Biodiversity in Central Asia - A Mini Report on the State of Biodiversity Across Central Asia
Introduction
The vast expanse of Central Asia holds some of the world’s largest untouched spaces. The grasslands, semi-deserts, and high mountain ranges which make up the majority of the regions ecosystems have given rise to some of the most weird and wonderful species on earth, such as the Saiga antelope pictured above. Central Asia has in some ways managed to fall off the map, as mainstream international press coverage, with the exception of Afghanistan, is limited to the occasional snippet on strange regimes, military build-ups punctuated by the intermittent arrival of naturalists and wildlife filmmakers. Beyond the borders of the various ‘stans’ that make up Central Asia little is really known of the region after being hidden behind the iron curtain for much of the 20th Century and only recently transitioning into a mixture of authoritarian regimes that are almost as insular. This has left environmentals and naturalists scrambling around trying to figure out the state of biodiversity in nations that to this day are not always willing to take in visitors with open arms. However, looks can be deceiving as nations which were once so reclusive are beginning to open the doors just a crack and with that we can gain a glimpse into how the indigenous wildlife is faring and what the various challenges are to their survival. This mini report provides an overview of how our presence in Central Asia is impacting on the natural world and presents three regional case studies; Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Afghanistan to illustrate biodiversity in a national context.
The State of Biodiversity in Central Asia
Central Asia or Eurasia is something of an enigma. This regional melting pot connects the cultures, languages and most importantly the biodiversity of Europe, the Middle East, South and East Asia. Though many would associate great mammal migrations with the wildebeast or zebra of Africa, Central Asia is in fact home to some of the last rare migratory mammal species in the world. The sparse vegetation and relative water scarcity of Central Asia has forced many of the animals species who call the region home to take on a migratory lifestyle and given rise to some unique species who have adapted to survive and thrive on the harsh lands of the Central Asian steppe. Central Asia continues to be a hotbed for biodiversity as 75% of the land is still covered by deserts, semi-deserts and steppes, yet, we should not be fooled by the wide expanse of wild spaces as they mask a history of gross mismanagement of agriculture and land during the communist period and are now coming under pressure from all sides as the human population expands and climate change begins to take hold. Finding exact up to date regional statistics on the flora and fauna of Eurasia can prove something of a challenge, however, there is some data on specific sectors of the area such as the mountains of Central Asia which house “significant numbers of wild crop relatives and around 5,000 species of vascular plants, almost one quarter of which are found nowhere else… more than 16 endemic and regionally threatened species of tulip grow in the hotspot, between 10 to 20 species of about 140 mammals found in the hotspot are endemic (depending on the definition of endemic and sub-species), more than 60 reptiles are found in the hotspot, including 10 to 20 endemics and this arid hotspot has about 30 to 60 freshwater fish species (depending if introduced species and sub-endemics are counted), about 5 to 10 of which are endemic”, there are also significant numbers of migratory birds and birds of prey whilst only a small number of rare amphibians remain (CEPF, 2023). The last Biodiversity Assessment for Central Asia by USAID found in 2001 that “there are 7,000 species of higher plants and more than 900 vertebrate species, including 172 mammals, 540 birds, 106 reptiles, 14 amphibians, and 150 fish. The region’s biodiversity is notable for its high degree of endemism, with up to 20% of the flora having restricted distributions”. Unfortunately, in the two decades since this report researchers have found that in 2020 “biodiversity decreased by 11 species of fish, 12 species of mammals, 26 species of birds, and 11 species of plants over the past 30 years”. It has been a story of reduction across the board as more than half of the species originally living in the Aral Sea (region) have disappeared since 1990. As of 2015 “21% of endemic species in Central Asia were considered as threatened, of which 11% were listed as “critically endangered” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The IUCN found in 2017 that 155 terrestrial and freshwater species were currently vulnerable, threatened or critically endangered” (Graaf and Siarova, 2021). With such dramatic decreases in the populations of various species over the past few decades it is only right that we should be trying to figure out what has happened and how are going to conserve the precious species of Central Asia.
