Ecosystem Strategic Framework

Transcription

1 Ecosystem Strategic Framework Document Control (see end of document for more information) Version Date Author(s) Comment 1.1 Executive Summary Living With Environmental Change (LWEC) is an innovative partnership that aims to ensure that decision makers in government, business and society have the knowledge, foresight and tools to mitigate, adapt to and benefit from environmental change. The LWEC Ecosystem Challenge, one of six major challenges identified by the LWEC partnership, aims to ensure that decision-making takes full account of impacts on the natural environment and their consequences for ecosystem sustainability, human well-being, and economic prosperity. This strategic framework establishes the agenda for LWEC s Ecosystem Challenge over the next five years. It sets out the evidence needs for policy, business and society; the research priorities to address these; how priorities have been identified; and how they will be taken forward by the LWEC partners. Over the next five years, the highest priority areas in which to encourage activity include: 1. standardising methods and criteria for measurement, mapping and monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystem services; 2. resilience of ecosystems and ability to recover from disturbance, including thresholds and tipping points ; 3. developing integrated landscape or seascape approaches; 4. improved valuation techniques and accounting frameworks for natural capital and ecosystem services, including tradeoffs between ecosystem services; 5. relationships between ecosystem services, biodiversity and function; 6. integrated ecosystems and bio-economic models, and decision support systems. 1. Introduction 1.1 This report This strategic framework establishes the agenda for LWEC s Ecosystem Challenge over the next five years. It sets out the evidence needs for policy, business and society; the research priorities to address these; how priorities have been identified; and how they will be taken forward by the LWEC partners. The annexes to this report provide information about how this framework links in with the LWEC strategy; policy, business and societal needs and the process for deriving the ecosystem priorities. Annex A describes the background and process by which the priorities highlighted here have been identified. 1

2 1.2 The Ecosystem Challenge The Ecosystem Challenge aims to ensure that decision-making takes full account of impacts on the natural environment and their consequences for ecosystem sustainability, human well-being, and economic prosperity. The natural environment underpins economic prosperity, health and wellbeing. We rely on natural ecosystems for food, water, and the air we breathe. Land, seas, rivers, woods and fields, parks and open spaces provide benefits so fundamental that they are often overlooked. However, worldwide urbanisation, rapid technological advances, population growth and everincreasing global connectedness, along with the ascendance of the market as the pre-eminent global economic system have placed an ever-increasing demand on ecosystems and the services they provide. As a result, our natural ecosystems are increasingly transformed, mismanaged, abused and degraded (MA, 2005, UKNEA, 2011). If these trends persist, the material and spiritual well-being and ultimately the survival of humankind could be at risk. If mitigation, adaptation and resilience measures are to be effective, we need to improve our knowledge about the links between human well-being and ecosystems and how benefits are delivered to people through ecosystem services. We need to learn how to intervene in markets to ensure both the sustainable use of natural capital stocks and flows, and the ongoing delivery of ecosystem services. Urgent research is needed on the way ecosystem services can be valued, their status assessed and their management requirements understood. There is then the challenge of how to take account of such knowledge within different decision-making frameworks, and also how to take account of the links and feedbacks between ecosystems and people. A particular challenge is to develop an approach to valuation of supporting, regulating and cultural services, as it is these that people have often unintentionally modified and degraded in the pursuit of goods such as food, from provisioning services, or of urban development. The need to conserve species, habitats and elements of the physical environment such as geology, landforms, soil and water will endure. But these will need to become more closely integrated with the growing aspiration for multi-functional landscapes that deliver a range of ecosystem services. New conservation and stewardship strategies may need to be developed that include environmental systems and processes as well as ecosystem services more explicitly. This is a significant interdisciplinary challenge. The ecosystem challenge will assess the links and feedbacks between the natural environment, ecosystem services and human well-being; how these might continue to develop within environmental limits in the face of major environmental change; and how decision-making and local and national planning can take account of these links and feedbacks to help in the development of new social, environmental and economic opportunities. The principal desired outcomes for the Ecosystem Challenge can be summarised as follows. Enabling and encouraging individuals and organisations to be more sustainable in their choices through: o understanding how people and environments interact 2

