Exploring knowledge, perception of risk and biosecurity practices among researchers in the UK: a quantitative survey

Accidental introduction and/or spread of Invasive Non-Native Species (INNS) can result from a range of activities including agriculture, transport, trade and recreation. Researchers represent an important group of stakeholders who undertake activities in the field that could potentially facilitate the spread of INNS. Biosecurity is key to preventing the introduction and spread of INNS. Risk perceptions are a fundamental component in determining behaviour, so understanding how researchers perceive the risks associated with their activities can help us understand some of the drivers of biosecurity behaviour in the field. The aim of this study was to investigate researchers’ perceptions of risk in relation to their field activities and whether risk perceptions influenced behaviour. We gathered quantitative data on perceptions of risk and biosecurity practices using an online questionnaire. Only 35% of all respondents considered their field activities to pose some risk in terms of spreading INNS. Higher risk perception was found in those who undertook high risk activities or where INNS were known/expected to be present. However, whilst respondents with experience of INNS were more likely to report consciously employing biosecurity in the field, this did not translate into better actual biosecurity practices. Awareness of biosecurity campaigns did in fact increase perception of risk, perceived and actual biosecurity behaviour. However, there remains a disconnect between reported and actual biosecurity practices, including a lack of understanding about what constitutes good biosecurity practice. These findings should be used to improve targeted awareness raising campaigns and help create directed training on biosecurity practices

The ISB model (infrastructure, service, behaviour): A tool for waste practitioners

In response to the EU Landfill Directive and the challenge of mitigating climate change, the UK government (nationally and locally) must develop strategies and policies to reduce, recycle, compost and recover waste. Best practice services that yield high recycling rates, such as alternate weekly collections, are now largely mainstream in suitable areas. However, national recycling performance is short of what is needed; policy makers must look for innovative ways to meet challenging recycling targets.Increasingly, local authorities are using behaviour change interventions to encourage the public to recycle; these tend to be based on the premise that an individuals’ behaviour is predetermined by their values. In practice, this has led to a host of initiatives that attempt to change individuals’ behaviour without addressing situational barriers. In this paper, we argue that that a behaviour-centric approach has limited effectiveness. Using an analysis of the literature and studies that investigated recycling participation in the city of Portsmouth, we have identified three significant clusters that can facilitate effective recycling: infrastructure, service and behaviour (ISB). We present the ISB model – a tool that can be used by waste practitioners when planning interventions to maximise recycling to better understand the situation and context for behaviour. Analysis using the ISB model suggests that current best practice, “business as usual” interventions could realistically achieve a national recycling rate of 50%. If the UK is to move towards zero waste, policy makers must look “upstream” for interventions that change the situational landscape.<br/

Improving Social technologies for recycling: interfaces, estates, multi-family dwellings and infrastructural deprivation.

Although kerbside recycling participation rates have been well studied, little consideration has been paid to dense housing, especially high-rise estates, even though such areas have particularly low participation rates.Because such areas present infrastructural difficulties for recyclates storage and collections, reduced service often results.Nevertheless, solutions still emphasise communication strategies and householder responsibility over adequate infrastructural provision. This paper draws together three empirically based analyses focusing on the improvement of waste collection procedures and infrastructural design for high- and low-rise dense housing. Two sites were studied: an inner London estate and Portsmouth. Both sites have minimal storage space either within the home or in external private, communal or public areas. Both areas have high churn rates. Analysis of the findings suggests that consideration needs to be given to several factors: social, architectural, technological, infrastructural and organisational. Communication strategies need to be simple and consistent and need to acknowledge non- Anglophone residents. Spatial ownership needs to be clearly demarcated and maintained. Solutions must be tailored to existing exigencies of the built environment (such as poor vehicular access) and need to include broader infrastructural factors such as functioning lifts and convenient, safe storage facilities. New-build is better placed to integrate a flexible collection infrastructure.However, pressure to increase housing density is providing a continuing challenge to design appropriate storage and collection infrastructures

Evidence needed to manage freshwater ecosystems in a changing climate: Turning adaptation principles into practice

It is widely accepted that climate change poses severe threats to freshwater ecosystems. Here we examine the scientific basis for adaptively managing vulnerable habitats and species. Our views are shaped by a literature survey of adaptation in practice, and by expert opinion. We assert that adaptation planning is constrained by uncertainty about evolving climatic and non-climatic pressures, by difficulties in predicting species- and ecosystem-level responses to these forces, and by the plasticity of management goals. This implies that adaptation measures will have greatest acceptance when they deliver multiple benefits, including, but not limited to, the amelioration of climate impacts. We suggest that many principles for biodiversity management under climate change are intuitively correct but hard to apply in practice. This view is tested using two commonly assumed doctrines: “increase shading of vulnerable reaches through tree planting” (to reduce water temperatures); and “set hands off flows” (to halt potentially harmful abstractions during low flow episodes). We show that the value of riparian trees for shading, water cooling and other functions is partially understood, but extension of this knowledge to water temperature management is so far lacking. Likewise, there is a long history of environmental flow assessment for allocating water to competing uses, but more research is needed into the effectiveness of ecological objectives based on target flows. We therefore advocate more multi-disciplinary field and model experimentation to test the costeffectiveness and efficacy of adaptation measures applied at different scales. In particular, there is a need for a major collaborative programme to: examine natural adaptation to climatic variation in freshwater species; identify where existing environmental practice may be insufficient; review the fitness of monitoring networks to detect change; translate existing knowledge into guidance; and implement best practice within existing regulatory frameworks