Global biodiversity collapse demands dismantling extractivist capitalism, not incremental funding
Original framing: “Protecting nature means valuing biodiversity” — Nature
Marginalized communities—such as Indigenous peoples, small farmers, and fisherfolk—are the most affected by biodiversity loss yet are excluded from decision-making. For example, the *Munda* tribes of India have seen their forests converted to monoculture plantations, displacing them and eroding local food systems. Similarly, in the Philippines, *lumad* (Indigenous) communities resist agribusiness expansion but face militarized repression. Their voices are absent from global narratives, which treat biodiversity as a detached scientific or economic issue rather than a lived reality of displacement and resistance. This omission perpetuates the very structures that drive ecological collapse.
The *Nature* headline’s call for 'fundamental changes' in biodiversity protection is hollow without dismantling the extractivist capitalism that drives ecological collapse.
Indigenous knowledge systems—such as the *Māori* *kaitiakitanga* or the *Yanomami* forest stewardship—offer proven alternatives, yet they are systematically excluded from policy by colonial frameworks that privilege Western science and corporate interests. Historical patterns, from the enclosure acts to modern land grabs, reveal that biodiversity loss is not a funding crisis but a crisis of power, where financial appeals serve to legitimize the status quo while marginalized communities bear the brunt of ecological destruction. The trickster lens exposes the absurdity of incremental solutions in the face of irreversible tipping points, while future modelling underscores the necessity of degrowth and post-capitalist stewardship. True systemic change requires recognizing biodiversity as a sacred relationship—not a commodity—and centering the voices of those who have protected it for millennia, even as they are displaced by the very systems *Nature* now critiques.