**9. Plural drivers of biodiversity losses**

To acquaint with what biodiversity is and why it should be important is the major step toward pluralism; however, it is not sufficient on its own. It is also important to recognize why bio-diversity in its diverse forms is being lost and what are different

#### *Biodiversity Conservation of Western Himalayas: A Pluralistic Approach DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107075*

combinations of activities at various labels might reduce or repeal the damage to nature meticulously. Specifically, one has to take out what is generally called the causes of biodiversity loss and degradation of nature [50, 51] or—drawing on our plural characterization above—what kinds of human actions and social processes are leading to the undermining of facets of nature and what makes those actions and processes persist.

Firstly, there should be a strong tendency to cast explanation in universal or globalized terms. Even though it is useful to categorize the biggest drivers of biodiversity decline as a resource over and land-cover change for agriculture purposes at a large scale, these analyses have often been conducted in a collective way without distinguishing these processes in terms of localities or actors [52]. Thus, the driver-based studies should go further to find out what sectors are responsible for detrimental activities and who benefited from them.

Secondly, scientific analysis of drivers normally hazards reducing bio-diversity, to a set of the singular index, reflecting a desire to let science drive policy at the cost of opening space for other means to know the natural world and as a result for consideration. Adding to that, biodiversity cannot be just lessened to a singular index, but the issue itself is much more complex than, for instance, the conventional drivers—pressures—state—impacts—responses structure can be handled [53, 54]. There are manifold clarifications for several causes behind the continued reduction of biodiversity. Economists thought that mankind as mostly independent realistic drivers and thus, motivate the utilization of biodiversity to observe win-win solutions. Conversely, ecologists should give priority to dependent and post-colonial structures of authority that relieve local communities of land rights which leads to state community differences and as a result, may advocate restitution of these human rights, and chiefly respect to the world views of native local communities as the first step toward sustainable management of nature. Others may emphasize macro-level institutional failure based on ever-expanding capital accumulation as the overarching single cause of the ongoing ecological crisis [55].

Finally, communal analytic effect on biodiversity change has been assembled into 'a political' clarification that directly emphasizes population pressure-based descriptions for the loss of interpreted pristine environment and more political descriptions that unite concern for communal justice, and acceptance of racially co-established concept about the natural world, with other justifications like widespread property conjecture placed in the middle. This divergence allows conservation groups to accentuate what looks doable and gives the existence of leading economic-political structures rather than what desires to be done.
