1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity due to over-exploiting, loss of habitat, pollution, and modern agricultural practices.
2. According to the author, they recommend that trade partners should operate under the same environmental laws and that there should also be international conventions to control the trade of biodiversity-implicated commodities. Also products should have more comprehensive labels; for example, labels such as "dolphin-friendly" on tuna. I think that to prevent the loss of biodiversity, we could have cooperation between governments and non-governmental organizations, integrated crop management and have reservations for species becoming extinct.
The international trade of goods is threatening biodiversity because farms, and agricultural centers are having to produce more product than ever, which requires more land or chemicals, therefor decreasing biodiversity.
They say trade partners need to operate under the same environmental laws and there should be international conventions to control the trade of biodiversity-implicated commodities. The researchers also call for more comprehensive environmental labels on products that incorporate biodiversity, as well as carbon footprints.But they say to combat biodiversity loss, policies aimed at producers, traders and consumers must be implemented in parallel.
1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity because agricultural areas around the world have to produce more food then ever before due to the rise in population over the past 100 years. What this is leading to is a decline in natural habitat for wild species which in turn is resulting in less diversity because the farms, by comparison, have less biodiversity than the habitats that once stood in their places.
2. The author believes that more regulation needs to be put into place with agricultural expansion and the transportation of agricultural goods. He also wants for there to be more comprehensive environmental labels on products that incorporate biodiversity, as well as lowering the carbon footprints of these agricultural areas. In order for biodiversity to stop declining, policies aimed at traders, producers, and consumers have to be put in place to better the environment. What I believe is that more time and money has to be put into technological research that can benefit agriculture while also doing less harm to environments all around the world.
1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity through the loss of habitat. Many animals are losing their habitats from an increase in farms and plantations while also polluting the surrounding environment. As the demand for produce goes up, so does the production, which in turn causes habitats to be lost because of expansion.
2. According to the author, to stop the treat of biodiversity, trade partners must abide to standard, international environmental laws. The author also mentions that policies aimed at producers, traders, and consumers must be implemented, as well as policies for the carbon footprint. To stop the loss of biodiversity, I think that money should be funded toward scientific research so that we can grow more produce without having to sacrifice the surrounding environment.
1- The trade of good is a threat to biodiversity, as farms, agricultural 'factories' and plantations have to produce much more than they did before. The loss of habitat also makes it a threat, along with the pollution that comes with the trade in general.
2- The author believes that to prevent the loss of biodiversity due to trade, traders should follow very distinct, precise rules, along with different severe regulations and policies. He believes it is all up to a set of rules, laws to stop the threat of losing biodiversity. I believe that more research should be done for an eventual way to grow and produce more, without endangering any species and biodiversity.
1. The trade of goods is a threat because the clearing of land is ruining the habitats of the native species.
2.The author says that international trade should be more controlled to prevent the over exploitation of the developing countries. I think that there should be laws that help protect these species, and help stop production if it is going to have major implication on biodiversity.
1) The clearing of land for the purpose of facilitating the trade of goods is damaging ecosystems greatly.
2) The author states that in order to preserve the ecosystem, it is imperative to enact strict restrictions on trade and how countries conduct trade, with all countries following the same regulations. I believe that more resources and effort must be concentrated into the efforts to conduct trade in an environmentally safe manner.
1) the constant changing of the island through clearing it for trade, though it is good for the island economically it is bad for it environmentally
2) the author states thAt it needs to be controlled. I agree because the over explotetation of the island can lead to a lowering in biodiversity. If the country follows this advice I think it can do well
1) the constant changing of the island through clearing it for trade, though it is good for the island economically it is bad for it environmentally
2) the author states thAt it needs to be controlled. I agree because the over explotetation of the island can lead to a lowering in biodiversity. If the country follows this advice I think it can do well
1. International trade is decreasing biodiversity, because the farmers have to produce more goods, and in order to produce more goods they have to use more land and resources. So by taking more land and resources, its taking away from the native species and thus threatening biodiversity.
2. The author says that the trading partners need to be under the same environmental laws. In my opinion I believe that there should be laws to protect biodiversity, but that we should also invest into ways of being able to maintain biodiversity while at the same time helping LEDC's stay economically afloat.
1. The trade of goods is affecting biodiversity by decreasing by 100 to 1000 times the rate of pre human interaction. This is happening because many industries in developing countries are destroying the habitat. The destruction of the habitat for industry for trading is hurting the native species.
2. The author says that trading partners should be under the same environmental laws. There should also be conventions to control trade of biodiversity implicated commodities. I believe that we can build better technology to be able to support LEDCs and also limit habitat loss. There should also be laws and regulation implicated to decrease the environmental strain that industries create
1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity due to over-exploiting, loss of habitat, pollution, and modern agricultural practices.
