The Nature of Change: Megan Tierney & Andrew Church

1,224 views

Published on

The Value of Nature - The National Ecosystem Assessment
Dr Megan Tierney, Programme Officer, Ecosystem Assessment Programme, UNEP-WCMC
Andrew Church, Professor of Human Geography, University of Brighton

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,224
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
207
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • ESS are the benefits provided by ES to humans, that make life both possible and worth living, and are often divided up into 4 different types: provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting...Support – provide E functions that enable all the other ESRegul – regulation of E processesProv – products obtainedCult – non-material benefits we obtain
  • Why do we need to conduct ESAs? Are they just a fad or phase we are going through.CLICK It is clearly evident that, globally, ES and BD are under threat – and in many cases this is a result of human activities, both past and present.If we don’t modify our actions, ES may not be able to sustain future generations. CLICK This relative bleak outlook was one of the main findings of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment or MA, a 5-year study commissioned by the UN to assess the condition and trends of the world’s ecosystems and the services they provide.However, on a more positive note, the MA also showed that if appropriate action is taken, then it could be possible to reverse the situation.But, if we want this to happen, then policy makers need to be able to make informed, evidence-based decisions on how best to make the required changes to current policy and practise. CLICK And the type of information they need to develop such strategies can come from ESA’s CLICK that are based on proven methodologies, such as that used by the MA.
  • So ES provide us with all sorts of things, from the obvious, like food and water, to the less obvious, like flood protection and pollination. They also provide us with spiritual and recreational benefits.But as just mentioned, many ESS are in a state of decline.If we ignore the link between ES and human well-being in decision making processes, then we risk not being able to met long-term development goals. CLICK Therefore ESS assessments provide the connection between environmental issues and people.Any assessment of ESS needs to consider both the ES from which the services are derived, and also on the people who may depend on and/or affected by any changes in these services. CLICK Therefore ESAs also connect the environmental and development sectors. This is a relatively new approach and creating these connections can be quite challenging because traditionally, economic development and nature have been viewed in isolation, or even in opposition, and the full extent of our dependence on ESS is seldom taken into account by either sector.But if you can get credible and robust information on link between ES management and economic and social goals, then bridges can be built between development and environmental communities. CLICK ESAs help to inform decisions by critically assessing different options and levels of uncertainty CLICK And by synthesizing large amounts of information they can be used to communicate complex information on relevant issues. CLICK However it is important to note that assessment are not research initiatives and generally don’t undertake any primary research. Instead they use experts to judge existing knowledge in order to provide credible answers to policy related questions.
  • ESAs play numerous roles in the decision making process including:Responding to decision makers’ needs for informationHighlighting the tradeoffs between decision options – For example – some crops, like corn, can be used as fuel and as biofuels. Both are important ESSBut as countries continue to target corn as the future supply of fuel, less food becomes available and food prices increase, even though the use of biofuels may lower GHG emissions.Other tradeoffs may be a decline water quality may decrease because of increased use of fertilizers, or increased erosion because of the conversion of more land to farming.In this case ESA can help policy makers by providing them with options of how to manage such tradeoffs and better understand the consequences of their decisions. And, through modelling future prospects, can look at the consequences that different decisions may lead toIn addition to this, an important part of the whole process is engaging and communicating with decision makers throughout the whole process
  • The assessment process has a number of key stages which are generally sequential, but usually there is some overlap and are iterative.The CLICK exploratory stage involves things like working out whether an assessment needs to be done, who the users may be, the scope of the assessment and how it is going to be funded.In the design stage, assessment organizers need to consider governance of the process – i.e. Who and how the assessment is going to be managed. It is felt that it is often best if the assessment is overseen by a technical Steering Committee or Review Panel, with an Associated ‘User’ Advisory Committee CLICK The design phase is also used to develop the Conceptual Framework, or the common understanding of what the assessment aims to do.The scales – both spatial and temporal - which the assessment will be conducted at and how they may link. For example, it is important that the scale of the assessment matches the biological and physical processes that create the ESS being assessed.Bridging knowledge systems and looking to see how different sources will be incorporated – for example, how will both formal scientific knowledge and traditional, local knowledge of different ES and ESS be amalgamated and assessed.Once the assessment has been designed, the technical work can begin CLICK The condition and trends component should concentrate on priority ESS and the associated drivers of change, which will have been selected during the design phase, based on requests from the user groupThe Scenarios component should develop descriptive story lines, supplemented by quantitative approaches, to illustrate the consequences of different plausible kinds of change in drivers, ES, their services and human wellbeing.It is important to note that Scenarios don’t attempt to predict the future, but are designed to provide decision makers with a better understanding of the potential consequences of decisions.The purpose of the Response component is to examine past and current actions that have been taken to enhance the contribution of ES to well-being.The Peer-Review process is essential to ensure validation of the findings and provide creditability.Assessment can fail or succeed on the strength of how results are communicated, so how this done is an important part of the process.