3 o understanding the roles that institutions, social dynamics, individual choices, technologies and infrastructures play in embedding particular lifestyles o understanding the trade-offs between provisioning and other ecosystem services o understanding why ecosystems can be vulnerable, and what can lead to irreversible changes in ecosystems o understanding the value, both financial and non-financial, of natural capital and ecosystem services to different communities Facilitating the development of the green economy through opportunities arising from managing ecosystems and ecosystem services or by providing products or services which reduce negative impacts on ecosystems, for example, certification of forestry and agricultural products, carbon and biodiversity offsetting, and monitoring technologies Identifying and promoting novel solutions to challenges facing ecosystems and provision of ecosystem services, for example, halting biodiversity loss, ecosystem restoration and elimination of damaging invasive species Promoting environmental sustainability in developed and developing countries, and developing methods to reduce the UK s impact on overseas ecosystems 2. Priority activities for implementation 2.1 Review of first Implementation Plan The LWEC Programme Design Group (PDG) for Objective B now referred to as the Ecosystem Challenge developed its first Implementation Plan in The PDG highlighted three priority areas requiring urgent progress. These were: how the full complement of ecosystem services can be valued and their status assessed, including supporting, regulating, provisioning, and cultural services; multifunctional landscapes that deliver a range of ecosystem services, in particular how to get there and how to quantify the services delivered; and new conservation and stewardship strategies that include environmental systems and processes as well as species and habitats. The Implementation Plan identified eight priority activities that range in scale and scope from workshops to major research programmes. The actions and their status are summarised in Table 1. 3

4 Table 1. Status of recommended actions from Objective B Implementation Plan Recommended Action Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) Science Hub for Integrated Water- Soils Research Sustainable Ecosystem Services Knowledge Forum and Network LWEC Objective B Champion Adaptive management at the landscape scale to deliver ecosystem services in a changing climate A Millennium Assessment (MA) for England Capacity building projects / case studies on how to use ecosystems approach Improved interaction between science and decision makers Status In progress. Research consortia underway by end Taken forward as the aligned activities of the Virtual Observatory, Defra Demonstration Test Catchment Programmes. Taken forward in part through the Valuing Nature Network and the Natural Capital Initiative, and the new Ecosystems Knowledge Network. Not taken forward. Taken forward through Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Sustainability (BESS), Character and Quality of England's Landscapes (CQuEL), KnowSeas, Sustainable Marine Bioresources, and Ocean Acidification Programmes. UK National Ecosystem Assessment now completed. Taken forward through KnowSeas; Natural Capital Initiative; Systematic reviews commissioned; Defra s guide on Value Transfer and on Paying for Ecosystem Services; Contributions to The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). ESPA addressing this in developing country context. Sutherland 100 question exercises. OPAL. UK-NEA. But also now an embedded activity as part of the co-design, co-development, co-delivery of joint LWEC initiatives such as UK-EOF. In addition to these activities, a number of other activities emerged over the past four years that also contribute to this Challenge and delivery of its priority recommendations. These are summarised in the more complete list of relevant LWEC-accredited activities in Annex B. 2.2 Summary of recommended opportunities and actions The recommendations of the Ecosystem Challenge Steering Group are described in more detail in Annex C. The recommendations range in scale and scope from workshops to major research programmes, and are listed in three categories: opportunities through existing investments that can be realigned or influenced by co-funding from LWEC partners; 4

5 opportunities through planned investments that are still in the design phase and therefore open to additional LWEC partnerships; and new opportunities viewed as strategically important by the Steering Group, but not currently resourced by any LWEC partner. 1. Opportunities through existing investments Annex C 1.1 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Sustainability (BESS) Annex C 1.2 Scottish Government s Strategic Research Environmental Change Programme Annex C 1.3 Defra s Ecosystem Knowledge Exchange Network Annex C 1.4 Human-Modified Tropical Forests 2. Opportunities through planned investments Annex C 2.1 National Ecosystem Assessment Follow On Annex C 2.2 Tree Health Annex C 2.3 Scoping study for a natural capital asset check Annex C 2.4 TEEB for Business Annex C 2.5 Action plan/research fund for providers of nature s services Annex C 2.6 Wealth Accounting & Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) Annex C 2.7 Joined up environmental monitoring Annex C 2.8 Exploring the future integration of biodiversity and other land use policies in a changing climate Annex C 2.9 Natural Capital Demonstration Projects 3. New opportunities and priority areas for development Annex C 3.1 Scale Dependence in Marine Ecosystems Annex C 3.2 Relevant Priorities from the LWEC Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Research Strategy (FCERM) Annex C 3.3 Relevant Priorities from UK Water Research and Innovation Framework (UKWRIF) Annex C 3.4 Standardising Methods and Criteria for Measurement, Mapping and Monitoring of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Annex C 3.5 Resilience of Ecosystems and Ability to Recover from Disturbance; Thresholds and Tipping Points Annex C 3.6 Developing Integrated Landscape or Seascape Approaches Annex C 3.7 Improved Valuation Techniques and Accounting Frameworks Annex C 3.8 Relationships between Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Function Annex C 3.9 Integrated Ecosystems and Bio-economic Models, and Decision Support Systems Areas covered by other organisations/committees/programmes: Marine science: The Marine Science Coordination Committee (MSCC) comprises representatives from six government departments (Defra, the Scottish Government, DfID, MOD, Welsh Government and BIS), nine agencies (Met Office, UKHO, FRS, NERC, Cefas, AFBI, JNCC, EA and SEPA), and non-executive members. The Committee's primary responsibilities are 5