The threats to biodiversity in Central Asia have been well documented, in part because agencies have been working to identify the various challenges with an aim to conserve and protect species such as the Saiga antelope and snow leopard which are on the edge of extinction. The greatest region wide threat has been the fragmentation of land once relied upon for the great mammal migration. As railways, fences, pipelines, and other infrastructure bisect migration routes and prevent animals from moving across landscapes to reach feeding and breeding grounds, this has created a huge upheaval in the lifecycles of migratory animals and has played its part in causing numbers to rapidly decrease in just a few years (Ali, 2023). Unfortunately, decades of communism, authoritarianism and high levels of socio-economic inequality have also had a negative impact on biodiversity as demand for meat, horns and other animal parts has continued to drive the poaching, hunting and illegal wildlife trade (Ali, 2023), like so many other parts of the world these practices can bring in easy money or free sustenance in difficult times, yet people are far slower to realise the damage done by these practices in the long term. Another major factor is the lethal mix of climate change and agriculture i.e. the keeping of livestock, which continues to have devastating, unintended consequences across the region. Climate change threatens the reduction in poverty across Eurasia which can exacerbate environmental destruction, poaching, hunting, the illegal wildlife trade, “mountainous landscape deforestation, soil erosion, changing water balances linked to the drying Aral Sea and resource-intensive production tied to increasing urban pollution”. The change in weather patters have also contributed to an increase in landslides and a decrease in available arable land which causes a domino effect of food insecurity and limited economic growth, effecting the rural poor most acutely as they directly rely on natural resources for survival (The World Bank, 2021). The overgrazing of the later communist period had serious consequences for the grasslands, however, the decline in livestock numbers during the economic transition provided a window for biodiversity to begin recuperating in the summer pastures in the high mountains. Unfortunately, the autumn and winter pastures did not fare so well as herding practices began to centre themselves around settlements and the areas close to the lower mountains were overused to provide fodder for livestock. This uneven distribution of livestock and environmental pressures has produced an increase in invasive, unpallatable grasses and conflict over pasture use in border areas (Kirby, 2011).
The outlook for Central Asia may appear bleak as the culmination of these many issues cause fragile ecosystems to begin crumbling under the tremendous weight of human demands on natural resources and anthropogenic climate change. It may also appear from that outside that the people of Central Asia are blissfully unaware of the impacts their behaviour has on the natural world and are more concerned with rebuilding their nations economies and finding a place on the world stage. However, this would only be showing half of the story. Like small acorns conservation efforts have grown across the region as governments wake up to the value of their nations biodiversity and international organisations often step in to provide technology, know how and funding to aid in conservation efforts. Protection policies are beginning to come out of the woodwork as countries look to ecotourism for new revenue streams whilst brave conservationists are fighting against the odds to care for natural spaces and wildlife in times of major political and social upheaval.
Uzbekistan
Once known as the heart of the Silk Road Uzbekistan sits right in the middle of Central Asia and is a nation which reflects its mixed heritage in every way. Uzbekistan is a country where the mountains touch the sky and and the steppe stretches as far as the eye can see, however, this nation of contrasts is also subject to intense desertification, droughts and the adverse effects of human behaviour. Even today gaining a comprehensive overview of the state of biodiversity in Uzbekistan is particularly difficult as statewide data on flora and fauna population sizes is either out of date with the most recent census being in 2001 which totalled “fauna of vertebrate animals includes 682 species: 108 mammals, 431 birds, 58 reptiles, two amphibians, and 83 fishes. The fauna of invertebrate animals is estimated at 15,000 species” (USAID, 2001), or the focus continues to be placed more so on rare and endangered species, which is important but does not paint a full picture. The 2019 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and the National Red Data Book of threatened species updated their lists to include “314 rare and endangered plants, 30 mammal and 52 birds species, including the snow leopard and Bukhara deer, among others” (IUCN, 2021). In 2020 the UNDP stated that “Uzbekistan has 27,000 unique and endangered species” (UNDP, 2020) which of course means that we need to do more to help Uzbekistan protect its wild spaces. The decision to redirect focus to endangered species such as the Saiga antelope or snow leopard may have been a stroke of genius in terms of conservation as specific species and their wider ecosystems are able to benefit from centralised efforts such as protection areas and funding. Unfortunately, the lack of information fails to show the wider improvements linked to such conservation efforts.