  • NEA WAS COMMISSIONED IN RESPONSE TO THE MA1a. Highlighted the importance of ecosystems services for HWB1 b. Showed that on a global scale that many ES are being degraded on even lost 2. Recommended to conduct a MA-type assessment to ID and develop effective policy responses to ecosystem service degradation.3. Ecosystem Assessment for England; expanded to include Scotland, England and Wales.THE UK NEA HAS 3 OBJECTIVES
  • 3 OBJ DISTILLED INTO 10 Q COVERINGcurrent status and trendssince WWII in ecosystems (habitats) and ecosystem serviceskey factors (drivers of change) affecting the UK’s ecosystemsevaluate change under plausible scenariosand consider a range of response optionsValuethe contribution of ecosystem services to human well-being through economic and non-economic analysesBy assessing terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems across the whole of the UK at different temporal and spatial scales
  • The UK NEA aimed to be an inclusive & owned process Expert Panel – academics - provided expertise and advised on assessment process.Client group: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) / the devolved governments - Scottish Government / Welsh Assembly / Northern Ireland Environment Agency / plus CCW & 2 research councils - Natural Environment RC and Economic and Social RCUser Group: - ensure outputs were relevant for different audiences - includes a mix of environmental agencies / NGO’s / companies from the private sector and other government departments e.g. JNCC, Natural England, the Wildlife Trust, the Department of Health and the Association of Electricity Producers.Secretariat – coordinated the assessment process, led on the stakeholder engagement, sourced data etc..
  • IN TERMS OF HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT CONDUCTING AN ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENTUK ecosystems are classified into 8 sets of Broad Habitats which match on to other assessments and data collection processes such as the Countryside survey Plus Urban and MarineAND ADOPTS THE SAME 4 CATERGORIES OF ES AS THE MA
  • BENEFITSEcosystem services followed MA Support – provide E functions that enable all the other ESRegul – regulation of E processesProv – products obtainedCult – non-material benefits we obtain
  • BUILDS ON MA FRAMEWORK – EMPHASIZING THE ROLE OF ESS Structured around the processes that link human societies with their well-being and the environment.Explores the drivers of change impacting on ecosystems and the services which flow from them to deliver a range of goods that we value individually and as a society
  • The questions the NEA wants to answer were divided into two related sections, and consequently the assessment is being implemented in two phases.The first set of questions relate to habitat status and trends and the ecosystem services they provide.The second set relate to future responses and policy implications.
  • TWO YEARS ON & THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETEDLast month the Synthesis was launched by the Secretary of State, Caroline Spelman – Claire will be saying more about this later on.SYN summaries the high level Key messages & findings for decision makersTech Report provides an evidence base & is will be available in hard copy by mid-OctoberConsists of 27 chapters including the methodology, assessing the status and trends in ecosystems and ES, the 3 measures of well-being value, plausible scenarios and response options and 4 country syntheses.
  • Important to recognize that the distribution and variety of habitats presents number of challenges to the management of ecosystems and ecosystem services at all different levels – across the UK, national, regional and local.
  • Figure 14 The relative importance of, and trends in, the impacts of direct drivers on UK ecosystem services.Cell colour indicates the impact to date of each driver on service delivery since the 1940s. The arrows indicate the current (since the 1990s) and ongoing trend in the impact of the driver on service delivery. Change in both impacts and trends can be positive or negative. This figure is based on information synthesised from the biodiversity and ecosystem service chapters of the UK NEA (Chapter 4; Chapter 13–16), as well as expert opinion. This figure presents UK-wide impacts and trends so may be different from those for specific final ecosystem services; however, more details can be found in the biodiversity and ecosystem service chapters. *Habitat change can be a result of either land use change or deterioration/improvement in the condition of the habitat.