6 to develop and implement a Marine Science Strategy for the UK, and to improve UK marine science co-ordination. Areas requiring collaboration with other organisations/ committees/programmes: Global Food Security: The UK s main public funders of food-related research and training are working together through Global Food Security to meet the challenge of providing the world s growing population with a sustainable, secure supply of good quality food from less land and with lower inputs. The programme delivers coordinated, multidisciplinary research through four themes: economic resilience, resource efficiency, sustainable production, and sustainable, healthy, safe diets. Global Uncertainties: Global Uncertainties brings together the activities of the UK Research Councils in response to global security challenges. The programme will help governments, businesses and societies to better predict, detect, prevent and mitigate threats to security. The Global Uncertainties programme focuses on six core areas: ideologies and beliefs; terrorism; transnational organised crime; cybersecurity; threats to infrastructures; proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CBRN) weapons and technologies. Energy: The Research Councils UK Energy Programme aims to position the UK to meet its energy and environmental targets and policy goals through world-class research and training. The current priorities of this programme are: taking a whole systems approach to energy options, supply and usage; ensuring a rapid exploitation through collaboration with ETI; growing the portfolio in demand reduction and transport; focusing postgraduate training through energy themes; continuing to support research in sustainable power generation and supply and alternative sources. Future priorities include: securing energy supply; low-carbon innovation; enhance understanding; reduce energy consumption; generate new skills; build international partnerships. The LWEC Ecosystem Challenge already has significant links with this programme through LWEC accredited activities such as Marine Renewable Energy and the Algal Bioenergy Special Interest Group. The latest UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) call included a topic on Integrated approaches to ecosystem services and energy, funding two projects entitled Integrated approaches to ecosystem services and energy: Assessing the global and local impacts on ecosystem services of energy provision in the UK and A global framework for quantifying the ecosystem service impacts of oil and biofuel production. Some activities relevant to the Ecosystem Challenge will require collaboration not only across different organisations and programmes, but also across LWEC Challenges. For example, the new NERC-led Minerals Security programme is relevant to the LWEC Resources Challenge as well as the Ecosystem Challenge; it will also require collaboration between LWEC and the RCUK Energy Programme. Similarly, the new NERC-led Radioactivity and the Environment programme is relevant to both the LWEC Health Challenge and the Ecosystem Challenge, but it is also relevant to the RCUK Energy Programme and may be relevant to the Global Uncertainties programme theme on proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons. Effort will be required to ensure the appropriate connections are made and sustained. 6

7 3. Next steps The Ecosystems Challenge Steering Group will keep the priority list of recommendations and actions (Section 2.2) under review, considering opportunities to take each forward. Depending on the activity and its delivery mechanism, some activities could be implemented immediately, whilst others may require further scoping or engagement of decision-making processes through individual Partner organisations. Progress in delivering the challenges will be tracked through the LWEC scorecard, which gives an overview of all of the objectives of the LWEC strategy. For each challenge a scorecard will be developed to track milestones, responsibilities and performance. 7

8 ANNEX A Background and process Background The Living With Environmental Change (LWEC) partnership brings together the main funders and users of environmental research in the UK (government departments, agencies, research councils and devolved administrations) to accelerate the feedback loop between researchers and users to ensure that decision-makers in government, business and society have the knowledge, foresight and tools needed to be able to mitigate, adapt to and benefit from environmental change. This strategic goal will be delivered through LWEC s strategy ( which identifies six strategic research challenges: Climate challenge: to understand the risks of climate change and assess options for avoiding or managing such risks. Ecosystem challenge: to ensure that decision-making takes full account of impacts on the natural environment and their consequences for ecosystem sustainability, human well-being, and economic prosperity. Resources challenge: to promote human well-being, alleviate poverty and minimise waste by ensuring a sustainable supply of water, food and other biological resources. Health challenge: to understand and protect human health in a changing environment. Infrastructure challenge: to make infrastructure, the built environment and transport systems resilient to environmental change, less carbon intensive and more socially acceptable. Societal challenge: to understand the role of government, business and society in enabling all to live with environmental change. With such a broad scope, diverse range of Partners, and with environmental change touching all aspects of life, the LWEC Partners identified the need for a strategic framework for each challenge. Conceptual framework for the Ecosystem Challenge The conceptual framework for this challenge is based on that set out by the Millennium Ecosystem assessment (2005) in which the benefits that people derive from ecosystems, termed ecosystem services, are the outcome of a set of interacting biotic and abiotic processes (Fig. 1). There are four categories of ecosystem services: supporting services, regulating services, provisioning services, and cultural services. Provisioning services (for example, food, fibre, fuel, water), and to a lesser extent regulating services (i.e. the things which influence the provisioning services such as pollination, disease and pest regulation, climate etc.), are understood by society as benefits and are recognised as having value, predominantly economic. In contrast, many key processes, referred to as supporting services (or intermediate ecosystem services) (such as primary production, soil formation, and the cycling of water and nutrients in ecosystems) which underpin the functioning of all terrestrial and marine ecosystems (and all the other services depend on), are less well understood and valued, leading to their degradation. Cultural services give rise to cultural goods and benefits and are gained through such things as aesthetics of the 8