The tunnel vision focus on threatened species does lead to a rather gloomy outlook for Uzbekistan’s biodiversity as even on their country profile produced by the Convention on Biological Diversity key data on the various species which call the region home is once again lacking and instead more time is spent focusing on the economic sectors which rely on natural resources and how such activities are effecting the country’s natural ecosystem’s. “The country’s economic sectors that depend on biodiversity include irrigated agriculture (Forty-nine percent of the Uzbek population resides in rural areas and depends directly or indirectly on agriculture as a source of livelihood. More than 90% of crops are grown on irrigated land), animal husbandry, forestry, fishery, recreation and tourism. Biodiversity is also linked to sectors and activities that adversely affect it, such as the oil and gas industry, chemical industry, unsustainable water resources management and waste disposal, development of transportation infrastructure and urban systems” (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). Humanities rapid encroachment on the wild open spaces of Uzbekistan has brought with it a wide variety of threats to biodiversity and even in those few areas that have managed to remain untouched by the physical presence of humans, climate change is arriving in our place. The sheer scale of threatened and endangered species in Uzbekistan where high levels of endemism and fragile ecosystems are impacted by the slightest change in weather or water is serious cause for concern. More so considering how the nation continues to try accelerating economic growth, possibly at the cost of the natural world. However, if Uzbekistan wants to start making changes then they must and have identified the key factors which are causing the decline in biodiversity:
Habitat loss and degradation of natural ecosystems,
Decrease in population size and loss of species (flora and fauna) - including economically valuable species,
Erosion/loss of genetic diversity,
Natural resistance of species (to diseases and to climatic changes) (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023),
Climate change (desertification and weather variability) (UNDP, 2020),
Unsustainable land use practices (soil erosion and degradation, water depletion, and decreased carbon sequestration potential) (The World Bank, 2021),
Narrowly focused development and management of agricultural irrigation infrastructure;
Unstable forms of management and use of natural resources in fisheries;
Low productivity of irrigated agriculture and unsustainable rainfed agriculture. (These factors, combined with the country's rapidly growing population, lead to the intensive use of all resources).
Non-compliance of legal acts with international standards regulating the use of biological resources;
Lack of mechanisms for economic valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services;
Lack of adequate management of the protected area system and its representative system;
Insufficient implementation of the state accounting and monitoring of the natural environment, in particular, biodiversity;
Insufficient funding for biodiversity conservation;
Insufficient implementation of mechanisms for assessing the impact of economic and other activities on biodiversity in the state environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure;
Low level of public awareness and participation in biodiversity conservation;
Insufficient development of environmental culture of the population (FAOLEX, 2023).
This neverending list of challenges and difficulties may fool you into thinking that Uzbekistan’s conservationists would never be able to even make a dent and will constantly be taking one step forward and two steps back. Though for a time this may have been true as the nation transitioned out of communism and into its modern form, Uzbekistan, like many nations in the region, has stepped up and is making great strides in the conservation and protection of their natural spaces. One of the most significant of those vital steps has been their 36% increase in protected areas and “The Government of Uzbekistan has also committed to increase the total protected areas coverage to 12% of its territory by 2028” (IUCN, 2020). This growth in protected areas was kicked off by the establishment of the first State Lower Amudarya Biosphere Reserve in 2011 and the designation of Ugam-Chatkal State Biosphere Reserve in 2018, most recently the Saigachi Protected Area was created providing a wide expanse which supports migratory routes of the endangered Saiga Antelope in the Ustyurt Plateau (IUCN, 2020). These reserves and protected areas are crucial to bolster the populations of migratory, threatened and endangered species whilst also providing safe havens for all Indigenous species which reside in these area.
