3 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Research data for paper: People, Nature and Large Herbivores in a shared landscape: a mixed-method study of the ecological and social outcomes from agriculture and conservation.
Data for paper appearing in People and Nature 2021Data descriptionAt 24 locations (four locations at six sites) in Sussex, UK we placed (i) a SMII recorder with ultrasonic (for bats) and acoustic microphone (for bird and human activity) for a period of 96h; (ii) three pan traps for a period of 24 hours; and, (iii) four camera traps for a period of 96h. Species identification was achieved using morphological traits (pan traps specimens), acoustic recognition (bird calls), visual recognition (camera trap footage) and spectrogram analysis (bat echolocation calls). This dataset reports the species recorded from this data collection effort.Abstract1. In this exploratory study, we employ an interdisciplinary approach to explore potential synergies and trade-offs between the needs of people and nature in the context of agro-ecological farming and nature conservation.2. Ecological field studies and management surveys from six sites were combined with a participatory-deliberative appraisal exercise using the Multi-Criteria Mapping (MCM) method. All six study sites and all four land use options in the appraisal were characterised by the use of large herbivores for agricultural and/or conservation purposes, to varying degrees, and were located in South-East England.3. MCM participants identified habitat and species diversity, soil health, food production, provision of education, and recreational access, as the principal benefits associated with successful management of such sites. Taken overall, their appraisals indicated that a combination of land uses may be best suited to delivering these diverse benefits, but with agroecological[1] farming being perceived as a particularly effective multi-purpose option. 4. Five of the six sites were used for recreational purposes and in total we recorded five times more humans than wild mammals. Ecological data from the sites indicated that the most conservation-oriented sites performed best in terms of species richness and activity (birds, mammals, bats and invertebrates) and number of species of conservation concern. However, beta diversity metrics indicated important variation in the species assemblages recorded within and between sites. Whereas both agro-ecological farms in our study produced the greatest weight of saleable meat per unit area, the site that produced the most meat also demonstrated consistently strong performance across many biodiversity metrics. 7. Overall, expert perspectives and the performance of our study sites suggests that combinations of diverse approaches to the management of large herbivores, within a ‘wildlife-friendly’ envelope, is consistent with providing for the diverse needs of people and nature within shared landscapes.[1] Whilst organic and biodynamic agriculture are subject to legal definition, agroecology offers a more flexible approach and can be viewed as “a development pathway from input-intensive industrial systems through to highly sustainable, ecological systems” – see Laughton, R. (2017) ‘A Matter of Scale’, Land Workers Alliance and Centre for Agroecology, Coventry University </div
Recommended from our members
Diverse approaches to nature recovery are needed to meet the varied needs of people and nature
Conservation and restoration projects often fail to engage local communities during the planning and implementation stage. In addition, when considering urban boundary ecosystems, there exists a wide range of stakeholders that must be involved in the planning process in order to ensure social equity in land management outcomes. Traditional methods for assessing future landscape change scenarios have been critiqued for their inability to adequately incorporate the diverse range of stakeholder values. This paper presents a Multicriteria Mapping study, incorporating a novel application of the Nature Futures Framework, to assess nature recovery scenarios on Brighton and Hove’s Downland Estate – an urban boundary landscape surrounding the city of Brighton and Hove in Sussex, South East England. We focus on two key research outcomes. First, we assess the perceived performance of alternative nature recovery options across Nature Future value perspectives and between contrasting stakeholder groups. Second, by mapping stakeholder values from our Multicriteria Mapping study, we demonstrate that the Nature Futures Framework provides a robust framework within which to assess the diverse values stakeholders hold for land use change. We propose that utilizing the Nature Futures Framework, in combination with the Multicriteria Mapping interview technique, can form a valuable tool to elicit stakeholder values that may have been hidden, or underrepresented in traditional assessment methods, and to compare the perceived performance of alternative nature recovery scenarios between stakeholder groups
Recommended from our members
The role of rewilding in mitigating hydrological extremes: State of the evidence
Landscape rewilding has the potential to help mitigate hydrological extremes by allowing natural processes to function. Our systematic review assessed the evidence base for rewilding-driven mitigation of high and low flows. The review uncovers a lack of research directly addressing rewilding, but highlights research in analogue contexts which can, with caution, indicate the nature of change. There is a lack of before-after studies that enable deeper examination of temporal trajectories and legacy effects, and a lack of research on the scrub and shrubland habitats common in rewilding projects. Over twice as much evidence is available for high flows compared to low flows, and fewer than one third of studies address high and low flows simultaneously, limiting our understanding of co-benefits and contrasting effects. Flow magnitude variables are better represented within the literature than flow timing variables, and there is greater emphasis on modeling for high flows, and on direct measurement for low flows. Most high flow studies report a mitigating effect, but with variability in the magnitude of effect, and some exceptions. The nature of change for low flows is more complex and suggests a higher potential for increased low flow risks associated with certain trajectories but is based on a very narrow evidence base. We recommend that future research aims to: capture effects on both high and low flow extremes for a given type of change; analyze both magnitude and timing characteristics of flow extremes; and examine temporal trajectories (before and after data) ideally using a full before-after-control-impact design. This article is categorized under: Human Water > Value of Water Science of Water > Hydrological Processes Science of Water > Water Extremes Water and Life > Conservation, Management, and Awareness.</p