THE THREAT OF HABITAT DESTRUCTION TO THE

BIODIVERSITY

AN ACADEMIC PAPER SUBMITTED TO:

RONNIE A. ROSELLO
AGRI 1 PROFESSOR

BY:

VERGEL G. CALLEJA
BSED MAJOR IN SCIENCE 1A

2022
 2

INTRODUCTION
Habitat Destruction has become one of the most important topics of research in
ecology as they are a major threat to the plants and survival of endangered species.
According to Nature research journalist, the global number of trees is approximately
3.04 trillion however approximately 15 billion trees are cut down each year, based on
the study about tree density, the number of trees worldwide has decreased by 46 percent
since the start of civilization. While according to the International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has assessed roughly 3 percent of described species
and identified 16,928 species worldwide as being threatened with extinction. Moreover,
the US Fish and Wildlife Service recently delisted 23 species from its Threatened and
Endangered Species List because they are believed to be extinct. Furthermore, our
populations of birds, fish, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians are declining at an
average rate of 68%. This crisis is only compounding with more species being lost each
day. Biodiversity experts say the mass extinction of wildlife caused by habitat
destruction is as big a danger as climate change (Watts,2019).
There are different types of habitat destruction that can occur. Three major types
are habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and degradation. All three types of habitat
destruction can be just as lethal. Some take longer to completely destroy the habitat and
some destroy the habitat instantly.
The Philippines is one of the megadiverse countries that is recognized for its
rich biodiversity and with almost 75% of the world’s biodiversity found in the country.
It has the most diverse life forms in a per unit area. Its biodiversity, composed of various
flora and fauna, provides resources to meet basic needs for human survival, promotes
economic development, and offers environmental services. Biodiversity, however, is
more than just the number of unique flora and fauna species found in a country. It refers
to the variety of life on Earth, it includes all organisms, species, and populations; the
genetic variation among these; and their complex assemblages of communities and
ecosystems (UNEP, 2010). It is described as the most complex and very vital feature
of Earth (Carrington, 2018). However, habitat destruction negatively impacts
biodiversity on an exponential scale. The country has been tagged as one of the world’s
biodiversity hotspots and a top priority in terms of conservation. The Philippines has
already lost almost 93% of its original forest cover since the 1990s caused to forest
fragmentation or deforestation. In recent years, the country has faced great challenges
in protecting, conserving, and developing its biodiversity. In fact, there has been
continued destruction of the country’s resources and an increase in the number of
endangered plant and animal species, reaching a total of more than 700 threatened
species. These include the Philippine eagle (Pithecophaga jefferyi), Philippine
freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus mindorensis), tamaraw (Bubalus mindorensis), yakal
(Shorea astylosa), and waling-waling (Vanda sanderiana), among others. Similarly, the
marine biodiversity and inland water biodiversity are deteriorating which is evident in
the decreasing quality of water and fish in Laguna de Bay, the Philippines’ largest lake.
Habitat destruction, one of the reasons for deteriorating biodiversity, can be
attributed to several factors as identified in the Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan (PBSAP). These include forest degradation, unsustainable mineral
extraction, and human activities and practices, among others. Rampant forest
degradation is associated with indiscriminate logging and deforestation as well as
conflicting land use. Most of the Philippine protected areas and ancestral lands sit on
where the country’s mineral reserves such as gold, copper, nickel, chromite, marble,
 3