The government and private sector can now also benefit from the protected spaces as sites for ecotourism which could potentially generate high economic profits by welcoming guests and beginning to utilise the finance from ecotourism to invest back into protecting nature. “Existing ecotourism programmes that attract international tourists include visits to villages in the Nuratau Mountains, the Zaamin Nature Park, the Zarafshan Nature Reserve, the “Djeiran” Ecological Center and Lake Tudakul. “Uzbektourism” is a national company currently conducting activities aimed at diversifying tourism products and establishing new means to familiarize and raise public awareness on the status and importance of biodiversity” (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). If ecotourism is able to mirror the successes of similar projects in Latin America and Africa this could go some way to having local communities see the value in biodiversity beyond simply exploiting it for immediate monetary gain and could help to harness public support for more protected areas in the future. Unfortunately, there is still more work to be done in the conservation of natural water bodies and the marine life within them, however, the government of Uzbekistan has already recognised the need to conserve and reproduce fish resources by organising fishing quotas which are sustainable in the long term. The government have also recognised the need for change in their high emitting oil and gas sector by implementing an initiative that is unique to the region with an aim to mainstream biodiversity conservation in the sector. Something which will no doubt prove challenging in the years moving forward but could also reap great rewards for the biodiversity which is currently affected by the exploration for oil and gas deposits (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023).
One of the most notable conservation efforts is the work being done by the UNDP and the Uzbekistan government. As Uzbekistan transitions to increased openness with a new found economic optimism biodiversity has come to be considered as a more high-profile area and the government is full steam ahead on expanding strategic conservation initiatives. Part of their new nature focused attitude has lead to increased finance in the form of the Ministry of Finance issuing SDG bonds with a total value of UZS 2.5 tn and now they want to utilize funds in close collaboration with international partners, using their expertise and technical assistance to successfully preserve biodiversity and prioritise sustainable development goals (BIOFIN, 2021). The various combined conservation projects of the UNDP and Uzbekistan have seen moderate and increasing support for improving legislation on the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources including pastures, flora and fauna. Conservation projects have spread out across every corner of the country and cover ecosystems ranging from deserts to wetlands to mountains and many have a set focus for the conservation of rare creatures such as the elusive snow leopard (UNDP, 2020). Though Uzbekistan has experienced some small victories through its partnership with the UNDP and through its own efforts they still have a long way to go if they want to safeguard their natural resources for future generations. Only time will tell if they wake up to realise just how important their wild spaces are to both their economy and to the planet as a whole.
Kazakhstan
Before you start conjuring up images of a certain comedians controvertial portrayal of a comedic ‘Kazakh’ character this would be a good time to reconsider what you think you know about Kazakhstan, its people and most importantly its biodiversity. In a nation so vast it rivals the size of Western Europe, Kazakhstan has been endowed with enormous biodiversity particularly in their mountain ecological systems. As the largest of the Central Asian nations much of Kazakhstan’s land remains wild being made up of “forest (2% of the country), steppe (28%), desert (32%), and mountain (7%)... pastures (8%), fallow lands (4%)” (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). The rest of the land is now used for agricultural purposes. With so many varying habitats animal and plant life has boomed encompassing “over 6,000 species of higher vascular plants, 5,000 species of mushrooms, 485 species of lichens, 2,000 species of sea weeds, 178 mammal species, 489 bird species, 12 amphibian species, and 104 fish species” (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). Unfortunately, even with much of the nations land remaining wild, Kazakhstan has not escaped from the rapid decrease in biological diversity as “the Red Data Book of Kazakhstan lists 125 species of vertebrates (15%), 96 species of invertebrates, 287 species of higher plants (4.8%) and 85 species of insects”. Even for those rare hoofed species which are being afforded more protection their numbers are still in decline which is shifting the situation for many to a critical point. Currently just over 5% of Kazakhstans land is set as a protected area (UNDP, 2023) which has allowed it to preserve steppe ecosystems which have been destroyed in other nations across Eurasia and has provided a refuge for key populations such as saigas, baibak marmots, steppe birch mice, a number of jerboa species, etc., and birds like pallid harriers, lapwings, steppe black-winged pratincoles, white-headed ducks and many others. (BIOFIN, 2023). However, these safe spaces are no where near extensive enough to truly protect threatened species and the lack of protected areas are not the only reasons behind the rapid depletion of Kazakhstan’s biodiversity. The assortment of issues which plague Kazakhstan’s biodiversity are complex, ranging from poverty in local communities to destructive industry and development, making it all the more challenging to begin combatting these issue. Just a few of the pressures placed on biodiversity in Kazakhstan are:
Poaching, which stems mainly from poor local communities with little choice for food,
The main pressures on biodiversity in Kazakhstan are linked to oil and gas extraction; coal extraction; extraction of uranium and other minerals; rock and slag run-off; atmospheric pollution; draining; waste storage; road construction; electric power transmission lines; oil and gas pipelines; channels and water reservoirs; and irrigation. All of these activities contribute to biodiversity loss in a number of different ways, among which are the contamination of water cavities, soils, subsoil water and atmosphere; change in habitat conditions; accumulation of radio nuclides in the biota; contamination of the environment, change of conditions for soils and subsoils; increased habitat toxicity; water contamination; settlement and spreading of invasive species; and accumulation of heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides and defoliants (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023),
Rapid infrastructure development,
Increasing human wildlife conflicts,
Climate change - frequent droughts, floods, deforestation (Amaral-Rogers, 2022),
Unsustainable agriculture,
Industrial development and logging,
Unsustainable cities,
And unsustainable tourism (UNDP, 2023).
Kazakhstan faces a long road ahead in attempting to balance development with the conservation of natural resources. Nevertheless, they have been and are continuing to engage with the international conservation and biodiversity finance community and are actively working to find the balance and bring back their endangered species from the brink. Kazakhstan’s work with The Biodiversity Finance Initiative has brought with it a number of finance solutions such as;
Subsidising game breeding to save animal species and develop hunting concessions.
Tax incentives for ecotourism development.
Strenghtening PA management planning for improved financing.
Introduction of biodiversity offsets as a formal instrument in Kazakhstan.
Establishing an internal Emission Trading System (ETS) to integrate the mechanisms into the national legal framework.
Creating an enabling environment for attracting carbon offsets from the international market, multinational enterprises operating in the country (BIOFIN, 2023).
Finance for biodiversity has been crucial in changing the way in which the Kazakhstan government and its people value natural resources and is making a significant contribution to Kazakhstan meeting their commitments to conserve biodiversity and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. It is not only BIOFIN which have been providing biodiversity finance as “the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), both with the financial support of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and through related grants with the Government of Kazakhstan, has implemented 10 large-scale initiatives in biodiversity conservation. The contribution to the conservation of globally significant ecosystems of Kazakhstan totals more than US$29million” (UNDP, 2023). Whilst finance can be crucial it is also important to have conservationists on the ground working to continue keeping protected areas safe and monitoring the progress of conservation projects. This is where the RSPB have stepped in, working alongside local experts to track the Saiga antelope populations, set up camera traps to observe carnivore and scavenger populations, survey habitats to determine the condition of the steppe grassland, survey wetlands to sample vertebrate diversity and to possibly detect unknown species and finally they have been collecting soil samples which “alongside the descriptions of vegetation communities and grazer abundance, will help to determine how natural and human-induced pressures affect the relationship between grazers, vegetation, and soil carbon” (Amaral-Rogers, 2022). Whilst the work of the RSPB has been invaluable, Kazakhstan has also received significant quantities of modern technology such as camera traps, thermal imagers and drones from the UNDP to help specialists conduct research on rare animals species, to keep records of their numbers and their migrations routes and to identify potential threats (UNDP, 2023).
