Case 5 - Creating sustainable uplands through stakeholder-academic co-learning and policy influence
Submitting Institution
University of LeedsUnit of Assessment
Geography, Environmental Studies and ArchaeologySummary Impact Type
EnvironmentalResearch Subject Area(s)
Environmental Sciences: Ecological Applications, Environmental Science and Management
Summary of the impact
The project combined stakeholder knowledge with natural science to
identify future scenarios and
adaptation options for uplands. Research into upland ecosystem services
identified win-win
scenarios (e.g. around carbon management) and important trade-offs (e.g.
effects on biodiversity).
These were embedded within government policy reports leading to additional
work in government
departments seeking to overcome policy barriers in these areas in order to
implement the
recommendations from the research. Overcoming these policy barriers has
influenced
government's decision to work in partnership to launch a new peatland
carbon code, focussing on
upland peatlands, creating corporate social responsibility (CSR) options
for companies via
peatland protection and restoration.
Underpinning research
The UK uplands are undergoing significant change [1, 2]. They are
experiencing effects of climate
change, rising demand for home-grown food and energy security, ongoing
upheaval in financial
support for agriculture, new European regulatory demands to improve water
quality, and
cultural/demographic change. Upland stakeholders must appreciate the range
of possible futures
they may face, if they are to prepare effectively. The Sustainable Uplands
project investigated
methods to anticipate, monitor and sustainably manage change in the UK
uplands.
The Sustainable Uplands project (funded 2005-9) combined the research and
knowledge of natural
and social scientists, policy makers and stakeholders. The
interdisciplinary consortium included
Co-Principal Investigator Joseph Holden (at Leeds Geography since
2000, NERC fellow 2002-5,
currently Professor), other School of Geography (SoG) staff, the School of
Earth and Environment
(K. Hubacek PI) and the Institute of Integrative and Comparative Biology
at the University of Leeds
with co-investigators from Durham University, University of Sheffield and
University of Sussex and
was funded by ESRC/NERC/BBSRC/Defra/SEPA (`Managing Uncertainty in Dynamic
Socio-Environmental Systems: An Application to UK Uplands', Grant
RES-227-25-0001, total value
£750K, 1/5/06-31/10/09) within the Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU)
programme. Additional
support was provided by some spin-off projects including commercially
leveraged funding which
provided underpinning research to support corporate policy making. Through
research and active
engagement, the project considered how the UK's uplands might change under
future social,
economic and environmental conditions.
Members of SoG led significant parts of the project including developing
models of the hydrology,
water quality and carbon storage potential of the UK's uplands, model
integration, devising data
collection methods, leading field measurement campaigns and analysing
data. Models were
combined with socio-economic data across three major case study sites
(Peak District National
Park, Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and the
Southern Uplands of
Galloway) [5]. Significant contributions were made by SoG staff
including academics Holden,
Michael Kirkby (Leeds academic since 1973, Professor), Pippa Chapman
(Leeds academic since
1999, currently Reader) and Irvine (research staff since 2001),
and a three year postdoctoral
researcher Nanlin Jin (now lecturer at Northumbria).
Contrasting policy scenarios for land use and management were developed
using simulation
models and qualitative inputs from interviews and focus groups. These
scenarios identified positive
and negative consequences for ecosystem services (such as flood risk,
climate regulation through
carbon storage, provision of drinking water) from the uplands [1, 5].
For example, Holden and
collaborators demonstrated the multiple ecosystem service benefits from
blocking drains in the
uplands but showed that there would be a long lag time to some benefits
because biodiversity and
ecological improvement will follow the recovery in hydrological processes.
Research by SoG
showed how upland landscape condition including vegetation cover and water
depth affect flow
velocity and therefore runoff times and peak flood levels [3].
Peatlands are a major source of
stored carbon. In collaboration with Durham University and Moors for the
Future (a non-academic
stakeholder partnership based in the Peak District), field sampling and
improved process
understanding resulted in a model for calculating carbon fluxes from peat
soils with different land
management scenarios [4, 5]. The project showed that where
extensification reduces managed
burning and grazing, changes in vegetation could compromise conservation
species, provisioning
services, amenity value and wildfire risk. However, where extensification
results in damaged
peatland restoration, there would be increased carbon storage, with
co-benefits to water quality
and flood risk countering habitat loss elsewhere in the landscape.
Intensification to boost UK food
security would benefit some provisioning services but negatively impact
carbon storage and water
quality and reduce abundance of certain conservation species.
Subsequently, the SoG led an ESRC `follow-on project' (`Sustainable
uplands: communicating and
learning to live with change', RES-189-25-0017, £101K, 14/9/09-13/11/10, Holden
PI) to
disseminate research results, supported by FT KE officer Sarah Buckmaster
(now
communications manager at UK Collaborative on Development Sciences), to
ensure impact-orientated recommendations were directed to multiple audiences.
References to the research
The research is published in a wide range of internationally-recognised,
rigorously peer-reviewed
journals. Output 3 is included in REF2. External funding of the research
is described in Section 2.