and limestone are located. Also, the growing human population in the country induces
the conversion of forest areas to either residential and/or agricultural land. There seems
to be a weak integration of biodiversity concerns in the landscape planning of the
country (Aquino-Gayao et al., 2014). Meanwhile, for the marine and inland water
biodiversity, the major threats are pollution and fishing operations (CBD, n.d.). Other
identified threats to biodiversity are the introduction of invasive alien species,
degradation from climate change, overexploitation, biopiracy, weak enforcement, and
management, and under-valuation of the country’s natural resources, among others
(Aquino-Gayao et al., 2014; BMB, n.d.).
Recently, scientist’s states that the best way to protect endangered species is to
protect the special places where they live. Wildlife must have places to find food, and
shelter and raise their young. Logging, oil and gas drilling, over-grazing, and
development all result in habitat destruction (Endangered Species Coalition, 2020).
Despite the habitat destruction that has occurred globally to date, there is still
hope. Studies reveal that by protecting 50 percent of the land and ocean around the
world, plant and animal species could thrive. Today, only 15 percent of the land and 7
percent of the ocean is protected, leaving us with a challenging yet attainable goal.
In the recent studies of the Department of Plant Sciences, the University of
California at Davis states that ecological habitat restoration seeks to repair areas that
have been subjected to habitat destruction. An ecological habitat restoration is an
attractive approach to carbon sequestration. In addition to the offset of carbon
emissions, this approach will help protect wildlife, preserve or expand open space, and
restore special biomes, with further ancillary benefits that will increase the delivery of
ecosystem services and help local commerce such as erosion control, water resource
protection, and job creation in habitat work and eco-tourism. They also revealed in
another study that habitat restoration is accomplished through the management,
protection, and re-establishment of plants by returning abiotic factors (e.g., soil
chemistry, water content, disturbance) and biotic factors (e.g., species composition,
interactions among species) to historical levels. Properly restored ecosystems
demonstrate the historical species diversity of the area instead of one species in
monoculture. Reestablishing plants provides a food source for animals and thus helps
restore animal populations (Berger, John J., ed, et all, 2000). Habitat restoration is
important for reasons varying from aesthetic and recreational to economic and
pragmatic.
The thesis statement for this paper is “Habitat destruction, is the process by
which natural habitat is damaged or destroyed to such an extent that it no longer is
capable of supporting the species and ecological communities that naturally occur there.
It often results in the extinction of species and, as a result, the loss of biodiversity.
Habitat destruction is done by completely removing trees and plants and instantly
changing the landscape”
 4

IMPACTS OF THREE MAJOR TYPES OF HABITAT DESTRUCTION ON

BIODIVERSITY
HABITAT LOSS
According to the National Geographic Channel documentation (2019), it states
that habitat loss is primarily, though not always, human-caused. The clearing of land
for agricultural, grazing, mining, drilling, and urbanization impacts the 80 percent of
global species that call the forest home. Habitat loss is occurring at an alarming rate.
Agriculture, the major cause of habitat loss (FAO, 2010), covers 36% of Earth's
potentially suitable land (FAO, 2003). The cover type for which loss is best documented
globally is forest (Balmford et al., 2002). Earth's forests underwent a net decrease of
5.2 million hectares per year between 2000 and 2010 with the greatest losses occurring
in tropical and subtropical woodlands (FAO, 2010). Although some forest loss has
natural causes (e.g., fire, Harrod et al., 1999), most of the current forest loss results
from human land use (FAO, 2010). The impact of forest loss on biodiversity is even
larger than expected from the raw number of hectares because forest loss is greatest in
the species-rich regions of the tropics and subtropics (Pereira et al., 2010). Furthermore,
it is in these areas that the most agricultural growth is expected in the future (FAO,
2003).
In addition, habitat loss has consistent, strong, negative effects on biodiversity.
Habitat loss has negative impacts on species richness (Laurance et al., 2002), population
abundance (Laurance et al., 2002), and genetic diversity (Aguilar et al., 2008). In
addition, habitat loss can shorten trophic chain length; alter species interactions; and
reduce successful foraging, breeding, and dispersal (reviewed in Fahrig, 2003). A
combination of agriculture and hunting is the greatest perceived threat to a mammal,
bird, and amphibian populations (Laurance and Useche, 2009). Habitat loss is
commonly cited as the greatest threat to wild bee populations (Brown and Paxton, 2009)
and is second only to hunting as the major threat to marine fish populations (Dulvy et
al., 2003).
Several studies find out that habitat loss affects not only biodiversity but also
impacts humans directly by decreasing the production of ecosystem goods and services
such as pollination (Potts et al., 2010; Ricketts et al., 2008), soil and water management
(Bruijnzeel, 2004), and carbon storage (Fargione et al., 2008). After accounting for the
potential economic benefits of habitat loss (e.g., agricultural and mineral products), a
conservative estimate of the global net economic cost of habitat loss is US$ 250 billion
per year (Balmford et al., 2002).
HABITAT FRAGMENTATION
Habitat fragmentation is commonly described in the literature as the consequent
result of habitat loss in which large, continuous habitat is broken up into many smaller
fragments with less overall area that is separated from one another by a human-modified
matrix of different land use types (modified from Didham, 2010; Ewers and Didham,
2006). This definition incorporates components of land use change related to both the
total amount of remnant habitat as well as its spatial configuration within the same all-
encompassing phase. Defining habitat fragmentation and habitat loss, however, is a
common point of contention in the literature as other authors argue that the term habitat
fragmentation should refer only to a narrower set of habitat characteristics. While
acknowledging that habitat fragmentation, like habitat loss, is a landscape-scale
process, these authors assert that these processes, and their effects on biodiversity,
 5