There is no doubt that Kazakhstan’s natural environment and biodiversity are suffering from the effects of human pressures - both current and historical. They are facing an uphill battle as they attempt to wrangle with an expanding oil and gas industry and a growing population who require, homes, infrastructure and nourishment whilst continuing to safeguard the last natural strongholds and stop or slow the domino effect of biodiversity loss. Yet, Kazakhstan is already proving to be resilient, willing to work with international organisations to attain the best technology and knowledge to help in their conservation efforts and are placing at least some emphasis on introducing protected reserves and finding new, more sustainable methods to utilise their natural resources. For all its falts Kazakhstan is, like many of its Eurasian cousins, trying to save what is left of its biodiversity and are moving forward with innovative conservation efforts and projects for the future.
Afghanistan
Afghanistan provides an interesting case study for biodiversity as the duration and extremity of social, political and violent upheavals have had ramifications not just for the human population but also for the various animal and plant species which reside within the region. Over the past few decades Afghanistan has experienced war, violence, destruction, economic instability and food insecurity as the Taliban, democratic government and international forces all vie for power and influence, all the while as bombs dropped and struggling communities are forced to overuse natural resources to stay alive it has been difficult to justify placing any emphasis on protecting Afghanistan’s biodiversity. Yet, as the Afghan people acclimatise to their nation now being governed by the Taliban it is important that we don’t lose sight of a nation where biodiversity is already on the slippery slope to extinction. Naturally, collecting up to date information on the state of biodiversity in Afghanistan is beyond difficult meaning we can for the most part only speculate upon the true impact of the Taliban takeover on the nations flora and fauna. However, we can begin to piece together the regions general trajectory from information gathered whilst the nation was under democratic government control between 2001-21 and the small shreds of data provided by those brave conservationists who remain inside Afghanistan. “Biodiversity resources in Afghanistan comprise an estimated 3,500-4,000 native species of vascular plants, 428-515 bird species, 137-150 mammal species, 101-139 fish species, 92-112 reptile species, and 6-8 amphibian species” (LSE, 2014), the range in numbers results from uncertainty in taxonomy and the questionable validity of some records (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). In terms of species which are either threatened or endangered there is little formal data as no nationwide studies have been conducted, however, the general consensus is that numerous species, particularly large mammals, are at risk from extinction. There is not doubt that the frequent disturbances and the lack of protected areas have played a role in reducing biodiversity. As of 2002 only 5% of Afghanistan’s forest cover still remains and that which does remain is on the verge of extinction, none of the 15 ‘protected areas’ have official boundaries or are managed as protected areas and climate change is causing droughts to become more extreme and put Afghanistan’s few wetlands at serious risk (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). When it comes to the state of Afghanistan’s biodiversity today there are far more questions than answers as the available data is shaky at best and conservationists are struggling to move forward in today’s hostile climate. What we can see and be sure of is the many factors which are linked to the decline in the nations biodiversity, which include,
Rapid urbanisation,
Lack of education and public awareness (LSE, 2014),
Warfare (due to the past long period of war and drought the agriculture sector in Afghanistan has been greatly damaged and its products are decreased by 50%. Parallel to that due to lack of enforcement the rural people have started to utilize the free natural resources)
Smuggling of timber,
Deforestation (forests and rangelands decreased by 50-70% and because of that many valuable wild plants have been endangered. Some plants species whose wild ancestors are found in Afghanistan are in the state of extinction) ,
Overgrazing (uprooting of valuable wild plants and conversion of pastures to rain fed cropping)
(FAO,2019),
Climate change (drought),
New settlements (which are taking a toll on the nation’s biodiversity resources,
Lack of protected areas (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023),
Illegal hunting and illegal wildlife trade (according to the conservationists… in Afghanistan, the Taliban has restarted hunting Afghanistan’s protecte wildlife, seemingly ignoring Afghanistan’s environmental laws and policies),
Lack of legal protection and enforcement,
Lack of international support (UN organisations for conservation are stuck between a rock and a hard place as they are forced to choose between evacuating the people and programmes which have been carefully curated for 20 years, thereby depleting the county of partnerships and expertise. Or they can attempt to continue their programmes and place their conservationists at risk (Maheshwari, 2022).
