Biodiversity 2020: climate change evaluation report

In 2011, the government published Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services [1]. This strategy for England builds on the 2011 Natural Environment White Paper - NEWP [2] and provides a comprehensive picture of how we are implementing our international and EU commitments. It sets out the strategic direction for biodiversity policy between 2011-2020 on land (including rivers and lakes) and at sea, and forms part of the UK’s commitments under the ‘the Aichi targets’ agreed in 2010 under the United Nations Convention of Biological Diversity’s Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 [3]. Defra is committed to evaluating the Biodiversity 2020 strategy and has a public commitment to assess climate change adaptation measures. This document sets out the information on assessing how action under Biodiversity 2020 has helped our wildlife and ecosystems to adapt to climate change. Biodiversity 2020 aims to halt the loss of biodiversity and restore functioning ecosystems for wildlife and for people. The outcomes and actions in Biodiversity 2020, although wider in scope, aimed to increase resilience of our wildlife and ecosystems in the face of a changing climate. In order to inform the assessment, we have defined which of the measurable outputs under Biodiversity 2020 contribute to resilience. Biodiversity 2020 included plans to develop and publish a dedicated set of indicators to assess progress towards the delivery of the strategy. The latest list (at the time of writing), published in 2017, contains 24 biodiversity indicators [4] that would help inform progress towards achieving specific outcomes, they are also highly relevant to the outputs (detailed below) that form the basis for this evaluation. The Adaptation Sub-Committee’s 2017 UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report [5] sets out the priority climate change risks and opportunities for the UK. The ASC also produced a review of progress in the National Adaptation Programme - “Progress in preparing for climate change” [6], which highlights adaptation priorities and progress being made towards achieving them. The UK Government’s response to the ASC [7] review includes a set of recommendations, of which Recommendation 6 states that “Action should be taken to enhance the condition of priority habitats and the abundance and range of priority species”. The recommendation further iterated that “This action should maintain or extend the level of ambition that was included in Biodiversity 2020” and that “An evaluation should be undertaken of Biodiversity 2020 including the extent to which goals have been met and of the implications for resilience to climate change.” To this, end an evaluation process has been put in place to define: a. What worked and why? Which actions or activities have had the greatest benefit in terms of delivering the desired outcomes? And, conversely, what prevented progress? b. Where are the opportunities? What are the financial, political, scientific and social opportunities for furthering the desired outcomes in the future? These objectives underpin the evaluation process for actions to date, and will also inform future actions and the iteration of a new nature strategy for England

Exploring the ecological outcomes of mandatory Biodiversity Net Gain using evidence from early-adopter jurisdictions in England

Net outcome-type biodiversity policies are proliferating globally as perceived mechanisms to reconcile economic development and conservation objectives. The UK government’s Environment Bill will mandate that most new developments in England demonstrate they deliver a biodiversity net gain (BNG) to receive planning permission, representing the most wide-ranging net outcome-type policy globally. However, as with many nascent net-outcome policies, the likely outcomes of mandatory BNG have not been explored empirically. We assemble all BNG assessments (accounting for ~6% of England’s annual housebuilding and other infrastructure) submitted from January 2020-February 2021 in six early-adopter councils who are implementing mandatory No Net Loss or BNG requirements in advance of the national adoption of mandatory BNG, and analyse the aggregate habitat changes proposed. Our sample is associated with a 34% reduction in the area of non-urban habitats, generally compensated by commitments to deliver smaller areas of higher-quality habitats years later in the development project cycle. Ninety-five percent of biodiversity units delivered in our sample come from habitats within or adjacent to the development footprint managed by the developers. However, we find that these gains fall within a governance gap whereby they risk being unenforceable; a challenge which is shared with other net outcome-type policies implemented internationally

A risk-adjusted and anatomically stratified cohort comparison study of open surgery, endovascular techniques and medical management for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms-the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS): a study protocol.