should be independently recognized and assessed (Fahrig, 2003). As influences on

species resulting from altered spatial configuration increase markedly with a reduction
in overall habitat amount in a landscape, Fahrig (2003) and other authors have
contended that the influence of the remnant habitat amount must first be taken into
consideration before the effects of habitat fragmentation can be independently defined.
Thereby, these authors believe that habitat fragmentation itself has little effect on
species and ecosystem dynamics in fragmented landscapes, and that habitat loss instead
is primarily responsible, regardless of its spatial configuration, for the dynamics that
follow.
Many early studies may certainly have been flawed in ascribing all effects on
species in fragmented landscapes to the spatial configuration without considering the
correlated nature of configuration with other processes related to the overall habitat
amount in the landscape (Fahrig, 2003). However, the principal conclusion of Fahrig
(2003) and others (Collingham and Huntley, 2000; Fahrig, 1997; Flather and Bevers,
2002; Henein et al., 1998), is that the impacts of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity
is insignificant after considering habitat amount, is hotly contested and is in stark
contrast to the thousands of studies exhibiting the pronounced ecological influence
imposed by components of spatial configuration such as edge effects, isolation, and
patch area after controlling for habitat amount (Thornton et al., 2011a; Haddad et al.,
2015). Based on these conflicting views and ways of approaching experiments on the
impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation, it can be difficult to pull out generalizable
consequences of these processes on terrestrial biodiversity across the board. Therefore,
some authors believe an all-encompassing “umbrella” term should be recognized that
embodies all of the underlying mechanisms and impacts associated with habitat loss
and fragmentation (Didham, 2010). Habitat fragmentation is arguably still the most
frequently used term in the literature to describe the sequence of interwoven processes
occurring in human-modified landscapes, whether or not the direct and indirect
underlying relationships between landscape and patch variables are explicitly
acknowledged and distinguished.
HABITAT DEGRADATION
Habitat degradation may be a more serious conservation issue for some species
and systems (Doak, 2000). Habitat degradation is often a slow transformation from
optimal to sub-optimal habitat, wherein habitat quality is reduced and habitats are less
able to provide the appropriate conditions (i.e., resources) for individual survival and
population persistence (Hall et al., 2007). All else being equal, lower-quality landscapes
have fewer or less valuable resources (e.g., food, shelter, cover) than higher-quality
landscapes and should have increased risks of extinction. In lower-quality habitats,
range sizes may need to increase to meet individual resource needs, and the larger
movement distances required to find unoccupied habitats may be too great to avoid
fitness consequences. Hence, coarse-grained differences in the density or value of
resources among landscapes could be expected to translate into differences in capacity
and ultimately, extinction risk. As habitat quality affects the potential capacity of the
landscape to support individuals, we expect habitat degradation influences to be evident
over a wide range of habitat amounts and levels of fragmentation, in contrast to isolation
effects which are primarily of interest at low amounts of habitat (Fahrig, 2007).
Landscape-level studies that have included habitat quality support this variable’s
importance in predicting regional population size (Wiegand et al., 2005) and extinction
risk (Klok and De Roos, 2003). However, we still know little about the relative
 6