1. Government commissioned peer-reviewed paper adopting the
project approach and foresight
on science/social science understanding to inform uplands policy
development:
Reed MS, Bonn A, Slee W, Beharry-Borg N, Birch J, Brown I, Burt TP,
Chapman D, Chapman PJ,
Clay G, Cornell S, Fraser EDG, Holden J, Hodgson J, Hubacek K, Irvine
B, Jin N, Kirkby MJ,
Kunin W, Moore O, Moseley D, Prell C, Quinn C, Redpath S, Stagl S,
Stringer LC, Termansen M,
Thorp S, Towers W, Worrall F (2009) The future of the uplands. Land
Use Policy S26, S202-S216.
doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.013
2. A position paper compiling the science baseline for the
research project:
Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T.P., Chapman, P.J.,
Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G.,
Hubacek, K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M.J., Reed, M.S., Prell, C.,
Stagl, S., Stringer, L.C., Turner, A.,
Worrall, F. (2007) Environmental change in moorland landscapes. Earth-Science
Reviews, 82, 75-100. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2007.01.003.
3. Research paper which is the first to comprehensively
establish the role of vegetation cover in
attenuating overland flow velocity - important implications for flood
management:
Holden, J., M. J. Kirkby, S. N. Lane, D. G. Milledge, C. J.
Brookes, V. Holden, A. T. McDonald
(2008), Overland flow velocity and roughness properties in peatlands, Water
Resources Research,
44, W06415, doi:10.1029/2007WR006052.
4. Paper on modelling work to determine the carbon offsetting
potential of upland peatlands:
Worrall, F., Evans M.G., Bonn, A., Reed, M.S., Chapman, D., Holden, J.
(2009) Can carbon
offsetting pay for upland ecological restoration? Science of the Total
Environment, 408, 26-36.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.09.022
5. Research paper showing key outputs from the field,
modelling and scenario work and
opportunities for practical benefits from the underpinning research:
Reed MS, Hubacek K, Bonn A, Burt T, Holden J, Stringer LC,
Beharry-Borg N, Buckmaster S,
Chapman D, Chapman P, Clay GD, Cornell S, Dougill AJ, Evely A,
Fraser EDG, Jin N, Irvine B,
Kirkby M, Kunin W, Prell C, Quinn CH, Slee W, Stagl S, Termansen M,
Thorp S, Worrall F (2013)
Anticipating and managing future trade-offs and complementarities between
ecosystem services.
Ecology and Society 18(1). doi: 10.5751/ES-04924-180105.
Details of the impact
One of the key recommendations of the research was for the need to
develop finance opportunities
to enable payments to be made for ecosystem service benefits to be derived
from upland
landscapes. The project directly influenced the policy debate in this
regard enabling a policy shift
towards facilitating private investment in upland management which maps on
to the policy briefing
documents and Westminster workshops produced by the project. For example,
our findings were
reported by the Commission for Rural Communities Inquiry into the Future
of England's Uplands.
This reported to the Prime Minister in June 2010 with some of our inputs
verbatim, particularly
those relating to carbon and water markets, and payments for other
ecosystem services [A].
This work influenced a Government Upland Policy Review published on 10
March 2011 outlining
the actions to be taken by the Government. This review stated that Defra
were going to "explore
and review the opportunities and challenges for the use of payment for
ecosystem service
approaches, including in upland areas" [B] and this was a direct
result of our project. The above
review also fed into the Government's Natural Environment White Paper in
2011 (which
consequently included a number of commitments on payments for ecosystem
services (PES) and
peatlands) [C]. One of the direct recommendations made in research
papers [5], and at policy-maker workshops in Whitehall and Edinburgh organised by the Sustainable
Uplands research
team, was to implement a UK peatland carbon code to facilitate corporate
investment for the
protection of upland peatlands. Notably, one of the commitments in the
2011 Natural Environment
White Paper was to publish a PES Best Practice Guide [C], and this
Guide features Sustainable
Uplands research about peatland carbon markets [D]. Project
researchers worked closely with
Defra, DECC and International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
to break down barriers
to implementing a UK peatland carbon code, work which also supported by a
NERC Knowledge
Exchange Fellowship (Viki Hirst) held in SoG and a number of follow-up
initiatives developed from
the underpinning research (e.g. NERC funded Valuing Nature Network project
http://www.valuing-nature.net/news/2012/peatland-carbon-code;
http:tinyurl.com/cyade85). The
project team was
invited to submit the idea for the proposed peatland carbon code to the
Ecosystem Markets
Taskforce (a commitment in the Natural Environment White Paper to identify
business
opportunities in light of the National Ecosystem Assessment). The code was
ranked joint top
opportunity out of 44 submitted opportunities by the Taskforce [E]
(made up from industry leader
representatives) and they recommended the development of a robust code for
peatland restoration
in their final report of March 2013, which reported directly to three
Secretaries of State in Defra,
DECC and BIS. The code (which has to be open, consistent, credible and
verifiable) was
developed with funding from Defra as a PES Pilot. Defra published its PES
Action Plan in May
2013 and announced its intention to work in partnership with the IUCN UK
peatlands programme
and others to support the testing, development and launch of a pilot
peatland carbon code [F]
(http://www.iucn-uk-peatlandprogramme.org/peatland-code/about). This code
is the UK's first
regulated scheme to facilitate peatland restoration using carbon finance.