9 environment, outdoor learning and recreation. Although these are recognised as important, they are difficult to measure. Fig. 1. Ecosystem services (UK National Ecosystem Assessment (2011). The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the Key Findings. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.). Strategic framework process A Challenge Steering Group has been established for each research challenge, which includes LWEC partners, business and representation from other stakeholders. The strategic frameworks were developed with the engagement of relevant beneficiaries, to achieve buy-in and deliver insights to maximise the impact and effectiveness of environmental research in the UK. Evidence needs have been identified for the key user groups of policy, business and society. The framework has built on the existing work of LWEC partners, their current investments and the body of evidence that addresses this challenge. Some of the priorities identified in this framework will lead to new research, whereas others will be taken forward through other mechanisms such as: knowledge exchange activities (fellowship placements, networks or communities of practice), reviews and synthesis of current research and evidence, or workshops to facilitate collaboration. Some priorities may be on the periphery of the LWEC remit and delivery will involve collaboration with other initiatives, such as RCUK Priority Themes or UKCDS. Some of the issues or needs identified may require further work to develop what action needs to be taken. The process for developing the strategic framework for the Ecosystem Challenge was initiated by a road mapping workshop on 11 March The objective of the workshop was to identify and prioritise issues and needs that will enable the UK to manage ecosystem services for human well-being and to protect the natural environment in a changing world. The road-mapping workshop brought together policy makers, researchers, managers, business and other stakeholders. The workshop analysis considered: needs and issues; trends and drivers; specific 9

10 challenges relating to high level objectives; the knowledge, tools and foresight needed to deliver this; and resources. Key outputs from the workshop are summarised in Box 1. The workshop report can be accessed here. The workshop produced a set of key drivers and recommendations for research priorities relevant to the Challenge. However, a number of key reviews and assessments were either too recently published, or had not yet been published, to be taken into account adequately by the workshop attendees. There is, therefore, an apparent mismatch between the workshop priorities and those emerging, particularly from the UK-NEA (see Box 2). In order to develop a more robust picture of the future research, innovation and knowledge exchange priorities, the Ecosystem Challenge Steering Committee commissioned a review/synthesis of recent key reports on ecosystems and ecosystem services both national and international and spanning policy, research and business challenges and needs to provide a synthesis of the key recommendations that are amenable to the research agenda for the LWEC Ecosystem Challenge. The Synthesis of Reports review document can be found here (to be published shortly). The review fed into a planning meeting in December 2011, where the outputs were considered alongside key knowledge held by meeting participants. to develop a prioritised list of activities/initiatives that should be developed over the next five years under the LWEC Ecosystem Challenge banner, i.e. co-designed, co-produced, co-delivered by some optimal combination of LWEC partners. Benefits of this approach include: a broader range of information, recommendations and constituencies will have been taken into account; the think tank will be able to tension need / urgency against achievability / feasibility in arriving at its priority list; robust outcomes will be produced; and greater focus of priority issues, maximising the chance of longer term success in their delivery. The priority areas highlighted by the planning meeting participants include: standardising methods and criteria for measurement, mapping and monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystem services; resilience of ecosystems and ability to recover from disturbance, including thresholds and tipping points ; developing integrated landscape or seascape approaches; improved valuation techniques and accounting frameworks for natural capital and ecosystem services, including tradeoffs between ecosystem services; relationships between ecosystem services, biodiversity and function; integrated ecosystems and bio-economic models, and decision support systems. The report of the planning meeting can be found here. 10