Funder: Health Technology Assessment Programme; Grant(s): Award ID: 15/153/02INTRODUCTION: In one-third of all abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), the aneurysm neck is short (juxtarenal) or shows other adverse anatomical features rendering operations more complex, hazardous and expensive. Surgical options include open surgical repair and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) techniques including fenestrated EVAR, EVAR with adjuncts (chimneys/endoanchors) and off-label standard EVAR. The aim of the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS) is to answer the research question identified by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme: 'What is the clinical and cost-effectiveness of strategies for the management of juxtarenal AAA, including fenestrated endovascular repair?' METHODS AND ANALYSIS: UK-COMPASS is a cohort study comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness of different strategies used to manage complex AAAs with stratification of physiological fitness and anatomical complexity, with statistical correction for baseline risk and indication biases. There are two data streams. First, a stream of routinely collected data from Hospital Episode Statistics and National Vascular Registry (NVR). Preoperative CT scans of all patients who underwent elective AAA repair in England between 1 November 2017 and 31 October 2019 are subjected to Corelab analysis to accurately identify and include every complex aneurysm treated. Second, a site-reported data stream regarding quality of life and treatment costs from prospectively recruited patients across England. Site recruitment also includes patients with complex aneurysms larger than 55 mm diameter in whom an operation is deferred (medical management). The primary outcome measure is perioperative all-cause mortality. Follow-up will be to a median of 5 years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received full regulatory approvals from a Research Ethics Committee, the Confidentiality Advisory Group and the Health Research Authority. Data sharing agreements are in place with National Health Service Digital and the NVR. Dissemination will be via NIHR HTA reporting, peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN85731188

Aspects of microbial communities in peatland carbon cycling under changing climate and land use pressures

This is the final version. Available on open access from the Finnish Peatland Society via the DOI in this record. Globally, major efforts are being made to restore peatlands to maximise their resilience to anthropogenic climate change, which puts continuous pressure on peatland ecosystems and modifies the geography of the environmental envelope that underpins peatland functioning. A probable effect of climate change is reduction in the waterlogged conditions that are key to peatland formation and continued accumulation of carbon (C) in peat. C sequestration in peatlands arises from a delicate imbalance between primary production and decomposition, and microbial processes are potentially pivotal in regulating feedbacks between environmental change and the peatland C cycle. Increased soil temperature, caused by climate warming or disturbance of the natural vegetation cover and drainage, may result in reductions of long-term C storage via changes in microbial community composition and metabolic rates. Moreover, changes in water table depth alter the redox state and hence have broad consequences for microbial functions, including effects on fungal and bacterial communities especially methanogens and methanotrophs. This article is a perspective review of the effects of climate change and ecosystem restoration on peatland microbial communities and the implications for C sequestration and climate regulation. It is authored by peatland scientists, microbial ecologists, land managers and non-governmental organisations who were attendees at a series of three workshops held at The University of Manchester (UK) in 2019–2020. Our review suggests that the increase in methane flux sometimes observed when water tables are restored is predicated on the availability of labile carbon from vegetation and the absence of alternative terminal electron acceptors. Peatland microbial communities respond relatively rapidly to shifts in vegetation induced by climate change and subsequent changes in the quantity and quality of below-ground C substrate inputs. Other consequences of climate change that affect peatland microbial communities and C cycling include alterations in snow cover and permafrost thaw. In the face of rapid climate change, restoration of a resilient microbiome is essential to sustaining the climate regulation functions of peatland systems. Technological developments enabling faster characterisation of microbial communities and functions support progress towards this goal, which will require a strongly interdisciplinary approach.Natural Environment Research Council (NERC

Interview with John Thorpe Crosher

Talks about working life making Melton Mowbray pies, Stilton cheese, at Tuxford & Tebbutt, Melton Mowbray. Describes changes in procedures, distribution. Mentions working relations at factory being good, wages, trademarks for products. Briefly explains why Stilton not made during Second World War; talks about going to shows with the Stilton Association, the need for cheese to be kept in suitable conditions