Browsing by Author "Woodcock, Ben A."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Does agri-environmental management enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services?: A farm-scale experiment
    (Elsevier, 2021-07-23) Bullock, James M.; McCracken, Morag E.; Bowes, Michael J.; Chapman, Roselle E.; Graves, Anil R.; Hinsley, Shelley A.; Hutchins, Michael G.; Nowakowski, Marek; Nicholls, David J. E.; Oakley, Simon; Old, Gareth H.; Ostle, Nicholas J.; Redhead, John W.; Woodcock, Ben A.; Bedwell, Tom; Mayes, Sarah; Robinson, Vicky S.; Pywell, Richard F.
    Agri-environmental management has been promoted as an approach to enhance delivery of multiple ecosystem services. Most agri-environment agreements include several actions that the farmer agrees to put in place. But, most studies have only considered how individual agri-environmental actions affect particular ecosystem services. Thus, there is little understanding of how the range of agri-environmental actions available to a farmer might be deployed on any individual farm to enhance multiple services. To address this knowledge gap, we carried out an experimental study in which we deployed a set of agri-environmental actions on a commercial farm in southern England. Agri-environmental actions comprised wildflower margins and fallow areas in arable fields, creating and enhancing grassland with wildflowers, and digging ponds. Alongside biodiversity responses, we measured effects on a number of ecosystem services: pollination, pest control, crop and forage yield, water quality, climate regulation and cultural services. Wildflower margins enhanced invertebrates, pest control and crop yield, and aesthetic appeal. A greater number of pollinators was linked to enhanced oilseed rape yield. But these margins and the fallows did not prevent run-off of nutrients and sediment into waterways, and showed limited carbon sequestration or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Newly-dug ponds captured large amounts of sediment and provided aesthetic appeal. Grasslands had higher soil carbon content and microbial biomass, lower N20 emissions, and net sequestration of carbon compared to arable land. Enhancement of grassland plant diversity increased forage quality and aesthetic appeal. Visitors and residents valued a range of agri-environmental features and biodiversity across the farm. Our findings suggest one cannot necessarily expect any particular agri-environmental action will enhance all of a hoped-for set of ecosystem services in any particular setting. A bet-hedging strategy would be for farmers to apply a suite of options to deliver a range of ecosystem service benefits, rather than assuming that one or two options will work as catch-all solutions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Future restoration should enhance ecological complexity and emergent properties at multiple scales
    (Wiley, 2021-12-07) Bullock, James M.; Fuentes-Montemayor, Elisa; McCarthy, Ben; Park, Kirsty; Hails, Rosie S.; Woodcock, Ben A.; Watts, Kevin; Corstanje, Ron; Harris, Jim A.
    Ecological restoration has a paradigm of re-establishing ‘indigenous reference' communities. One resulting concern is that focussing on target communities may not necessarily create systems which function at a high level or are resilient in the face of ongoing global change. Ecological complexity – defined here, based on theory, as the number of components in a system and the number of connections among them – provides a complementary aim, which can be measured directly and has several advantages. Ecological complexity encompasses key ecosystem variables including structural heterogeneity, trophic interactions and functional diversity. Ecological complexity can also be assessed at the landscape scale, with metrics including β diversity, heterogeneity among habitat patches and connectivity. Thus, complexity applies, and can be measured, at multiple scales. Importantly, complexity is linked to system emergent properties, e.g. ecosystem functions and resilience, and there is evidence that both are enhanced by complexity. We suggest that restoration ecology should consider a new paradigm to restore complexity at multiple scales, in particular of individual ecosystems and across landscapes. A complexity approach can make use of certain current restoration methods but also encompass newer concepts such as rewilding. Indeed, a complexity goal might in many cases best be achieved by interventionist restoration methods. Incorporating complexity into restoration policies could be quite straightforward. Related aims such as enhancing ecosystem services and ecological resilience are to the fore in initiatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Implementation in policy and practice will need the development of complexity metrics that can be applied at both local and regional scales. Ultimately, the adoption of an ecological complexity paradigm will be based on an acceptance that the ongoing and unprecedented global environmental change requires new ways of doing restoration that is fit for the future.