  • Figure 19 Economic values that would arise from a change of land use from farming to multi-purpose woodland in Wales (£ per year). *Unlike other values which are on a per hectare basis, the recreation is valued using one site per 5 km grid; this captures the fact that once a woodland site is established the per hectare recreational value of establishing a second site is not constant but diminishes significantly and to air on the side of caution we take that marginal value as being zero. Source: adapted from Bateman et al. (2002, 2003) and Bateman (2009) and reproduced with permission from Elesiver © (2009).
  • Figure 22 Spatial distribution of changes from the baseline in five ecosystem service related goods (agricultural production (FGM: Farm Gross Margin); greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; recreation; urban greenspace; biodiversity) under the Nature@Work scenario (upper row) and the World Markets scenario (lower row) for Great Britain.
  • Figure 13 Relative importance of, and trends in, the impact of direct drivers on UK NEA Broad Habitat extent and condition. Cell colour indicates the impact to date of each driver on extent and condition of Broad Habitats since the 1940s. The arrows indicate the current (since 1990s) and ongoing trend in the impact of the driver on extent and condition of the Broad Habitat. Change in both impacts and trends can be positive or negative. This figure is based on information synthesized from each Broad Habitat chapter of the UK NEA Technical Report (Chapters 5–12) and expert opinion. This figure presents UK-wide impacts and trends, and so may be different from those in specific sub-habitats or regions; however more details can be found in the individual Broad Habitat chapters. *Habitat change can be a result of either land use change or deterioration/improvement in the condition of the habitat.
  • Figure 14 The relative importance of, and trends in, the impacts of direct drivers on UK ecosystem services.Cell colour indicates the impact to date of each driver on service delivery since the 1940s. The arrows indicate the current (since the 1990s) and ongoing trend in the impact of the driver on service delivery. Change in both impacts and trends can be positive or negative. This figure is based on information synthesised from the biodiversity and ecosystem service chapters of the UK NEA (Chapter 4; Chapter 13–16), as well as expert opinion. This figure presents UK-wide impacts and trends so may be different from those for specific final ecosystem services; however, more details can be found in the biodiversity and ecosystem service chapters. *Habitat change can be a result of either land use change or deterioration/improvement in the condition of the habitat.
  • The Nature of Change: Megan Tierney & Andrew Church

    1. 1. Understanding Nature’s Value to Society<br />Megan Tierney & Andrew Church<br />UNEP-WCMC<br />University of Brighton <br />
    2. 2. Ecosystem Services<br /><ul><li> The benefits people obtain from ecosystems, and that make life both possible and worth living.</li></li></ul><li>Ecosystem Service Assessments:why do we need them?<br /> Globally, ecosystems and biodiversity are under threat<br /> Ecosystems may not be able to sustain future generations<br /> We need proven, evidence-based methods on ecosystems and the services they provide so decision makers can develop strategies to reverse current rates of degradation<br />Ecosystem Service Assessments<br />
    3. 3. Ecosystem Service Assessments:what is their purpose?<br /> ESAs provide the connection between environmental issues and people<br /> ESAs connect the environmental and development sectors<br /> ESAs help to inform decisions<br /> ESAs communicate complex information <br /> ESAs do not conduct new primary research<br />
    4. 4. Ecosystem Service Assessments:role in decision making<br /> ESAs play numerous roles in decision making:<br /> Responding to information needs<br /> Highlighting trade-offs between options<br /> Modelling plausible future scenarios<br /> Engaging decision makers<br />
    5. 5. Ecosystem Service Assessments:how are they conducted?<br /> Exploratory<br /><ul><li>Need, scope, users, funders</li></ul>Design<br /><ul><li>Governance, conceptual framework, scale, amalgamating data sources</li></ul>Implementation<br /><ul><li>Assessing condition and trends of priority services, identifying drivers of change, development of scenarios, response options, peer review</li></ul>Communication<br />
