License to Kill?—Disease Eradication Programs May Not be in Line with the Convention on Biological Diversity

Abstract

Global human population growth is associated with many problems, such as food and water provision, political conflicts, spread of diseases, and environmental destruction. The mitigation of these problems is mirrored in several global conventions and programs, some of which, however, are conflicting. Here, we discuss the conflicts between biodiversity conservation and disease eradication. Numerous health programs aim at eradicating pathogens, and many focus on the eradication of vectors, such as mosquitos or other parasites. As a case study, we focus on the "Pan African Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign," which aims at eradicating a pathogen (Trypanosoma) as well as its vector, the entire group of tsetse flies (Glossinidae). As the distribution of tsetse flies largely overlaps with the African hotspots of freshwater biodiversity, we argue for a strong consideration of environmental issues when applying vector control measures, especially the aerial applications of insecticides. Furthermore, we want to stimulate discussions on the value of species and whether full eradication of a pathogen or vector is justified at all. Finally, we call for a stronger harmonization of international conventions. Proper environmental impact assessments need to be conducted before control or eradication programs are carried out to minimize negative effects on biodiversity.

The Ethics of Eliminating Harmful Species: The Case of the Tsetse Fly

“…Intrinsic value, on the other hand, is a concept we struggle even to identify or understand, let alone operationalize (Batavia and Nelson 2017). For instance, although the CBD has codified intrinsic value, highlighting it preeminently in the very first words of the text ( https://www.cbd.int/convention/text/ ), the convention also provides criteria in annex I for prioritizing components of biological diversity important for conservation and sustainable use (Hochkirch et al 2017). Generally, these criteria favor instrumental values, such as “medicinal, agricultural, or other economic value,” leading us to question what intrinsic value means (or why it matters) from a policy perspective, if instrumental values take priority in practical decision-making contexts.…”

The Unmeasured ecological effect of mosquito control

“…Many toxic substances have broad-spectrums and several of them have a high risk when used in sensitive habitats. These toxins are non-selective and might harm other insects and vertebrates, too (Hochkirch et al, 2018;Bolzonella et al, 2019).…”

Gene drives in plants: opportunities and challenges for weed control and engineered resilience

“…Much of the scientific discussion has focused on the technical and biological aspects of enabling effective gene drives. However, it is important to note that the release of a synthetic gene drive could have downsides [1,25], and that there are serious ethical issues and potentially unforeseeable ecological consequences associated with the genetic alteration of populations of wild organisms [26]. Plants are not exempt from these concerns.…”