influence of habitat degradation and the circumstances under which quality is important
to explicitly consider. Further, the potential influences of habitat degradation have yet
to be studied from a spatially-explicit perspective over a range of habitat qualities and
examined across a broad range of organisms.
Habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation often co-occur in landscapes and
may interact under specific conditions to produce disproportionately large risks of
extinction. Threshold population responses may arise from mechanisms that result in
the under-occupancy or reduced productivity of habitat patches. For example, habitat
loss results in larger inter-patch distances and reduced dispersal success. When
combined with degradation which can limit resources, trigger density-dependent
emigration, or reduce vital rates, smaller and more geographically limited populations
may result in a disproportionately large risk of extinction. Extinction thresholds have
been observed in studies of habitat loss and fragmentation (Swift and Hannon, 2010).
Here, we extend this parameter state space to include habitat quality and examine
population outcomes for indications of quality-related extinction thresholds and
quality-induced shifts in previously observed amount-fragmentation thresholds.

DEFORESTATION
95% of global deforestation occurs in the tropics. Brazil and Indonesia alone
account for almost half. After long periods of forest clearance in the past, most of
today’s richest countries are increasing tree cover through afforestation. In the
Philippines, deforestation (forest denudation and fragmentation) is a leading cause of
habitat destruction that negatively impacts biodiversity on an exponential scale. Poorly
controlled logging and mining activities have created mostly irreparable damage to
forest cover, affecting the diverse assemblages of flora and fauna that inhabit those
primary forest territories. Findings stated in the DENR-FMB’s (Department of
Environment and Natural Resources-Forest Management Bureau) 2011 Philippine
Forest Statistics establish that only about 24% remains of the country’s forest cover,
with lows falling as badly as 20% in the late 1990s. Regardless of the slight
improvement over the past decade, these numbers still illustrate a severe drop from 70%
at the start of the 20th century. Through the years, the conversion of land for residential
and commercial use has also contributed to the same effects in lower-lying habitats.
In like manner, marine habitats such as coral reefs are being destroyed by way
of irresponsible and unsustainable fishing and aquaculture is harming marine habitats
and ecosystems all over the country. Notable examples of these are dynamite and
poison-dependent fishing practices that are still being practiced to this day, as well as
more recent developments such as black sand mining in the northern Philippines. As a
result, the Philippine coral reef system is down to 5% in terms of being in excellent
condition, as over 32% are already severely damaged. The World Resources Institute
more recently (July 2013) reports that 85% of the reefs in the Coral Triangle (the region
covering countries such as the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, et al.) are threatened,
shadowing the global average which stands at 60%.
 7

BIOPROSPECTING
The Philippines has long been recognizing the importance of conserving and
protecting its resources. Some regulations were already in place even before 1995.
Indeed, the Philippines is the first country in the world to introduce legislation on the
collection, use, and development of genetic resources, also known as bioprospecting,
and related activities (Swiderska, 2001; Smagadi, 2005).
The first agency to be involved in supervising bioprospecting activities is the
National Museum of the Philippines which was established in the early 1900s. The
responsibility was later assumed by DENR as the lead agency in conserving, managing,
developing, and properly using the country’s environment and natural resources. A
specific bureau, the Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB) were created for this
purpose in 1987. In 1990, the Philippines also had a kind of permitting system for the
collection of biological samples in the form of a memorandum of agreement titled
“Guidelines for the Collection of Biological Specimens in the Philippines”. However,
this system seemed to be ineffective mainly because of the limited scope and lack of
teeth to enforce the policies indicated (LEAD as cited by Smagadi, 2005).
The Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act, also known as the
Wildlife Act, primarily aims to conserve and ensure the sustainability of all wildlife
resources and habitats in the country. It limits the definition of bioprospecting to
research, collection, and utilization of biological and genetic resources for purposes of
applying the knowledge derived there solely for commercial purposes (as cited by
Medaglia, 2014). It has provided a more specific and uniform procedure for granting
access to biological and genetic resources and evaluating bioprospecting activities.
Through this act, a bioprospecting activity/project will be allowed only if the interested
party/proponent will enter into a Bioprospecting Undertaking (BU) and declare its
willingness to comply with the terms and conditions set by the Secretary of DENR
and/or the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture (DA). BU still requires the
proponent to secure a PIC from IPs, protected area management boards (PAMBs) and
local government units (LGUs), or other private or public agencies having special
jurisdiction over specific areas.