    6. 6. The UK National Ecosystem Assessment<br />2005: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) published.<br />Assessed the consequences of global ecosystem change for human well-being, and highlighted the importance of ecosystem services to HWB<br />On a global scale, many ecosystem services had been degraded/loss, and action required to ensure conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems<br />2007: UK House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee recommended that, ‘ultimately the Government should conduct a full MA-type assessment for the UK to enable the identification and development of effective policy responses to ecosystem service degradation’.<br />2008: Secretary for State for Defra, Hilary Benn, announced Ecosystem Assessment for England.<br />Expanded to include Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland with a start in 2009.<br />
    7. 7. Objectives of the UK NEA<br />The UK NEA was the first analysis of the UK’s natural environment in terms of the benefits that it provides people.<br /> Part of the LWEC (Living With Environmental Change) initiative.<br />The objectivesof the UK NEA were to:<br />Produce an independent and peer-reviewed National Ecosystem Assessment for the whole of the UK. <br />Raise awareness of the importance of the natural environment to human well-being and economic prosperity. <br />Ensure full stakeholder participation and encourage different stakeholders and communities to interact and, in particular, to foster better inter-disciplinary cooperation between natural and social scientists, as well as economists. <br />© U Bac<br />
    8. 8. Governance of the UK NEA<br />The UK NEA aimed to be an inclusive and owned process<br />27 member Expert Panel (natural and social scientists, economists) – provide expertise and advise on assessment process<br />2 Co-chairsof the Expert Panel: Bob Watson (Defra Chief Scientist) and Steve Albon (John Hutton Institute)<br />12 member Client Group - funders<br />26 member User Group (agencies, NGOs, private sector, other government departments) – ensure outputs relevant for different audiences<br />The assessment team: with ~400 authors, led by a team of Coordinating Lead Authors (CLAs)<br />A Secretariatbased at UNEP-WCMC – coordination, stakeholder engagements, source data<br />
    9. 9. 10<br />UK NEA Broad Habitats (ecosystems)<br />
    10. 10. UK NEA Ecosystem Goods & Services (for people)<br /><ul><li>The UK NEA has adopted the MA classification for ecosystem services.</li></li></ul><li>12<br />UK NEA Conceptual Framework<br />REPLACE<br /><ul><li>Structured around processes that link human societies with their well-being and the environment
    11. 11. Explores drivers impacting on ecosystems and the services which flow from them to deliver goods valued individually and as a society.</li></li></ul><li>UK NEA Assessment Process<br /><ul><li>Key questions addressed in the UK NEA covered:</li></ul>Habitat status and trends since 1940s, and the ecosystem services they provide<br />Key factors (drivers) affecting ecosystems<br />Change under plausible scenarios & the range of response options<br />Value contribution of services to HWB through economic and non-economic analyses<br />
    12. 12. UK NEA Assessment Process<br /><ul><li>Author teams compiled and reviewed and/or analyzed evidence.
    13. 13. Each chapter underwent two external review processes, together with discussion between the Expert Panel, Client Group and User Group
    14. 14. These chapters formed the evidence base for the UK NEA Technical and distilled to produce the UK NEA Synthesis report.</li></li></ul><li>Publications<br />SYNTHESIS<br />TECHNICALREPORT<br />Evidence Base:<br />Methodology<br />Status & Trends<br />3 measures of HWB & value<br />Scenarios & response <br />options<br />Country syntheses<br />Summarizes high level key messages and findings for decision makers<br />
    15. 15.
    16. 16. <ul><li>UK lacks extremes
    17. 17. But is remarkably variable (biophysically, ecologically & socially)</li></ul>Distribution of UK habitats<br />
    18. 18. Distribution of UK habitats<br />Variability impacts on how systems are managed<br />
    19. 19. The UK, its people and its ecosystems<br />The UK is a small, densely populated island nation and the first industrialised country in the world<br />80% population live in urban areas and for some the natural world is something ‘out there’<br />BUT we are all reliant on benefits we derive from the natural world for well-being and economic prosperity<br />
    20. 20. Benefits derived from natural systems are constantly under-valued (in both economic analysis and decision-making)<br />Ecosystem and ecosystem services are constantly changing <br />Changes are driven by societal changes<br />Changes influence our demand for goods and services & how resources are managed<br />Change has been greatest in past 60-years<br />The UK, its people and its ecosystems<br />
    21. 21.
