He is a member of the Climate Leadership Corps of former American Vice President and climate activist Al Gore. In 2009, the European Parliament declared him an International Ambassador for Biodiversity. From 2014 to 2021, the maximum term of mandate – he was Chairman of the Europarc Federation, an association that covers all of the national parks of Europe. This is just a sample from a long list of references. And didn’t VRT news anchor Hanne Decoutere say in a recent interview, that he is admired by David Attenborough, Jane Goodall, and the aforementioned Al Gore? In short, Ignace Schops has a loud voice in the climate debate, and Wherever possible makes it heard.
“Because it’s necessary. ‘There’s no business on a dead planet’”, he says. “Economics is not achievable without a healthy planet. Try growing tomatoes in the desert. It won’t work, will it? Compare it to the human body, which contains around 150 billion life forms. Most of them are fantastic creatures, and keep us alive. But there are also little devils amongst them. Viruses such as corona, for example. We use every resource to combat them, in order to keep the human race alive. So, when we talk about biodiversity, we’re talking about ourselves. Unfortunately, the biodiversity of the body is also decreasing, just like with flowers and bees.”
But awareness of this seems to be increasing.
“The figures do not show this. Biodiversity is decreasing both worldwide and locally. The constructed surface area of Flanders increases by five hectares per day. We have certainly made progress in increasing awareness, but allow me to use another English saying: ‘It’s not what you say, but what you do.’ Now, we really have to do something. That’s not easy. Take corona for example. The cause and effect are close to each other. You get sick, you get the virus and maybe you die. Climate change, on the other hand, is an assassin, who smiles as he enters. And at the same time strangles us, without us noticing.”
Something else, but closely related: the Hoge Kempen National Park is the first national park in Flanders. Five years ago you spoke about plans for expansion. How is that going?
“The National Park was set up in 2006, and at that time had a surface area of six thousand hectares, around half of which was in Maasmechelen. On the tenth anniversary, we organised an event to which all district stakeholders – politicians, nature and tourism organisations, etc. – were invited. I then expressed three wishes: that the National Park should become twice as big, twice as beautiful and twice as strong. In concrete terms: a doubling of the surface area from six to twelve thousand hectares, expanding it from six to ten municipalities. Within half an hour everyone had agreed that we should do this. And, voilà, we are now busy doing it. Maasmechelen still takes up a quarter of the surface area within that expansion. And don’t forget that Maasmechelen also has part of the area of natural beauty Rivierpark Maasvallei on its territory. There are few municipalities in the Benelux countries which can say that they have two high-grade nature projects within their borders.”
You have frequently said that nature has an intrinsic value, but many decision-makers highlight the socio-economic return. In other words: in their view, investments in nature projects must also make some profit.
“The intrinsic value is nevertheless invaluable. There need not be any financial return, but you can’t persuade policy-makers that way. The only thing that helps is, indeed, insisting on the socio-economic value. Compare it to culture. If a painting by Vincent van Gogh was not worth millions, it would probably already have been burnt. The English have a nice way of putting it: ‘Value is in the eye of the beholder’. We people attribute value to things. The wolf, the squirrel and the tree frog don’t know how important they are. We determine – or a better word in this case – experience that.
To come back to your question: firstly – the initial surface area of six thousand hectares –the National Park generated an annual turnover of 191 million euros and five thousand jobs. Investing in nature is the new money-earning model. Look at the increased number of holidays close to home, especially during and after corona. Limburg has a massive asset. Forty percent of the nature in
Flanders is located in our province, and ninety percent of Flemish flora and fauna is also to be found in
Limburg. Thanks to the efforts of all partners over the past thirty years, biodiversity has tripled.”
Day-to-day reality shows that by no means everybody on board. Take the individual story of the PFOS scandal in Zwijndrecht, and collective disregard, such as fly tipping and the injudicious use of water during severe droughts.
“I discuss this in my book ‘Gered door de boomkikker’ (Saved by the Tree Frog), which came out earlier this year. In my book, I pose the question: What is a healthy society? In that regard, I’m a big supporter of the Ubuntu philosophy, a way of thinking of the southern part of Africa. They key to it is solidarity: I am, because we are. We can only be happy if others are too. That way we are all connected to each other, and no-one needs to be jealous. If we apply this to nature: Why should we ask Latin American, African and Asian countries to protect the rain forest, when we don’t look after our own backyard? It can’t be that difficult can it? Compared to the rest of the world, Flanders has a tiny amount of nature. The average surface area of a Flemish area of natural beauty is one hectare. The National Park is one of the last areas you can get lost in.”
Do you think Belgium will achieve its climate aims?
“I don’t have a crystal ball, but if we handle it properly, we will be much better off. The good thing about it, is that history teaches us this. During the industrial revolution – more specifically when the combustion engine was invented – Belgium was the world authority. We reaped the benefits of that for a hundred years. If we now take the driver’s seat in climate transition, we will profit from that for at least one hundred years. We really shouldn’t get cold feet about this.
But, again: are the policy-makers dealing with this enough?
“Two problems. The first one: the individualisation of the issue. Aaah, Jef or Louis, are you still going on a holiday by plane? Or: Anja, haven’t you got LED lightbulbs yet?
We’re not doing very well, are we? I’m not saying that the individual shouldn’t take his own responsibility, but systemic change is a job for the government. The government must ensure that we as individuals live in the most sustainable way possible, and create the circumstances for this. Second problem: the politicisation of the subject. I’m fortunate enough to talk to Al Gore now and again. Years ago, he told me that, as a former politician, without realising it, he had politicised the subject with his sensational film ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. He had a point. He was a Democrat, so the Republicans had to oppose him in any case. Climate and biodiversity are often pushed to the left, despite the planet having nothing to do with politics. It belongs to all of us.
Do you sometimes get disheartened when you see that nearly every climate rule creates resistance?
“Absolutely not. That’s because I see nature as such a wonderful phenomenon. It works for us, even when we don’t love it. Pure water, clean air, the smallest micro-organisms ... It takes care of them, in spite of human obstruction. And it doesn’t send us a bill for doing this. It even makes us happy when we don’t want to be. And it doesn’t make social distinctions. Black or white, rich or poor, literate or illiterate, none of that matters. I find that incredibly amazing. Unfortunately, we don’t see it as a factory that works for us.”
How do you explain that?
"The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that we didn’t tell that story enough. The nature boys and girls were talking about the sea eagle and the orchid, but did not fully realise that everything is connected. We have locked nature up in reserves, like native Americans. We think in boxes, but the world doesn’t work like that. Nature, climate, health, the economy, agriculture, you name it – it’s all connected. But how do people often reason? That environmentalist, he can deal with his frogs! I take Koen Vanmechelen as an example. To many people he’s the guy with the chickens. They don’t take the time to wonder what he actually does. I’m a great believer in the power of creating awareness, but of course society must be open to it.”