Though Afghanistan is not a biodiversity hotspot (LSE, 2014) in the same way as some of its Eurasian cousins this makes these various factors no less damaging or critical to resolve. During the twenty year period in which Afghanistan experienced some liberalisation and a shift in focus to biodiversity and the restoration of natural resources small steps were taken to make improvements such as implementing some of the obligations from the Rio Convention i.e.
Establish priority and feasible protected areas as legally recognized and effectively managed entities. Priority areas should be Band-i-Amir, Ajar Valley, Pamir-i-Buzurg, and Dashte Nawar;
Develop a protected areas system plan for Afghanistan designed to protect representative areas of high biodiversity in all major eco-regions;
Survey all wetlands and potential protected areas listed in this document to determine current status and suitability for inclusion into the protected areas system plan;
Initiate a national Red-Listing process for Afghan mammals with the technical assistance of IUCN, incorporating targeted surveys to establish current status of priority species;
Encourage national and international scholars to develop a comprehensive flora of Afghanistan;
Develop effective plans to intervene in the destruction of the remaining monsoon-dependent forests of eastern Afghanistan;
Develop effective plans for preserving and recovering remnant pistachio and juniper forests in northern Afghanistan;
Develop programs to preserve native Afghan landraces of crop plants and livestock;
Develop a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for Afghanistan (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023).
Though some headway was made in introducing protected areas (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023) and various conservationists began working on conserving plant and animal species used for agriculture or in animal husbandry as a method of stabilising food insecurity (FAO, 2019), unfortunately, little more has been achieved. In part this may be because the aims and actions that were carried out over the period of 2001-2021 were streamlined towards protecting agriculture and ensuring rural prosperity. With objectives such as improving irrigation systems to conserve water, restoring 15% of degraded water, forests and rangeland and enhancing access to rural energy it is easy to see how these approaches could benefit biodiversity in reducing the rural populations reliance on natural resources (i.e. through hunting, poaching, illegal wildlife trade, overgrazing etc.), however, they do not seem to be directly focused on protecting at risk species. Though it is important to continue maintaining the 12% of arable land in Afghanistan in order to keep the consumption demands of the population at bay it is also crucial that we remember that with a few exceptions like the wetlands of Ghazni province which supports large numbers of migratory birds such as flamingoes, waterfowl, shorebird and the critically endangered Siberian crane, which has sadly not been sighted in Aghanistan since 2000 (Smallwood et al., 2011), the majority of Afghanistan’s land is arid and relatively inhospitable to life (LSE, 2014). This forces humanity and biodiversity to coexhist in a way that they are simply not doing at this moment. Today, Afghanistan has become the unknown as the Taliban has shown no interest in protecting biodiversity and has shut out international organisations from working effectively in the country. It is all too likely that the return of the Taliban, at least for now, spells the end of biodiversity conservation work in Afghanistan as immediate concerns lie with “establishing a stabilised government, preventing a return to civil war, minimising threats to cross-border stability, restarting an economy and avoiding famine” (Maheshwari, 2022). We must hope that the Taliban and the wider population who now live under their control do not or are not forced to destroy Afghanistan’s ecosystems to the point where they are unable to recover and that one day the nation will open itself up to working alongside the international community to protect its all too precious biodiversity. The international community should not give up on Afghanistan but we should be calling “on the Taliban government to guarantee the safety of Afghan conservationists, reinstate the rule of law, including laws concerning environmental protection and protected areas, and comply with sustainable community-based natural resource management. We must also call for a safe environment to conduct ecological studies in collaboration with national and international scientific organizations, to generate credible information to safeguard ecological integrity in Afghanistan” (Maheshwari, 2022).
References
Ali, Noor. “Supporting species migration in Central Asia - Story.” IUCN, 3 March 2023, https://www.iucn.org/story/202303/supporting-species-migration-central-asia.
