Charles Cowap
(chartered surveyor, Knowledge for Professional Practice), Prof Mark Reed and
Prof Alister Scott (Birmingham City University) reflect on how the landbridge
event on ecosystems services held in June helped inform a new policy and
practice note exploring how land advisers can incorporate ecosystem services
thinking into their everyday practice.
The language of ecosystem services can be disenfranchising
and alienating, but it’s here to stay.
And however off-putting we may find the jargon, the concept itself
really does provide a new lens through which to view traditional land use problems
and opportunities. We have to get past the jargon to appreciate the added value
and ensure its widespread assimilation into daily practice through continuing
professional development and lifelong learning.
When a group of land-based professionals came together
recently under the auspices of landbridge to talk about these issues, there was
concern that ecosystem services was an overly academic idea for the adviser in
his or her day-to-day practice. It was
only after an amount of discussion and breaking down of the jargon that
participants began to get to grips with what is involved. There was an emerging consensus around the
importance of place-making and place identity, benefits, risk and resilience as
key unifying hooks to engage practice and understanding. At that event, Alister Scott and colleagues
from Birmingham City University
even remodelled the Biblical story of Ahab and Naboth (Kings C21), with Charles
Dickens’ Scrooge for modern times, using Provisioning, Regulating, Supporting
and Cultural ecosystem services in a dream of land use futures. This certainly helped to make the concepts
more real for us.
The ecosystem services framework, and the wider Ecosystems
Approach that it came from, promises changes to the way in which we all do our
jobs, to the valuation, appraisal and management of the natural environment. It could transform the way we manage land,
undertake development, value assets, appraise plans, programmes and projects,
and pay for a range of goods and services. This has far-reaching implications
for the land-based professions, including for example, planners, chartered
surveyors, agricultural lawyers, the agricultural supply industry and advisors
such as agronomists and nutrition advisors, working in areas such as valuation,
estate and property management, construction, property development and
environmental services.
So delegates at the event in Birmingham were calling for more tools that
would help them to develop their professional knowledge. They wanted, "a robust and mainstreamed
toolkit", "tools for practical implementation of scientific and
policy work into practice" and recognised the need for “professional
confidence in an approach that has political support". This in turn led to calls for "advocacy
and promotion to a wider audience".
Some practitioners were curious as to " …how to value
alternative land uses", while others stressed the "... role of [the]
agricultural supply industry in knowledge transfer and policy adoption by
farmers", coupled with a comment that "greater consideration is
needed as to how to influence farmers to work for the environmental public
goods". This was also reflected by
another participant’s comment about, "the need to identify win-win
strategies to achieve adoption of environmental policies by land managers
seeking to make a living".
A potential disconnect between current agricultural policy
and the government’s adoption of the Ecosystems Approach in the Natural
Environment White Paper was recognised by one comment, "Sustainable
intensification as outlined in Prof Beddington's Foresight Report is the basis
of future agricultural policies. What is
the role of the ecosystems approach in meeting this policy objective?" A pertinent question indeed!
Researchers were also left with some questions from the
event, for example one commented on a lesson learned: "knowing how
non-academics view and use the Ecosystems Approach, learning the research
priorities of these professionals", and recognising the importance of "....the link to farming groups and
related professional advice giving sectors".
A recurring theme was the importance of, "valuing
things which have traditionally been unvalued and therefore neglected or
exploited". There was also a
clearly articulated need for more accessible and concise information.
Landbridge hopes to go some way towards filling that
gap. A new Policy and Practice note will
be coming out, authored by us and with input from all the participants,
enabling the ‘people on the ground’ to use ecosystem services in their practical land management.
No comments:
Post a Comment