11 Box 1. Outputs from LWEC Road Mapping Workshop, March 2011 The workshop participants identified the following key drivers for the Ecosystem Challenge: - Global population peaks at ~ 10 billion before Water and food security - Extreme events and sea level rise - Land and water use - Lifestyle / behaviour change - Globalisation Peak global oil and gas production and energy scarcity - Political / societal choice - Societal response to climate change and the unforeseen consequences - Emerging new technologies, e.g. nano-, bio- and information technology These drivers will lead to a number of specific challenges for ecosystems in the future. 1. Provision of food (and energy) including at the expense of other ecosystem services: understanding trade-offs between provisioning and other ecosystem services. If provisioning services are prioritised, what are the consequences of focussing exclusively on food and energy? How can we achieve the level of provision we want while mitigating or reducing tradeoffs. 2. Unforeseen consequences (of societal choices): the outcome from policy, technology implementation as a consequence of putting a boundary of a complex system or thinking in a linear or simplistic way. 3. Ecosystem fragmentation: carrying capacity through reduced area and isolation of ecosystems due to fragmentation combines to reduce resilience of biodiversity to change. 4. Land trade-offs and impacts: assessing and managing trade-offs and impacts at scales from local to global. 5. Resilience of ecosystems to FAST change: identify vulnerabilities, including, why are some ecosystems more vulnerable? What are the consequences of vulnerability? And should we respond to this, and if so how? 6. Tipping points/ irreversible changes: environmental change drives ecosystem changes to novel, irreversible or threshold states e.g. 1) Trophic collapse 2) Greenland ice melt. 7. Biodiversity loss: halt or reverse biodiversity loss. 8. Extreme events (droughts): including low flow impacts on ecosystems and soil moisture impacts. 9. Habitat loss and adaptation to climate change: most UK habitats are susceptible to climate change. 10. Invasive organisms/species and bio-security: prevent, mitigate and adapt to increases in invasive species in ecosystems under climate change and globalisation. 11. Water scarcity: availability and equitable access to water that meets needs of society and key ecosystem functions. 12. Ocean warming and acidification: major changes to marine ecosystems (and the services they provide) on a global basis. In order to deliver these challenges the following knowledge, tools and foresight were identified: - Data interoperability and management - Decision support tools, management and reporting - Ecosystem based management (including species movement & experiments to inform management) - Ecosystems and sustainable economy (including valuation) - Improved modelling and forecasting (including systems modelling) - Improved monitoring and observations - Links between local and global environmental change 11

12 Box 2. Key drivers for the UK identified by the UK- NEA conversion and intensification of natural habitats to farmland, exploitation of natural resources, especially marine fish, and air and aquatic pollution, especially nitrogen, sulphur and phosphorus; and to a lesser extent climate change, and Policy, business and societal needs Policy needs The UK National Ecosystem Assessment has identified widespread deterioration of semi-natural ecosystems across the UK over the past 60 years. There has, in this time, been a major growth in the supply of food from agriculture, a provisioning service. This period has also seen a marked over-exploitation of many fish stocks. This is associated with deterioration in many supporting services, regulating services and cultural services. At the same time this has been associated with a major loss of biodiversity in most of the groups for which we have evidence. Ways of reducing these declines and harmonising conflicting land use demands identified in the 2010 Foresight Land Use Futures report is a major challenge. This means practical tools for land and water management, and to assist decision making, are required. The increasing adoption of an ecosystem approach to public policy places human economic, social and personal well being derived from ecosystems at the heart of environmental policy. This requires the development of economic and other methods for eliciting values attached to ecosystem services, in order to guide decisions about their sustainable management and the trade-offs between services which are inevitable. Better understanding of these trade-offs, and their management, is particularly important in those poorer parts of the world where in subsistence economies people are more immediately reliant upon natural resources and ecosystem services. The UK government s stated intention to put the environment at the heart of the economy requires not only that we have mechanisms for assessing economic value and the role of water provisioning and other services within the economy. It also requires that we develop mechanisms for paying for management of ecosystems, as through payment for ecosystem services. Similarly, policies which seek to give greater empowerment for decisions and actions to local communities require much better understanding of the social and other processes that shape the way individuals and communities interact with the natural environment. In seeking to engage more sectors of society in decisions about and management of ecosystems, there is a major challenge of communicating the findings of research to diverse audiences. 12

13 The significant shift in public policy towards a more ecosystem-based approach, often planned to operate at catchment and similar large scale, means monitoring of the outcomes and learning lessons from policy change is of increased importance. Business needs The UN TEEB report (2010) set out the business context in globally recognising, demonstrating and capturing the value of ecosystem services so that they are included in decision-making processes. This has been taken further in the UK through Defra s Natural Environment White Paper which states: Too many of the benefits we derive from nature are not properly valued. The value of natural capital is not fully captured in the prices customers pay, in the operations of our markets or in the accounts of government or business. We will put natural capital at the centre of economic thinking and at the heart of the way we measure economic progress nationally. Many businesses recognise the opportunities that may arise from managing ecosystem services or providing products and services that have low impact, with estimated markets for such services running to hundreds of billions of dollars (R. Miller, TSB, 2011). However, elsewhere in the business community there is a lack of appreciation of the risks associated with loss of provisioning, regulating and supporting services, and at the same time little recognition or understanding of the terms ecosystem services and natural capital. There is a two-part challenge in engaging the business community further. The first will be to communicate what ecosystem services are, how they are relevant to their operations and the extent to which ignorance of these services constitutes a business risk, using language which attracts their attention. Having established this, the second element will be to facilitate discussion and development of programmes of research-related activities and refinement of the tools which different businesses will require to allow them to effectively manage these risks. Business would expect there to be a focus on those companies where there is clear relevance to these concepts, for example in the water and agricultural sectors, at least in the early stages of development of tools and approaches. The LWEC partnership can bring considerable value to this by facilitating further development of industry engagement with the ecosystem challenge. Since LWEC brings all the major research funders together, this would help the business community to engage more efficiently with possible research initiatives. The business community would certainly benefit from the early development of an information booklet aimed at a business audience, collecting together a variety of case studies as a starting point for recognition, discussion and understanding. There is also a clear need for a phased approach to further engagement. An initial workshop drawn from a variety of different sectors would provide an opportunity to get a wider and deeper business input to this area. This would offer a platform for further workshops and more focussed, sector-specific business engagement, leading to a richer and more nuanced understanding of the potential risks and benefits of different ecosystem services and of developing different tools for their evaluation. 13

