+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

I already have an outline for this paper. I’ve attached it here.

For this assignment, you will complete the following sections:

Introduction (Links to an external site.)

: Introduce the

thesis  (Links to an external site.)

and provide a brief overview of the main points.

Explain why and how three environmental challenges/problems are associated with this issue.

Explain why and how direct and/or indirect environmental values are impacted by this issue.

Recommend a policy that will effectively and efficiently address the three environmental challenges/problems associated with your issue.

Evaluate the social, political, economic, and environmental pros/cons of implementing your policy.

Conclusion (Links to an external site.)

: Conclude your paper with a brief review your main points and overall argument/thesis.

Important: Parts 2 to 5 need be written as body paragraphs, with all of the parts necessary for a complete body

paragraph (Links to an external site.)

.

The paper must be 10 to 12 pages in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the

Writing Center (Links to an external site.)

. You must use at least four credible

sources

Download sources

(at least two of which must be found in the University of Arizona Global Campus Library) other than the textbook to support your claims. Cite your sources

in-text (Links to an external site.)

and on the

reference page (Links to an external site.)

. For additional information regarding APA samples and tutorials, visit the Writing Center, located within the Learning Resources tab on the left navigation toolbar, in your online course.

Writing the Final Paper

The Final Paper:

Must be 10 to 12 double-spaced pages in length (excluding title and reference pages), and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Writing Center.

1
Outline – Loss of Biodiversity
Name
Institution
Course
Professor
Date
2
Outline – Loss of Biodiversity
I.
Introduction and thesis
A. Introduction: The planet’s biodiversity is collapsing. U.S. richness of species and
ecosystems is declining at a higher rate. Biodiversity loss is a serious threat to humanity.
B. Thesis: No Net Loss policies will help to restore the planet’s richness of species, and
ecosystems of yesteryears so as to protect humans from destroyed humanity’s food
supply, health risks, and dangers to human habitat.
II.
Environmental challenges/problems
A. Humanity’s food supply is disrupted by biodiversity loss because the ecosystems don’t
function normally as they have been doing.
Supporting evidence: “If, however, the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem
i.
functioning is monotonically increasing, as Reich et al.’s reanalyses suggest, then each
extinction would produce an incremental decrease in the functioning of ecosystems”
(Cardinale, 2012).
1. Explanation: The quote implies that humans get food when the ecosystems are
functioning normally.
2. So what? Biodiversity loss interferes with the functioning of ecosystems and this
interference leads to the loss of food sources for humans.
B. Biodiversity loss has devastating health consequences for humans.
Supporting evidence: “Biodiversity hypothesis states that contact with natural
i.
environments enriches the human microbiome, promotes immune balance and protects
from allergy and inflammatory disorders” (Haahtela, 2019).
1. Explanation: The quote shows that the healthy living of humans is dependent on nature.
3
2. So what?: With biodiversity lost, human immunity is lower. Humans become vulnerable
to many diseases.
C. Humans rely on ecosystems for survival and they will therefore lose quality habitat once
the biodiversity completely collapses
Supporting evidence: “People who rely most directly on ecosystem services, such as
i.
subsistence farmers, the rural poor, and traditional societies, face the most serious and
immediate risks from biodiversity loss” (Cardinale, 2012).
1. Explanation: The quote demonstrates that humans obtain many benefits from the
biodiversity that enhances their survival.
2. So what? Once biodiversity is lost, a human loses all these benefits, and this leads to
low-quality lives.
III.
Direct/indirect environmental values
A. The human food, health, and security needs will not be adequately met once the species
richness is lost.
Supporting evidence: “Biodiversity supports human and societal needs, including food
i.
and nutrition security, energy, development of medicines and pharmaceuticals and
freshwater, which together underpin good health” (WHO, 2015).
1. Explanation: Biodiversity is the source of all these needs, and once it has been lost, a
human cannot meet their needs sufficiently anymore.
2. So what?: The overall well-being of humans will reduce since it directly depends on
these needs.
IV.
Policy description
A. NNL policy will effectively address the biodiversity loss
4
Supporting evidence: “Biodiversity offsets are considered typically to seek to achieve
i.
NNL either through active ecosystem restoration or through the prevention of anticipated
biodiversity losses (avoided loss offsets), both of which result in biodiversity gains
depending upon the reference scenario” (Bull & Srange, 2018).
1. Explanation: The evidence shows that No Net Loss policies will mitigate the
biodiversity losses
2. So what?: NNL policy will lead to biodiversity conservation.
V.
Policy pros/cons
A. The outcomes of the biodiversity policy are predictable but the restoration outcomes have
high uncertainty.
Supporting evidence: “A fundamental problem in offsetting is the often poor definition
i.
and measurability of the value(s) to be offset” (Maron et al., 2012).
1. Explanation: The evidence implies that the policy benefits cannot be estimated when
they will materialize.
2. So what?: The short-term effectiveness of the policy cannot be easily determined.
B. The policy is easier to implement although its implementation relies on the goodwill of
political leaders who may at times have no interest in biodiversity protection.
Supporting evidence: “Biodiversity protection interests usually have no vested interest in
i.
biodiversity barter” (Maron et al., 2012).
1. Explanation: The evidence demonstrates that the implementation of biodiversity policy
is not assured.
2. So what?: A leader who doesn’t have a biodiversity interest will not prioritize
implementing the policy
5
C. The policy has a significant value but the value cannot commoditize.
Supporting evidence: “The major difficulty in evaluating avoidance is that only part of
i.
the process of avoidance is observable: permit denials and evaluations of alternative
impact sites common to major infrastructure project” (Ermgassen, 2019)
1. Explanation: The source demonstrates how hard it is to quantify the biodiversity
currency.
2. So what?: The cost-benefit-analysis cannot be easily done
D. The policy repairs the damaged ecosystems but it is slow in restoring the benefits lost as a
result of biodiversity loss.
Supporting evidence: “Restoration activities have become a major part of ongoing
i.
efforts to better manage ecosystems and repair damage caused by past mismanagement
and degradation” (Ermgassen, 2019)
1. Explanation: The source implies that repairing the ecosystem is beneficial to humans but
the pace at which the biodiversity benefits are restored is slow.
2. So what?: It may take a long time for humans to fully benefit from the policy.
VI.
Conclusion
A. Rephrased Thesis: Biodiversity loss can be addressed using No Net Loss biodiversity
policies and this will restore the benefits that humans forego when the loss happens.
B. Strong Closing: Humanity is greatly endangered if biodiversity loss is not addressed
now.
6
References
Bull, J., & Srange, N. (2018). The global extent of biodiversity offset implementation under no
net loss policies. Kent Academic Repository.
Cardinale, B. (2012). Impacts of Biodiversity Loss. Science, 336, 552-3.
10.1126/science.1220530
Haahtela, T. (2019). A biodiversity hypothesis. Allergy, 74(8), 1445-1456.
https://doi.org/10.1111/all.13763
Maron, Hobbs, R. J., Moilanen, A., Matthews, J. W., Christie, K., Gardner, T. A., Keith, D. A.,
Lindenmayer, D. B., & McAlpine, C. A. (2012). Faustian bargains? Restoration realities
in the context of biodiversity offset policies. Biological Conservation, 155, 141–148.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.06.003
WHO. (2015, 3 June 3). Biodiversity and Health. https://www.who.int/news-room/factsheets/detail/biodiversity-and-health
zu Ermgassen, Baker, J., Griffiths, R. A., Strange, N., Struebig, M. J., & Bull, J. W. (2019). The
ecological outcomes of biodiversity offsets under “no net loss” policies: A global review.
Conservation Letters, 12(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12664

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!