CONCLUSION
Habitat destruction is one of the biggest threats facing plants and animal species
throughout the world. The loss of habitat has far-reaching impacts on the planet’s
ability to sustain life. Habitat destruction is defined as the elimination or alteration of
the conditions necessary for animals and plants to survive, not only impacting
individual species but the health of the global ecosystem.
Despite limited studies, scientists state that despite the habitat destruction that
has occurred globally to date, there is still hope. Findings from the studies have revealed
that by protecting 50 percent of the land and ocean around the world, plant and animal
species could thrive. Today, only 15 percent of the land and 7 percent of the ocean is
protected, leaving us with a challenging yet attainable goal. And the best way to protect
endangered species is to protect the special places where they live. Wildlife must have
places to find food, and shelter and raise their young.
 8

On the other hand, the studies also revealed that ecological habitat restoration
may help to repair areas that have been subjected to habitat destruction. While re-
establishing plants provides a food source for animals and thus helps restore animal
populations (Berger, John J., ed, et all, 2000).
The three major types are habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and degradation.
All three types of habitat destruction can be just as lethal. Some take longer to
completely destroy the habitat and some destroy the habitat instantly. In addition,
habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation often co-occur in landscapes and may
interact under specific conditions to produce disproportionately large risks of
extinction. Threshold population responses may arise from mechanisms that result in
the under-occupancy or reduced productivity of habitat patches.
As a megadiverse country, the Philippines is recognized for its rich biodiversity.
It has the most diverse life forms in a per unit area. Its biodiversity, composed of various
flora and fauna, provides resources to meet basic needs for human survival, promotes
economic development, and offers environmental services. However, the unsustainable
use and management of the country’s biodiversity may lead to its destruction. The
country has been tagged as one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots and a top priority
in terms of conservation. Policies have been initiated to protect and conserve
biodiversity in the country which cover legislation on access and benefit sharing
 9

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aquino-Gayao, G., et al. (2014). The Biodiversity Finance Initiative – BIOFIN