    22. 22. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Late 1940s onwards: emphasis on maximizing production of goods to meet needs for food, fibre, timber energy & water<br />Driven by:<br />Market forces<br />Government policy<br />Subsidies promoting production and infrastructure development<br />
    23. 23. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Productivity increases:<br />Area under crops (↑40% England)<br />Crop yields per hectare (4x)<br />Milk yield (2x)<br />Softwood production <br />
    24. 24. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Productivity declines:<br />Fish landings: ↓50%<br />
    25. 25. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Gains in production have impacted on other ecosystems and ecosystem services:<br />90% decline in semi-natural grasslands (through conversion)<br />Fertiliser run-off impacted aquatic systems<br />Coniferous forest plantations at the expense of other habitats and most comprised of non-native species<br />
    26. 26. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Biodiversity has also declined<br />Farmland Bird Index: 43% decline <br />
    27. 27. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Improvements to ecosystem services in last 10-20 years<br />Driven by: <br />Policy and legislation<br />Technological developments<br />Changing attitudes and behaviour<br />
    28. 28. Changes in the past 60-years<br />1956: Clean Air Act (human health)<br />1981: Wildlife and Countryside Act (recognized role of biodiversity)<br />1990s: CAP decoupled from production<br />Encourages stewardship of countryside<br />Agri-environment schemes cover 6.5 m ha in England<br />Forestry policy provides a variety of services<br />Production, recreation and biodiversity<br />
    29. 29. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Fisheries management improved<br />Public awareness of environmental issues increased<br />RSPB membership<br />1960: 10,000<br />2009: 1 million<br />
    30. 30. Present challenges & future outlook<br />30% of services are in decline or a degraded state<br />
    31. 31. 30% of services are in decline or a degraded state<br />Soil condition – fundamental to productivity and biodiversity – degraded<br />Pollinators are declining<br />Marine fish catches are low + ecological impact of fisheries<br />Younger generation – less engaged with natural world<br />Present challenges & future outlook<br />
    32. 32. Communication and language challenge<br />NEA quantitative study of 100 terms linked to ecosystems in 1.5 billion word of UK language corpus and 3 specialised corpora<br />Ecosystem services not meaningful framework for vast majority of people but influence in policy<br />Issue of nominalisation - tendency of syntax to obscure agency <br />Nature and natural environment have most meaning and multiple meanings<br />
    33. 33. To reverse declines in ecosystem services:<br />Need more resilient management systems<br />Better balance between production and other services<br />How to increase (and sustain) production but have smaller environmental footprint?<br />Better understanding of the value of the full range of ecosystem services (including cultural)<br />Responding to the challenges<br />
    34. 34. But ecosystem services are consistently undervalued in economic analysis and decision making<br />Therefore the UK NEA explored:<br />How and why the economic value of ecosystem services should be incorporated into decision making<br />Importance of considering both market and non-market goods, and at different spatial scales<br />Responding to the challenges<br />
    35. 35. <ul><li>Case study: rural land use in Wales
    36. 36. Potential economic value of conversion from farming to multi-purpose woodland</li></li></ul><li>Economic analysis demonstrates that:<br />Failure to include valuation of non-market goods in decision making leads to poor resource management<br />Value of ecosystem services varies spatially<br />If recognize the value of ecosystem services, UK can move towards a more sustainable future and services that are equitably distributed<br />Responding to the challenges<br />
    37. 37. Economic analysis demonstrate:<br />Many possible outcomes<br />Decisions made now will impact on those future outcomes<br />Moving forward<br />
    38. 38. Moving forward<br />To move forward and enhance ecosystem management:<br />Generate and share knowledge and information<br />Establish legal/policy/institutional frameworks and understand impact of social behaviours<br />Respond to changing markets/incentives/technology<br />
    39. 39. Moving forward<br />A move towards a sustainable future will require:<br />Changes to individual and societal behaviour<br />Adopting an integrated approach to ecosystems management<br />Appropriate mix of regulations, technology, financial investment and education (i.e. multiple responses)<br />Range of actors and collaborations: government, private sector, voluntary organizations, civil society at large<br />Addressing issues at a range of spatial and temporal scales<br />
    40. 40. Moving forward<br />UK NEA has identified that there are still knowledge gaps, uncertainty and controversy in our evidence<br />However, has also demonstrated:<br />Have sufficient understanding to start managing ecosystems more sustainably<br />Social benefits of such management<br />
    41. 41. Responding to the challenges<br />Plausible future scenarios<br />Scenarios developed to gain understanding of what the future might hold<br /><ul><li>Six storylines
    42. 42. Emphasis ranged from:
    43. 43. Environmental awareness and ecological sustainability
    44. 44. National self sufficiency and economic growth</li></li></ul><li>Responding to the challenges<br />Significant gains in ecosystem service delivery under storylines that emphasized environmental awareness<br /><ul><li>Challenge:</li></ul>How to capture benefits of each scenario to create best value?<br />
    45. 45. Economic implications:<br />Each scenario assessed in terms of changes in 5 ecosystem service goods<br />Agriculture<br />Carbon storage and GHG emissions<br />Biodiversity<br />Cultural services<br />Recreation<br />Urban greenspace amenity<br />Responding to the challenges<br />
    46. 46. Responding to the challenges<br />Substantial change in values with different levels of ecosystem service provision<br />Importance of including valuation of non-market goods in decision making<br />
    47. 47.