14 Societal needs The health and wellbeing of people around the world is highly dependent upon the benefits offered by a healthy natural environment. For the most basic human needs to be met, the vitality of this environment must be protected. The sustainable supply of food, water, energy, and even clean air is directly linked to the delicate functioning of different ecosystems and the services they deliver. But the natural world is consistently undervalued in conventional economic analyses and decision making 1. It is possible to put a monetary value on many ecosystem services which will help to ensure the natural environment is given due consideration in planning and decision making. However, our understanding of how particular ecosystems operate, and of the ecosystem services that humans rely on, is incomplete. We can assess the value of food production relatively easily, but it is harder to assess the value of natural air purification processes. Indeed, some of the benefits delivered through ecosystem services cannot be quantified in economic terms. While it may be possible to identify the cost of replacing the flood protection function that a particular ecosystem provides, it is more difficult to quantify the emotions stimulated by a spectacular landscape. Beyond the supply of food, water, minerals, protection etc., healthy ecosystems also provide spiritual attachment, aesthetic pleasure, and opportunities for recreation and reflection. Understanding is made more difficult by the complex relationships which seemingly disconnect many people from the ecosystem services on which they depend. We also recognise that individual behaviours, habits and practices which can have a negative impact on ecosystem services cannot simply be explained by the attitudes and values that people hold about the environment. Many unsustainable practices are enacted habitually, without conscious choice, and are entrenched within a broader socio-technical context and we need better ways of understanding this to guide policy and its implementation. Measures to protect the environment must therefore go beyond relying solely on economic analysis or particular interpretations of what is valuable. It is essential that we explore the various ways in which individuals and communities, both within the UK and worldwide, perceive, interact with and benefit from the natural world. Defra s Natural Environment White Paper reported that people: want to see measures to protect and improve the places they care about in both rural and urban areas; are concerned about declines in native wildlife; feel it important to recognise all the different kinds of value provided by the environment, from the feeling we get from beautiful landscapes to the health benefits we get from outdoor exercise; feel it important to understand the financial value of these benefits as well as their intrinsic worth; are worried about the effect our modern lifestyles have on the environment; and want Government to make it easier to do the right thing. 1 UK National Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis of the Key Findings (2011). 14

15 Existing research & activities and emerging opportunities The current list of accredited LWEC activities relevant to the Ecosystem Challenge is given in Annex B. More detailed descriptions of existing, planned and emerging opportunities for investment are provided in Annex C. 15

16 ANNEX B Accredited activities related to the Ecosystem Challenge [note: does not include all relevant activities, just the lead ones] 1. National Ecosystem Assessment (Defra, SG, WG, NERC, ESRC) This world-leading, 1.2M initiative will produce the world s first national assessment of its kind. Following the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment chaired by Professor Robert Watson (Chief Scientific Adviser for Defra) it will provide an assessment of the current state of all of the ecosystems in the UK. The study will provide the evidence foundation of the ecosystems approach to policy that Defra are leading across Whitehall, identifying both threats and opportunities. 2. UK Ocean Acidification Research Programme (NERC, Defra, DECC) The overall aim of this 12.4M Research Programme is to provide a greater understanding of the implications of ocean acidification (as a result of the absorption of anthropogenic carbon dioxide) and its risks to ocean biogeochemistry, biodiversity and the whole Earth System. SG and WG have also been consulted in the design phase of the programme. 3. Demonstration Test Catchments (Defra, EA, WG) The Demonstration Test Catchments will develop an evidence-base for wider application to the management of river catchments across England and Wales. The 8M project will initially set up three instrumented catchments with an integrative data infrastructure to provide a shared-use network as the framework for collaborative analysis. Research and mitigation actions in other catchments will also be drawn in and supported where relevant, to enhance the developing evidence base. 4. Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) (Lottery fund to Imperial College London, with additional contributions from Defra & EA) Open Air Laboratories OPAL is a ~ 13M multi-disciplinary programme that seeks to encourage and support collaboration between the academic, statutory, voluntary and community sectors in pursuit of excellence in environmental science focusing on the issues of loss of biodiversity, environmental degradation and climate change. 5. Marine Predators as Indicators of the Integrity and Health of Marine Ecosystems (SMRU (NERC), SG, Defra, SNH, Natural England) The 20M research programme at the Sea Mammal Research Unit aims to fulfil a need for information within government and industry about the upper end of marine food chains. Marine mammals reflect underlying process within a complex ecosystem and are vulnerable to anthropogenic effects. 6. Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) Survey (NERC Defra & many non- LWEC UK and International contributors; run by NERC (SAHFOS)) The CPR survey is the world s most geographically extensive and longestrunning (started 1931) large-scale plankton biodiversity monitoring activity (with current funding of approximately 1.2M per year). The survey determines the abundance and distribution of microscopic plants (phytoplankton) and animals (zooplankton) in our oceans and shelf seas. Using ships of opportunity from ~20 shipping companies, it obtains samples at monthly intervals on ~30 trans-ocean routes. The survey is internationallyfunded with a wide consortium of stakeholders. 16