Amaral-Rogers, Vanessa. “Protecting Kazakhstan's grasslands steppes in face of future uncertainty - Saving Nature With Science - Our work.” The RSPB Community, 11 August 2022, https://community.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/b/science/posts/protecting-kazakhstan-s-grasslands-steppes-in-face-of-future-uncertainty.
BIOFIN. “Biodiversity Finance moving up the agenda in Uzbekistan.” BIOFIN, 17 December 2021, https://www.biofin.org/news-and-media/biodiversity-finance-moving-agenda-uzbekistan.
BIOFIN. “Kazakhstan.” BIOFIN, 2023, https://www.biofin.org/kazakhstan.
CEPF. “Mountains of Central Asia - Species | CEPF.” Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, 2023, https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/mountains-central-asia/species.
Convention on Biological Diversity. “Main Details.” Main Details, 2023, https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=uz.
Convention on Biological Diversity. “Main Details.” Main Details, 2023, https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=kz.
Convention on Biological Diversity. “Main Details.” Main Details, 2023, https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=af.
FAO. THE STATE OF AFGHANISTAN’S BIODIVERSITY FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE. 2019, https://www.fao.org/3/CA3482EN/ca3482en.pdf.
FAOLEX. “Strategy for biodiversity conservation in the Republic of Uzbekistan for the period of 2019-2028. | FAOLEX.” Food and Agriculture Organization, 11 February 2023, https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/details/en/c/LEX-FAOC189329/.
Graaf, Loes van der, and Hanna Siarova. “Multifaceted Threats to Biodiversity in Central Asia.” Global Waste Cleaning Network, 25 September 2021, https://gwcnweb.org/2021/09/25/multifaceted-threats-to-biodiversity-in-central-asia/.
IUCN. “IUCN welcomes Uzbekistan as its newest State Member.” IUCN, 29 October 2021, https://www.iucn.org/news/membership/202110/iucn-welcomes-uzbekistan-its-newest-state-member.
IUCN. “Uzbekistan makes a big step forward towards achieving global biodiversity targets.” IUCN, 13 July 2020, https://www.iucn.org/news/eastern-europe-and-central-asia/202007/uzbekistan-makes-a-big-step-forward-towards-achieving-global-biodiversity-targets.
Kirby, Alex. Biodiversity in Central Asia: A Visual Synthesis. 2011. Zoi Environment Network, Zoï Environment Network, FOEN, UNEP, https://zoinet.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Biodiversity-CA-EN.pdf.
LSE. National Biodiversity Strategy & Action Plan. 2014, https://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/laws/4849.pdf.
Maheshwari, Aishwarya. “Biodiversity conservation in Afghanistan under the returned Taliban.” Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2022. www.nature.com/natecolevol, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357890821_Biodiversity_conservation_in_Afghanistan_under_the_returned_Taliban.
Smallwood, Peter, et al. “Wildlife Conservation…in Afghanistan?” BioScience, vol. 61, no. 7, 2011, pp. 506–511, https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/61/7/506/265992.
UNDP. “Biodiversity in Kazakhstan.” United Nations Development Programme, 2023, https://www.undp.org/kazakhstan/projects/biodiversity-kazakhstan.
UNDP. “Biodiversity is everyone’s business.” United Nations Development Programme, 22 May 2020, https://www.undp.org/uzbekistan/news/biodiversity-everyone%E2%80%99s-business.
UNDP. “Wildlife of Kazakhstan – Iconic Heritage of Future Generations.” United Nations Development Programme, 1 March 2023, https://www.undp.org/kazakhstan/stories/wildlife-kazakhstan-iconic-heritage-future-generations.
USAID. Biodiversity Assessment for Uzbekistan. June 2021, https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACN475.pdf.
The World Bank. “Climate and Environment Program in Central Asia.” World Bank, 9 June 2021, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/environment/brief/climate-and-environment-program-in-central-asia#Pillar%202.