    48. 48. Extensive media coverage<br />© Harrison<br />
    49. 49. The Natural England White Paper<br />Outlines plans for the next 50 years<br />The Government’s response to the evidence base set out in the UK NEA<br />Joining up the Government’s environmental monitoring, to enhance understanding the of ecosystem services<br />
    50. 50. What next?<br /><ul><li>Dissemination of findings
    51. 51. Time to reflect on content of the UK NEA
    52. 52. Event at the BES conference
    53. 53. Second phase ???
    54. 54. SGA network</li></li></ul><li>http://uknea.unep-wcmc.org/<br />
    55. 55. Present challenges & future outlook<br />Climate predictions (2060, high emissions)<br />Hotter, drier summers<br />Warmer, wetter winters<br />
    56. 56. MEA – Non-material benefits - Different countries and systems of knowledge <br />NEA – Environmental settings - Domestic gardens to national landscapes<br />Distinct from ecosystems and habitats, spatially defined, explore links to satisfaction of human needs<br />A series of cultural goods contributing to well being – health, tourism and recreation, heritage, education and ecological knowledge religious and spiritual <br />Major knowledge gaps – the contribution of ecosystem services to these goods and related inequalities of goods<br />
    57. 57. Challenge will be how to manage ecosystems so we benefit from the range of services provided, particularly in the face of:<br />Population growth<br />2010: 62 million<br />2033: 72 million<br />Climate change<br />More severe weather events<br />Changes in rainfall patterns<br />Present challenges & future outlook<br />
    58. 58. Present challenges & future outlook<br />UK is, and will likely remain an active trading nation – trading in products of ecosystem services<br /><ul><li>2008: imported 50m tonnes biomass
    59. 59. Significant overseas ecological footprint
    60. 60. Influenced by social, economic and ecological changes elsewhere</li></li></ul><li>
    61. 61.
    62. 62. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Late 1940s onwards: emphasis on maximizing production of goods to meet needs for food, fibre, timber energy & water<br />Driven by:<br />Market forces<br />Government policy<br />Subsidies promoting production and infrastructure development<br />
    63. 63. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Productivity increases:<br />Area under crops (↑40% England)<br />Crop yields per hectare (4x)<br />Milk yield (2x)<br />Softwood production <br />
    64. 64. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Productivity declines:<br />Fish landings: ↓50%<br />
    65. 65. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Gains in production have impacted on other ecosystems and ecosystem services:<br />90% decline in semi-natural grasslands (through conversion)<br />Fertiliser run-off impacted aquatic systems<br />Coniferous forest plantations at the expense of other habitats and most comprised of non-native species<br />
    66. 66. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Biodiversity has also declined<br />Farmland Bird Index: 43% decline <br />
    67. 67. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Improvements to ecosystem services in last 10-20 years<br />Driven by: <br />Policy and legislation<br />Technological developments<br />Changing attitudes and behaviour<br />
    68. 68. Changes in the past 60-years<br />1956: Clean Air Act (human health)<br />1981: Wildlife and Countryside Act (recognized role of biodiversity)<br />1990s: CAP decoupled from production<br />Encourages stewardship of countryside<br />Agri-environment schemes cover 6.5 m ha in England<br />Forestry policy provides a variety of services<br />Production, recreation and biodiversity<br />
    69. 69. Changes in the past 60-years<br />Fisheries management improved<br />Public awareness of environmental issues increased<br />RSPB membership<br />1960: 10,000<br />2009: 1 million<br />
    70. 70. Present challenges & future outlook<br />30% of services are in decline or a degraded state<br />
    71. 71. http://uknea.unep-wcmc.org/<br />

    ×