17 7. Character and Quality of England's Landscapes (NE, Defra and English Heritage) The ~ 1M CQuEL Project (Character and Quality of England s Landscapes) aims to assess change in the character and quality (the form and the function) of England s landscapes. CQuEL seeks to provide place-based evidence about the character and function of landscapes and the provision and quality of selected ecosystem services delivered by England s natural environment, where the natural environment is understood through the concept of landscape. The project seeks to develop a better understanding of the ways in which different landscapes are changing and what this means for the ecosystem services these places provide. 8. KnowSeas (Knowledge-based Sustainable Management for Europe's Seas) (NERC (SAMS), NERC (SAHFOS), Defra (Cefas), and many non-lwec UK and International partners) KnowSeas is a large-scale integrating EU FP7 collaborative project with 30 partners from 15 countries, coordinated by the Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS), a NERC Collaborative Centre. The total project cost is 6,335,740, with a total EU contribution of 4,923,570. Europe s four regional seas have suffered severe environmental degradation due to human pressure. The Ecosystem Approach to management, a management paradigm that encompasses humans and the supporting ecosystem, offers a means of sustainably managing our seas to optimize both ecological and social well being. However, the science base for this approach needs strengthening and practical tools must be developed and tested for policy implementation. The KnowSeas consortium will strengthen the science base for managing Europe s seas through the practical application of systems thinking. 9. Southern Ocean Fisheries and Climate Change (NERC, FCO) Work on Southern Ocean fisheries and Climate Change is delivered through the ~ 5.5M Ecosystem Science into Policy (ESP) programme which focuses on the maintenance of, and potential threats to, Ecosystem Services derived from the Southern Ocean. ESP is specifically targeted at providing policy makers, particularly the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) that leads on UK policy for Antarctica, with the information they require concerning management of ecosystems in a changing environment. ESP is the NERC/UK contribution to the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). 10. Valuing Nature Network (NERC, with possible involvement from ESRC, Defra, SG and NE) The aim of the proposed 0.6M research network is to create partnerships to promote and develop research capacity in the valuation of biodiversity, natural resources and ecosystem services. Capacity will be created by establishing cross-disciplinary collaborations between the natural and social science communities designed to: - Articulate the nature of the valuation problem we currently face in relation to understanding the contribution that natural capital makes to human well-being; and, - Identify and develop the underpinning natural science knowledge that would enable robust monetary and non-monetary valuation to be achieved. 11. Macronutrient Cycles Programme (NERC, EA, Defra, SG, WG) This is a major new 9.5M programme that aims to understand the interactions between Carbon, Nitrogen and Phosphorus Cycles in the 17