ReplyDelete2. According to the author, they recommend that trade partners should operate under the same environmental laws and that there should also be international conventions to control the trade of biodiversity-implicated commodities. Also products should have more comprehensive labels; for example, labels such as "dolphin-friendly" on tuna. I think that to prevent the loss of biodiversity, we could have cooperation between governments and non-governmental organizations, integrated crop management and have reservations for species becoming extinct.
The international trade of goods is threatening biodiversity because farms, and agricultural centers are having to produce more product than ever, which requires more land or chemicals, therefor decreasing biodiversity.
ReplyDeleteThey say trade partners need to operate under the same environmental laws and there should be international conventions to control the trade of biodiversity-implicated commodities. The researchers also call for more comprehensive environmental labels on products that incorporate biodiversity, as well as carbon footprints.But they say to combat biodiversity loss, policies aimed at producers, traders and consumers must be implemented in parallel.
1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity because agricultural areas around the world have to produce more food then ever before due to the rise in population over the past 100 years. What this is leading to is a decline in natural habitat for wild species which in turn is resulting in less diversity because the farms, by comparison, have less biodiversity than the habitats that once stood in their places.
ReplyDelete2. The author believes that more regulation needs to be put into place with agricultural expansion and the transportation of agricultural goods. He also wants for there to be more comprehensive environmental labels on products that incorporate biodiversity, as well as lowering the carbon footprints of these agricultural areas. In order for biodiversity to stop declining, policies aimed at traders, producers, and consumers have to be put in place to better the environment. What I believe is that more time and money has to be put into technological research that can benefit agriculture while also doing less harm to environments all around the world.
1. The trade of goods is threatening biodiversity through the loss of habitat. Many animals are losing their habitats from an increase in farms and plantations while also polluting the surrounding environment. As the demand for produce goes up, so does the production, which in turn causes habitats to be lost because of expansion.
ReplyDelete2. According to the author, to stop the treat of biodiversity, trade partners must abide to standard, international environmental laws. The author also mentions that policies aimed at producers, traders, and consumers must be implemented, as well as policies for the carbon footprint. To stop the loss of biodiversity, I think that money should be funded toward scientific research so that we can grow more produce without having to sacrifice the surrounding environment.
1- The trade of good is a threat to biodiversity, as farms, agricultural 'factories' and plantations have to produce much more than they did before. The loss of habitat also makes it a threat, along with the pollution that comes with the trade in general.
ReplyDelete2- The author believes that to prevent the loss of biodiversity due to trade, traders should follow very distinct, precise rules, along with different severe regulations and policies. He believes it is all up to a set of rules, laws to stop the threat of losing biodiversity. I believe that more research should be done for an eventual way to grow and produce more, without endangering any species and biodiversity.
1. The trade of goods is a threat because the clearing of land is ruining the habitats of the native species.
ReplyDelete2.The author says that international trade should be more controlled to prevent the over exploitation of the developing countries. I think that there should be laws that help protect these species, and help stop production if it is going to have major implication on biodiversity.
1) The clearing of land for the purpose of facilitating the trade of goods is damaging ecosystems greatly.
ReplyDelete2) The author states that in order to preserve the ecosystem, it is imperative to enact strict restrictions on trade and how countries conduct trade, with all countries following the same regulations. I believe that more resources and effort must be concentrated into the efforts to conduct trade in an environmentally safe manner.
1) the constant changing of the island through clearing it for trade, though it is good for the island economically it is bad for it environmentally
ReplyDelete2) the author states thAt it needs to be controlled. I agree because the over explotetation of the island can lead to a lowering in biodiversity. If the country follows this advice I think it can do well
1) the constant changing of the island through clearing it for trade, though it is good for the island economically it is bad for it environmentally
ReplyDelete2) the author states thAt it needs to be controlled. I agree because the over explotetation of the island can lead to a lowering in biodiversity. If the country follows this advice I think it can do well
1. International trade is decreasing biodiversity, because the farmers have to produce more goods, and in order to produce more goods they have to use more land and resources. So by taking more land and resources, its taking away from the native species and thus threatening biodiversity.
ReplyDelete2. The author says that the trading partners need to be under the same environmental laws. In my opinion I believe that there should be laws to protect biodiversity, but that we should also invest into ways of being able to maintain biodiversity while at the same time helping LEDC's stay economically afloat.
1. The trade of goods is affecting biodiversity by decreasing by 100 to 1000 times the rate of pre human interaction. This is happening because many industries in developing countries are destroying the habitat. The destruction of the habitat for industry for trading is hurting the native species.
ReplyDelete2. The author says that trading partners should be under the same environmental laws. There should also be conventions to control trade of biodiversity implicated commodities. I believe that we can build better technology to be able to support LEDCs and also limit habitat loss. There should also be laws and regulation implicated to decrease the environmental strain that industries create