Humans have also introduced, time and again, invasive species. Non-native species arrive either intentionally or accidentally, with catastrophic effects. Native species can’t compete with these invaders that grow and reproduce faster, face fewer natural predators, or are more resistant to disease. Native island populations are particularly susceptible, with the dodo in Mauritius and the flying fox on Guam, poignant examples.

Human-driven climate change plays its part; it’s already disrupting ecosystems and is likely to climb the ranks as a driver of extinction. There will be winners and losers under climate change, but species that specialise in a particular ecology, don’t roam far, or fail to set up new communities in different habitats, are nailed-on candidates for extinction.

In most cases, lots of factors conspire to reduce biodiversity. Take the cutting of a new road through a forest, as an example. This will obviously reduces the area of forest habitat, but it can also introduce diseases and invasive species, which could change the forest microclimate. The road itself can open up the area to poaching, logging and other forms of exploitation.

Does it matter to humans?

There’s been a noticeable trend in recent years to ‘re-cast’ biodiversity in terms of ‘natural capital’ and ‘ecosystem services’, which tries to quantify the goods and financial advantage that nature provides, free of charge.

These goods and services, when put together globally, can have a high value – between $125-145 trillion per year based on things like plants storing carbon, insects pollinating crops and trees filtering water. This valuation approach is controversial because many services are essential and irreplaceable. And some are impossible to ‘cost’ in monetary terms. How do you put a price on the cultural, spiritual and wellbeing benefits of green spaces and wild places to humans?

The loss or decline of a single species might seem relatively trivial. But a single loss can reverberate through an entire ecosystem, disrupting food webs and altering what an ecosystem provides. In extreme cases it can lead to the total collapse of an ecosystem, as seen with some of the world’s fisheries.

These biodiversity losses haven’t taken us by surprise, they have happened while we’ve been actively trying to stop them. Sadly, conservation efforts over the past 60 years have been swamped by the massive effects of human population growth and the increasing consumption of individuals across the planet.

Does anyone have the power to change the trend?

The history books paint a pretty gloomy picture of humans driving species to extinction for the last 60,000 years, but the future doesn’t need to be the same. Humans also hold the key to unlocking ways of slowing, stopping and even reversing this trend.

We can look to hopeful futures from global commitments like the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and Sustainable Development Goals. They might come from national initiatives like China’s Ecological Civilization plan, or more local ones like the re-introduction of large carnivores to parts of Europe. Or they might come from new and emerging technologies.