18 environment. The research will assess the fate and distribution of these nutrients and the likely changes due to man-made impacts such as climate change, land use change, population changes and changing pollution gradients across the UK and Europe. 12. Marine Renewable Energy (NERC, Defra) This 3.7M programme will contribute to the evidence base to predict the environmental implications of future marine renewable energy options at appropriate scales, and to the research capacity to deliver decision support about the biophysical properties of coastal and marine environments to promote offshore and near-coastal renewables development with enhanced environmental benefits. 13. Algal Bioenergy Special Interest Group (NERC, TSB) The key goal of this 0.77M network is to understand the opportunities and risks to the quality of freshwater and marine environments of using algal biomass as a source of renewable energy. The network will enable early evaluation of the environmental and economic impact of algal bioenergy through development of a sustainability framework using analogues developed for terrestrial bioenergy deployments. The network will also ensure close engagement with technological developments in this area. 14. BioMara (Sustainable Fuels from Marine Biomass) (NERC (SAMS) lead, SG Agency and other non-lwec partners including EU Framework funding, Universities and Irish and Northern Irish Departments and Institutes) This 6 million UK and Irish joint project (funded through Interreg IVA, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the Crown Estates) aims to demonstrate the feasibility and viability of producing third generation biofuels from marine biomass, using both macroalgal (seaweeds) and microalgal (single celled plants) sources as an alternative to agri-fuels production from terrestrial land plants. It focuses on Scotland, Northern Ireland and the border part of Ireland, aiming to provide the region with access to a more economically and environmentally sustainable local renewable fuel source, whilst also helping to service local public transport infrastructure and build on the regions technology-base. 15. Sustainable Marine Bioresources (NERC, Defra and other non-lwec partners including SEERAD/FRS and AFBI) This collaborative 5-year programme is a response to the Prime Minister's Strategy Report on the future for UK fishing (2004), which called for Research Councils, universities and government agencies to pool their scientific expertise to help deliver the knowledge and understanding needed to progress the objectives and practice of ecosystem-based fisheries management. Funding includes 1.4M cash with a further 0.9M in kind contributions. 16. CEH Biodiversity Programme (NERC, Defra, NE, BBSRC, ESRC and other non-lwec partners including European Commission, SNH and JNCC) This programme aims to create a knowledge flow from detecting environmental change and how it interacts with natural processes, then predicting its wider impact on the environment and the likely consequences for sustainability, including assessing risks, and finally integrating these to develop policy relevant solutions to benefit society. Over the 5 years of LWEC ( ) the funding for this programme totals 32.51M. 18

19 17. Biogeochemistry Programme (NERC, Defra, DECC, EA, SEPA) This programme, measures, analyses and models biogeochemical cycles and local, regional and global scales. These cycles include the greenhouse gases and important pollutants which interact strongly with themselves and with the global climate system. The programme aims to understand the linkages between the biogeochemical cycles and water and biodiversity and hence quantify possible effects of man s interventions on the cycles and on ecosystem services. Over the 5 years of LWEC ( ) the funding for this programme totals ~ 33M. 18. Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) (NERC, ESRC, Defra, DFID) This 40.5M programme will address key environmental vulnerabilities in areas of the world where poverty is worst. The aim is to find ways in which poverty can be reduced by accounting for regional variations in climate, weather patterns and land use without causing or worsening enduring environmental problems. 19. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service Sustainability (BESS) (NERC, Defra, Natural England, Scottish Government) Whilst we know that there has been significant biodiversity loss in the UK, we have a very limited understanding of its functional consequences in terms of levels of biodiversity we must have in order to provide the ecosystem services we need and how to manage land and resource use to support important biodiversity-ecosystem function relationships in an integrated way. The 13M BESS programme aims to develop this understanding via research on four landscape types: lowland agricultural, wetland, upland and urban. 19

20 ANNEX C LWEC Action Plan for the Ecosystem Challenge Priority activities recommended to be taken forward C1. Opportunities through existing investments C1.1 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Sustainability (BESS) C1.1.1 Rationale and objectives. The Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Sustainability (BESS) programme is a major new NERC investment ( 13M over six years) that will endeavour to address the following scientific goals by undertaking replicated research across a small number of UK landscape study areas: 1. to define how biodiversity within landscapes underpins the delivery of different ecosystem services at a range of scales and across gradients; 2. to establish whether there are critical levels of biodiversity required to deliver different kinds of services under different driver-pressure scenarios, as well as which enhance the resilience of ecosystems to those different drivers; and 3. to develop novel tools and indicators appropriate for tracking and measuring biodiversity and ecosystem services under those different scenarios. In fulfilling these scientific goals, the programme will underpin the development of ecosystem-services based approaches to environmental management which are essential if we are to build truly sustainable societies within healthy environments in an uncertain world. The three over-arching goals of the BESS programme will be addressed via three linked science themes: 1. functional relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem services; 2. resilience of biodiversity-ecosystem service relationships to changing conditions; and 3. monitoring and evaluation of ecosystem services. A multi-functional view of UK landscapes i.e. which delivers a wide range of ecosystem services to people including food, clean air and water, health and recreation is firmly on the policy agenda, as evidenced by policy-led activities such as the National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA). There are therefore obvious benefits to LWEC from broader engagement and participation in BESS. C1.1.2 Other relevant investments. BESS has clear potential for linkages with other UK initiatives, such as the Defra Demonstration Test Catchments and Natural England s Pilot Areas programmes, as well as the UK Environmental Change Network, which contributes to the wider European Long-Term Ecosystem Research Network. BESS is also highly relevant to other LWEC programmes: Ecosystem Services and Poverty Alleviation; Valuing Nature Network; The Virtual Observatory; Macronutrient Cycles; and the Insect Pollinator Initiative. BESS is expected to be congruent with the aims of a second phase of the National Ecosystem Assessment. C1.1.3 Implementation mechanism(s). BESS has been funded by NERC as a strategic Research Programme that will be led by a Directorate with a part-time 20