‘Wild land’: a concept in search of space

This paper sets out the general background context surrounding the issue of wild land in Scotland. It explores definitions of wild land and related concepts, identifies key issues associated with wild land in Scotland, and explores the question of the desirability of designating areas as wild land for Scotland. There is increasing interest in the concept of ‘wild land’, ‘wildness’, or ‘wilderness’ in Scotland, other parts of the UK and Europe. Changes in agricultural policy are leading to land abandonment in several European Union member states and in some cases ‘re-wilding’ is taking place with little or no managerial input from humans. These events have led to renewed interest across Europe in setting aside land with minimal management to create ‘wild’ areas. There has been either interest or activity, not always in the public sector, in Italy, Spain, Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and the Netherlands in exploring and establishing some form of wild land area. Many of these are relatively small, with evidence of recent human activity, and, as such, are quite distinct from the concept of ‘wilderness’, which has been so influential in certain parts of the world (such as North America) in influencing the designation of areas of land for minimal management. In contrast there are the large areas of northern Scandinavia, which still contain ‘wilderness-like’ qualities, and to some extent are preserved in the wilderness areas and national parks of Finland, Sweden and Norway. Unfortunately, the terms ‘wild land’, ‘wildness’, ‘wilderness’, come with an enormous amount of associated cultural baggage, resulting in argument and conflict over definitions, purpose, and management of potential wild land or wilderness areas. The aim of this paper is to unpack some of that baggage and clarify the key issues in the current discussions on wild land taking place in Scotland

Study on the scope for reconstruction of the grazing livestock sector of Xinjiang based on organic farming methods

This paper explores the feasibility of developing organic livestock farming in the pastoral area of Xinjiang, in order to address the problems of grassland degradation and to promote the sustainable development of the grazing livestock sector. Research shows that organic grazing farming may reduce the stocking rate of grassland and relieve the strained relationship between animal and grassland, as well between man and nature. As a result, the value of multifunctional grazing systems may be more widely recognized. As well as including production and economic objectives, cultural, social and environmental implications will also be taken into account. Additionally, herders may also have an improved source of income to poor rural people. The potential markets for organic products are very big and the traditional ruminant livestock husbandry systems in Xinjiang are very close to organic livestock farming. It is considered necessary to change from a production-oriented approach to farming system research to a wider consideration of the systems and policies needed to support the development of organic grazing livestock alongside consideration of how to fund the relevant research and training and establish the systems of quality guarantee associated with organic production.Grazing Livestock, Organic Farming, Xinjiang, China

From Countrysides of Production to Countrysides of Consumption: the Implications for Rural Areas

Inaugural lecture

Forest Land Ownership Change in United Kingdom

Publisher PD

Triggering change: Towards a conceptualisation of major change processes in farm decision-making

In this paper, we present a broad conceptualisation of major change in farm level trajectories. We argue that as a result of path dependency, major changes in farming practice primarily occur in response to 'trigger events', after which farm managers intensify their consideration of the options open to them, and may set a new course of action. In undertaking new actions, the farm system enters a period of instability, while new practices become established. Over time these new practices, if successfully achieving anticipated aims, lead to a further period of path dependency. Recognising and capitalising upon this pattern of events is important for the development of policies oriented towards incentivising major change in farming practices, and may explain why similar projects and/or policies influence some 'types' of farmers differently, and at different times. To illustrate our arguments, examples of this process are described in relation to empirical examples of major on-farm change processes, drawn from qualitative interviews with organic and conventional farmers in two English case study area

Triggering change: Towards a conceptualisation of major change processes in farm decision-making

In this paper, we present a broad conceptualisation of major change in farm level trajectories. We argue that as a result of path dependency, major changes in farming practice primarily occur in response to 'trigger events', after which farm managers intensify their consideration of the options open to them, and may set a new course of action. In undertaking new actions, the farm system enters a period of instability, while new practices become established. Over time these new practices, if successfully achieving anticipated aims, lead to a further period of path dependency. Recognising and capitalising upon this pattern of events is important for the development of policies oriented towards incentivising major change in farming practices, and may explain why similar projects and/or policies influence some 'types' of farmers differently, and at different times. To illustrate our arguments, examples of this process are described in relation to empirical examples of major on-farm change processes, drawn from qualitative interviews with organic and conventional farmers in two English case study area

Improving coherence of ecosystem service provision between scales

© 2014 Elsevier B.V. High-level consensus about safeguarding ecosystem services for optimal benefits to society is not yet matched by transposition to field scale. Various 'societal levers' - markets, statutory legislation, common/civil law, market-based instruments and protocols - have evolved as a fragmented policy environment of incentives and constraints, influencing the freedoms of resource owners. This has produced mosaic landscapes reflecting both natural conditions and landowner aspirations. The Principles of the Ecosystem Approach serve as a framework to consider three case study sites: an English lowland estuary and two in Scotland. Societal levers today safeguard some socially valuable services, but the present policy environment is neither sufficient nor sufficiently integrated to achieve coherence between the choices of resource owners and wider societal aspirations for ecosystem service provision. The heterogeneity of societal levers protects freedom of choice, enables adaptive decision-making related to the properties of the natural resource, and makes allowance for changes in societal preferences. Resultant mosaic landscapes provide flexibility and resilience in ecosystem service production. However, further evolution of societal levers is required to bring about greater coherence of ecosystem service production from local to national/international scales. This paper explores how issues of scale, regulation and variability manifest in the ecosystem service framework

Rural-Urban Policies : Changing Conceptions of the Human-Environment Relationship

Peer reviewedPostprin

Social Innovation in Community Energy in Europe: A Review of the Evidence

Citizen-driven Renewable Energy (RE) projects of various kinds, known collectively as community energy (CE), have an important part to play in the worldwide transition to cleaner energy systems. On the basis of evidence from 8 European countries, we investigate CE, over approximately the last 50 years (c.1970–2018), through the lens of Social Innovation (SI). We carry out a detailed review of literature around the social dimension of renewable energy; we collect, describe and map CE initiatives from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the UK; and we unpack the SI concept into 4 operational criteria which we suggest are essential to recognizing SI in CE. These are: (1) Crises and opportunities; (2) the agency of civil society; (3) reconfiguration of social practices, institutions and networks; (4) new ways of working. We identify three main phases of SI in CE. The environmental movements of the 1960s and the “oil shocks” of the 1970s provided the catalyst for a series of innovative societal responses around energy and self-sufficiency. A second wave of SI relates to the mainstreaming of RE and associated government support mechanisms. In this phase, with some important exceptions, successful CE initiatives were mainly confined to those countries where they were already embedded as innovators in the previous phase. The third phase of CE innovation relates to the societal response to the Great Recession that began in 2008 and lasted most of the subsequent decade. CE initiatives formed around this time were also strongly focused around democratization of energy and citizen empowerment in the context of rising energy prices, a weak economy, and a production and supply system dominated by excessively powerful multinational energy firms. CE initiatives today are more diverse than at any time previously, and are likely to continue to act as incubators for pioneering initiatives addressing virtually all aspects of energy. However, large multinational energy firms remain the dominant vehicle for delivery of the energy transition, and the apparent excitement in European policy circles for “community energy” does not extend to democratization of energy or genuine empowerment of citizens