Matt Lobley from the Centre for Rural Policy
Research at the University of Exeter, reflects on their recent symposium on the
future direction for ecosystem services.
(Click on the links to see slides from the presentations.)
What’s the
current evidence on ecosystem services and where do we go from here? The Centre for Rural Policy Research’s symposium
held in June was designed to explore innovation around ecosystem services and
the ecosystems approach. With around 50
academics and practitioners and a range of engaging speakers the discussion
was lively.
Professor
Michael Winter started the
day off by questioning whether an Ecosystem Services approach necessarily
implies sustainability. He did this by reviewing work on the Defra-funded
Sustainable Intensification Research platform before going on to explore the
relationship between sustainable intensification and ecosystem services. This
was followed by Professor
Duncan Russel’s presentation
on the factors that facilitate and hamper the implementation of ecosystems services.
The problem, it seems, is that whilst decision makers sometimes reach the
rational high ground, much decision making actually occurs in the “swampy low
ground”. In other words, the world of policy making and implementation is
complex and often involves muddling through. Duncan’s research has revealed a
range of societal, institutional and individual enablers and barriers and shows
that possessing “more knowledge” or championing a new idea does not necessarily
mean that it will be embedded into policy making and help implementation.
Next up was
Professor
Richard Brazier who described his
work with Charles Cowap on understanding the value of the internationally
important habitats, Culm grasslands, for ecosystem
services. Once more widespread, like many habitats the area of Culm has been
significantly eroded and fragmented and Devon is home of over 80% of the
remaining Culm in England. Compared to intensively managed grassland Culm soils
are characterised by higher soil moisture, organic matter and carbon content.
It is estimated that the loss of water and carbon value from Culm grasslands,
which have been converted to intensively managed grasslands since 1900 is £32.3
million, and that work undertaken to date by Devon Wildlife Trust to restore Culm
grassland has a potential benefit of over £9 million. Richard concluded by
saying that such figures need to be combined with data describing agricultural
productivity in order to understand whether recreation of Culm grasslands is
viable at the landscape scale.
Dr Rob Fish presented an overview of his experiment
in public dialogue designed to understand what people make of the ecosystem
services agenda. Working with publics in Birmingham, Glasgow and Exeter, this
project drew on the work of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment to engage
people in extensive discussion about ecosystem services and the ecosystem
approach. Despite some initial scepticism the direction of dialogue was
cautiously positive and the more participants applied and learned about it, the
more positively they tended to view the framework.
Laurence
Couldrick talked about the future of payments for
ecosystem services and the work of the Westcountry Rivers Trust, with over 2000
farmers and covering some 150,000 ha. He stressed the importance of partnership
working, monitoring outcomes and the benefits that can flow from better
information and understanding. This was followed by Nick
Kirsop Taylor’s assessment
of Biodiversity Offsetting. Nick argued that while rumours of the death of
biodiversity offsetting may be exaggerated it may well “disappear” as part of
the new Government’s agenda. He outlined various possible futures for
biodiversity offsetting including that of becoming a zombie policy. “The autopsy may have to wait a while, but
maybe not too long…” he concluded.
Finally, Lisa
Schneidau from Devon
Wildlife Trust rather bravely attempted to sum up the day and identify next
steps, identifying topics for further discussion, including the importance of
communication, and the need for an integrated approach.
Thanks for the helpful summary. The difference between the high ground and the swampy ground seems particularly apposite!
ReplyDeleteMore details of the Devon Culm appraisal reviewed by Richard Brazier can be seen here at this link including a link to the report itself.
http://www.devonwildlifetrust.org/socio-economic-value-of-the-culm/
Regards,
Charles Cowap