It takes account of the
trade-offs and complementarities between ecosystem services as determined
by the underpinning
research. It is a direct impact from the Sustainable Uplands project [F].
It enables companies to
develop CSR via investment in upland blanket peat restoration and
protection which also yields
multiple ecosystem service benefits (e.g. improved water quality and flood
alleviation) [F].
Other Sustainable Uplands project findings have been used by water
companies to justify using
land management and PES to reduce water treatment costs. These strategies
are being
implemented in the business plans prepared in early 2013 to be submitted
to OFWAT as part of
the 2014 Price Review. Exemplar companies include South West Water [G]
and Yorkshire Water
[H]. The former was supported by a NERC internship run jointly by
SoG and Birmingham City
University, to develop PES approaches within the business bundling carbon
and biodiversity
benefits in tandem with their clean water programme. Yorkshire Water
commissioned a direct
piece of work (fieldwork and further modelling using the models developed
by the Sustainable
Uplands project) about costs and benefits of water treatment costs versus
reducing water colour
and fertiliser inputs from upland management through land management
change and paying or
incentivising farmers to change their behaviour. Related to this the
project's outcomes (citing
Holden) were used as part of the St George's House (Windsor)
consultation into the uplands
recommending that more water companies should be pushed to invest in
upland management for
multiple benefits to society and that regulators should be encouraged to
incentivise such
approaches [I].
The project has also benefited land owners and managers. For example, it
provided inputs to
Pennine Prospects' review of its Integrated Management Strategy and
Conservation Action
Programme for the South Pennine Moors and Nidderdale Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty's
last Management Plan [J]
Our technical reports for the IUCN Commission of Inquiry (reports
available http://www.iucn-uk-peatlandprogramme.org/resources/reports
- see for example `Peatlands and
climate change')
provided evidence for IUCN lobbying of the UK Government and for EU Common
Agricultural
Policy reform as part of the IUCN process. As a result the environment
ministers of the UK
governments formally announced in February 2013
(http://tinyurl.com/acn84x2) that they were
committed to conserving peatlands in the UK and British Overseas
Territories and set out an action
framework to protect and enhance the natural capital of peatlands
recognising their importance for
biodiversity, water and climate change. [K]
The project received the Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) Best
Impact Award from the £30m
cross research council RELU programme which ran from 2004-2013. The award
was voted for by
business people, scientists, and policy makers. Sir Howard Newby, who
presented the award,
said: "Environmental and social change in the uplands has implications for
all of us and this project
has helped our understanding of these changes, and enabled people who live
in and make use of
the uplands to make more informed choices." [L]
Sources to corroborate the impact
[A] Former Government Rural Advocate, Commission for Rural Communities;
to corroborate the
contributions our work made to the CRC inquiry. [Available on request].
[B] Uplands Policy Review, Defra, March 2011, Paragraph 85, page 28.
Available from
http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/documents/interim2/upland-policy-review2011.pdf
[Available on
request].
[C] The Government's 2011 Natural Environment White Paper The Natural
Choice: Securing the
Value of Nature. See, for example, page 28. The commitments in the
2011 Natural
Environment White Paper to publish a PES Best Practice Guide can be found
on page 39.
Available from:
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8082/8082.pdf.
[D] Payments for Ecosystem Services Best Practice Guide, May 2013.
Available from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/200920/pb13932-pes-bestpractice-20130522.pdf
(e.g. page 40) [Available on request]
[E] Ecosystems Market Taskforce:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/ecosystem-markets/files/Ecosystem-Markets-Task-Force-Final-Report-.pdf
(see page 19 in particular).
[Available on request]
[F] Senior Economic Adviser, Defra - Commissioned review on barriers and
opportunities to
payments for ecosystem services, the PES Best Practice Guide and the PES
Pilot to develop
the Peatland Code. [Available on request].
[G] Exmoor Mires Project Manager, South West Water; to corroborate the
work with South West
Water. [Available on request]
[H] Environment Strategy Manager, Yorkshire Water; to corroborate the
work with Yorkshire Water.
[Available on request]
[I] St. George's House (2010) Securing a Positive Future for
England's Uplands. [Available on
request].
[J] Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty: Evidence Base to
Management Plan 2009-2014. [Available on request]
[K] Joint DA Ministerial letter to IUCN, dated 5 February 2013 (For a
specific example paragraph 3
mentions the climate change and carbon sequestration component of the IUCN
inquiry which
we delivered at http://tinyurl.com/nwgqtjj. Paragraphs 7 and 8 note
government actions on
these issues). [Available on request].
[L] RELU press release, 18 November 2011. [Available on request].