(Note: Here it is: Frankly, my dear, they INTEND to have all the marbles! Look who's partnering now, and look at the intent -- and they don't mean this in a warm and fuzzy way! -- "We do our mission in a way that really touches the lives of all people.")

January 2003

By Gideon Berger

Nature Conservancy President and CEO Steve McCormick talks with our online magazine editor Gideon Berger about the recent World Summit and the conservation challenges ahead.

In terms of conservation, what is the shape of things to come from the Conservancy when you look out over the next year, five years and beyond?

I think we're getting an appreciation for the results of our ecoregional plans. We're getting a greater appreciation of the scale at which we need to work. It doesn't just mean that we're working at larger landscapes, but that we have to ensure that we incorporate natural ecological processes into our plans. So it's both scale and completeness.

Scale means we need to be more imaginative, like in our involvement in the Sustainable Rivers Project -- http://nature.org/success/dams.html  -- [a Conservancy partnership with the United States Army Corps of Engineers that will improve dam management to keep rivers ecologically healthy while they provide human services]. That's really representative of a new way of thinking about things. I also see our involvement in things like land-use planning, and working on compatible economic development.

Another thing is the increasing recognition that at scale we inevitably need to work with humans and human values. We're more and more struck by the value of preserving biological diversity for human well-being, because it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It doesn't exist for the creation of nature preserves that are set aside. We do our mission in a way that really touches the lives of all people.

What do you say to people who believe that there are more pressing problems facing humanity than the protection of biodiversity?

The conservation of natural resources, biological diversity, is regarded still by many people as a luxury -- something to do when you satisfy other human needs.

I think we have a real deeply ingrained understanding now that the preservation of biological diversity is imperative for the maintenance of basic human needs. So I say, with no exaggeration or hesitation, that I don't think there is any more important cause or commitment than the preservation of biological diversity because I really think that it underpins the stability of all human endeavors.

Is there a single most important action the Conservancy needs to accomplish in the next year in the effort to preserve Earth's biodiversity? What does the Conservancy need to be most wary of that could set back conservation?

The coming year is likely to be as unstable or more unstable in many ways as what we've experienced in the last year. The economic outlook is, at the very least, highly uncertain. The sense of global stability is likely to be further undermined by increasing conflicts and tensions. And those will in the coming year be likely to pull our attention away from this cause.

It's important for us to redouble our efforts and be even more emboldened to pursue this mission. There's no more important time than when there are these kinds of disturbances and turbulence.

The work we do and the results that we produce are some of the most hopeful examples of the human endeavor. In a time of tension and instability, the most important thing to do is keep our eye on that longer view and realize that what we are able to provide for humankind is the greatest legacy of all.

At the U.N. Development Program's Equator Prize ceremony at the World Summit -- http://nature.org/success/summit.html  -- you awarded grants to 20 organizations with no previous connection to The Nature Conservancy. Some of them work in countries where the Conservancy has no formal programs in place. What are you hoping these grants will accomplish for conservation in these nations and what does this mean for The Nature Conservancy?

All of the groups that were represented in Johannesburg at the Equator Initiative have accomplished tangible, lasting results using their own imagination, initiative and limited resources to demonstrate that biological diversity and preserving biological diversity is essential for maintaining the sustainability of human economic activities. Even though they were in some cases from areas outside of where we are directly working, in my mind they manifested everything that we aspire to and believe in. I could think of nothing more appropriate than to award a very modest amount to demonstrate our commitment to what they do, our recognition of what they have accomplished, and to make a statement about the Conservancy's eagerness to step into the global arena of preserving biological diversity and recognize that it is a necessity for the sustainability and durability of humans to survive.

I don't think we need to be in every location, necessarily. I think we need to be mindful of what's happening in every location and provide what we can in the way of assistance, support, advice and guidance to enable others to do the work. It made a great statement at the World Summit. What it did -- solidify our credibility, enhance our reputation, and heighten the eagerness to work with the Conservancy amongst of variety of multilateral institutions -- was absolutely invaluable.

Since Johannesburg, we have had a number of conversations with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). They really want to work with us. They have established biodiversity as one of their three pillars of emphasis, and I was invited to join [UN Secretary-General] Kofi Annan and [UNDP Administrator] Mark Malloch Brown in a formal program [in October] to talk about how we can do this.

Prior to the summit, a number of reports were released that painted a pessimistic picture about the global state of conservation -- climate change, increasing losses of species, continued population growth and development, etc. Do we really have a shot at making a measurable difference?

They're tough, perplexing issues. I won't say they're entirely intractable, but they are challenging to deal with. So the expectations were awfully high that things would emerge from Johannesburg. But getting people there to talk about these things is a tremendous sign of an increasingly committed world community.

The other thing that gave me a sense of optimism was the fact that the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were there in force, large and small. They seem to recognize that they need to play a major part in solving these problems, and that there are inherent constraints on government agencies to deal with these kinds of problems that will probably never go away. NGOs can step through that breach and can begin to actually take on some responsibility for addressing these problems directly.

We saw that happening. The fact that the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD), an NGO, announced a partnership with Greenpeace, is a remarkable breakthrough. I think in large part it is a reflection of the fact that there is an acceptance of responsibility and an opportunity to address problems through civil society and not relying strictly on governments and public agencies or the for-profit sector.

The Conservancy has been getting impressive conservation results for 50 years -- what more is there to do? Why can't we just expect more of the same if we keep working the way we have in the past?

If we are measuring our success truly against our mission, then the amount of biological diversity which we've protected in our 50-year history projected out at that rate would fall far, far short of preserving all the portfolio sites that emerge from ecoregional planning. Far short.

I think it's a tremendous attribute of The Nature Conservancy that we are so steadfastly dedicated to tangible results, but we need to be realistic about what results are demanded by the ecoregional plans that we've done, and not so much work a lot harder, but work a lot smarter. We need to be getting more and more conservation done for the same amount of resources that were getting. We need to be more productive. And I think we can. That's the whole notion of achieving "leverage" -- being catalytic. That's why I say we're working for "tangible, lasting results at scale through leverage."

Working with partners is how we will get a greater return on our investment. Working with and through other entities. We've already distinguished ourselves with how we work with partners, but in the early days, we were quite proud of the fact that we worked all by ourselves, especially in the United States.

I see us in the future having a very high impact. It's a little bit like how if you take a magnifying glass and focus the sun's energy, you create sufficient conditions to start a fire. We have to think of ourselves as a kind of magnifying glass, focusing attention and energy to the point where it creates those kind of almost incendiary results.

What are you most excited about right now that's happening in the conservation movement?

I'm really excited about the increasing commitment among a broad range of groups to address this global imperative of preserving biological diversity. I just see more and more willingness and genuine eagerness to focus on outcomes and solutions and not who gets the credit. That makes me very hopeful.

http://nature.org/magazine/winter2002/newyear/