Philippines: Policy and Institutional Review. Retrieved from:
https://www.biofin.org/sites/default/files/content/knowledge_products/BIOFIN%2
0Policy%20and%20Institutional%20Review%201.pdf
Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB) (2015). Concept Note on Access and
Benefit Sharing. Retrieved from:
https://info.undp.org/docs/pdc/Documents/PHL/93474%20Concept%20Note%20o
n%20Access%20and%20Benefit%20Sharing.pdf.
Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB) (2016). “Status of the Philippine
Biodiversity.” BMB Official Website. Retrieved from: http://bmb.gov.ph/388-
protection-and-conservation-of-wildlife/facts-and-figures/786-status-ofthe-
philippine-biodiversity.
Castillo, M.B and Ani, P. (2020). Revisiting the State of Philippine Biodiversity
and The Legislation on Access and Benefit Sharing. Retrieved from:
https://ap.fftc.org.tw/system/files/field/file/article/Revisiting%20the%20State%20
of%20Philippine%20Biodiversity%20And%20The%20Legislation%20on%20Acc
ess%20and%20Benefit%20Sharing.pdf
Converse Energy Future. (2022). Causes, Effects, and Solutions for Habitat Loss
and Destruction. Retrieved from: https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-
effects-solutions-for-habitat-loss-and-destruction.php
Crowther, T.W. et al. (2015). Mapping Tree Density at a Global Scale. Retrieved
from:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14967.epdf?referrer_access_token=E3f-
1mw-ck5qB-POd6sAHNRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PVqBqhRh-
xvvJTzHFUU9TMfiseqc7XBtw3yJeJCBwHMEd325JNCYv-
3DvRroRPJJJkTX95golfBeN0XF1aaW8P59jvn5Sk0G_AU4O4V7AYAm5mOs3
rWaxWrsHFRlurXF_VPR7jZ2KGxI0z_pVK9CiduKFpJfIe_7psSeNpIyQG2A%3
D%3D&tracking_referrer=www.nationalgeographic.com
Endangered Species Coalition. (2020). 10 Easy Things You Can Do to Save
Endangered Species. Retrieved from: https://www.endangered.org/10-easy-things-
you-can-do-to-save-endangered-species/
Foundation for the Philippine Environment. (2022). Why are We Losing Species?
Retrieved from: https://fpe.ph/biodiversity.html/view/why-are-we-losing-species
Heather, B.J and Lenore, F. (2013). Habitat Loss and Fragmentation. Retrieved
from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/habitat-
loss#:~:text=Habitat%20loss%20has%20significant%2C%20consistently,species
%20distribution%2C%20and%20also%20indirectly.
Heinrichs, J. et al. (2016). Habitat Degradation and Loss as Key Drivers of Regional
Population Extinction. Retrieved from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030438001630179X
 10

International Union for Conservation of Nature. (2020). Halting The Extinction

Crisis. Retrieved from:
ttps://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/elements_of_biodiversit
y/extinction_crisis/index.html#:~:text=The%20IUCN%20has%20assessed%20rou
ghly,38%20percent%20of%20those%20assessed.
Klappenbach, L. (2021). Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Destruction.
https://www.treehugger.com/habitat-loss-fragmentation-and-destruction-130129
Metapopulations, M. (2006). Habitat Loss and Fragmentation. Retrieved from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/habitat-
loss#:~:text=Habitat%20loss%20has%20significant%2C%20consistently,species
%20distribution%2C%20and%20also%20indirectly
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators Blog. (2022). The Natural World in
2022: In the Midst of a Biodiversity Crisis. Retrieved from:
https://www.ncelenviro.org/articles/the-natural-world-in-2022-in-the-midst-of-a-
biodiversity-
crisis/#:~:text=Furthermore%2C%201%2F3%20of%20the,an%20average%20rate
%20of%2068%25.
National Geographic Channel. (2019). The Global Impacts of Habitat Destruction.
Retrieved from: https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2019/09/25/the-global-
impacts-of-habitat-
destruction/#:~:text=Habitat%20loss%20is%20primarily%2C%20though,are%20
cut%20down%20each%20year.
Robson, K. (2021). What is Habitat Destruction? - Effects, Definition & Causes.
Retrieved from: https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-habitat-destruction-
effects-definition-causes.html
Rogan, J and Lacher J.r, T. (2018). Impacts of Habitat Loss and Fragmentation on
Terrestrial Biodiversity. Retrieved from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/habitat-
loss#:~:text=Habitat%20loss%20has%20significant%2C%20consistently,species
%20distribution%2C%20and%20also%20indirectly.
Ritchie, H. and Roser, M. (2015). Deforestation and Forest Loss. Retrieved from:
https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#:~:text=95%25%20of%20global%20defo
restation%20occurs,increasing%20tree%20cover%20through%20afforestation.
World Wide Fund for Nature. (2020). Losing Their Homes Because of the Growing
Needs of Humans. Retrieved from:
https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/wildlife_practice/problems/habitat_loss
_degradation/