Biodiversity Matters: Assessing Cultural Value in Lowland Landscapes

Joe Morris, Cranfield University with Anil Graves, Jim McGinlay, David Parsons,

Richard Bradbury, James Bullock

NERC sponsored Wessex BESS

envecon 2019

Cultural services: Biodiversity matters, but not alone

Key message

• How do people perceive biodiversity?

• Do people benefit from it?

• How much and in what way?

• ‘So what ?’ and ‘What to do?’

Our research questions:

Biotic(bio-

diversity)

Abiotic

Human made

Environmental setting

Direct Interaction:

Indirect interaction

Benefit pathways/processes

Wellbeing:Feeling and being ‘good’

Biodiversity and Cultural Benefits: a framework

• Exploratory

– 3 Workshops (n=42)

– Preferencing survey

(47)

• Verification

– Public survey (550)

– On line survey (300)

– Farmer survey (20)

• Decision support

– Stakeholder survey (7)

A Lowland Landscape - Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire

1400 km2 of lowland:grassland, arable,woodland, rivers & urban

• Biodiversity-ecosystemservice relationships• Water quality, fish production• Crop production• Climate mitigation• Cultural services

Wessex-BESSData and surveys

• People mainly see a holistic

natural and cultural landscape

• Mainly at landscape and habitat

scale

• Mainly visually-driven complexity

• Difficult to partition biotic, abiotic

and human-produced features –

salience?

Perceptions of biodiversity?

King, H.P., Morris, J., Graves, A., Bradbury, R.B., McGinlay, J., Bullock, J.M. (2017). Biodiversity and cultural ecosystem benefits in lowland landscapes in southern England. J Environmental Psychology, 53, 185-197,

Broad species groupings and

satisfaction

Satisfaction

charisma

Do characteristics of biodiversity affect benefits?

Charisma and reported benefit +vely correlated

Bigger reported benefits by people involved in nature activities

Biodiversity in the landscape associated with benefits to people

More positive response to less charismatic species by nature aware people

McGinlay, J., Parsons, D., Morris, J., Hubatova, M., Graves, A., Bradbury, R.B. Bullock, J.M. (2017). Do charismatic species groups generate more cultural ecosystem service benefits? Ecosystem Services, 27, 15-24

Species and Satisfaction: response to change

+ve-veBirds

NettlesCurrent Missing Decreased Increased

-ve +ve

• Landscape complexity/diversity

preferred

• Ancient grasslands preferred to arable

• Accessibility and proximity

• Greater views

• Quality more than quantity

• Woodland

• Presence of historic interest

What characteristics of landscape and habitats are associated with benefits?

“Mark on the map 3 outdoor places of importance to you”; 470 points

Viewsheds

Ridding, L.E., J.W. Redhead, T.H. Oliver, R. Schmucki, J. McGinlay, A.R.Graves, J. Morris, R.B. Bradbury, H. King, and J.M. Bullock. 2018. The importance of landscape characteristics for the delivery of cultural ecosystem services. Journal of Environmental Management 206, 1145‐54.

• Social antecedents and activities with a nature-related focus

– Self-reported knowledge

– Nature-related education

– Membership/participation in conservation

– Outdoor ‘nature’ activities

– Reading, listening, watching natural history

– Age?

What characteristics of people are associated with benefits?

McGinlay, J., Parsons, D.J., Morris, J., Graves, A., Hubatova, M., Bradbury, R.B. & Bullock, J.M. (2018) Leisure activities and social factors influence the generation of cultural ecosystem service benefits. Ecosystem Services, 31, 468‐480.

No Yes

Flo

wers

Nettle

s

-2 0 2 -2 0 2

0

50

100

150

0

10

20

30

40

Satisfaction

Cou

nt

Characteristics of people and benefits?

NO YES

-ve 0 +ve -ve 0 +ve

Satisfaction with current provision

Count

Membership of conservation organisations

Charismatic

Ambiguous

McGinlay, J., Parsons, D.J., Morris, J., Graves, A., Hubatova, M., Bradbury, R.B. & Bullock, J.M. (2018) Leisure activities and social factors influence the generation of cultural ecosystem service benefits. Ecosystem Services, 31, 468‐480.

• Perceptions closer to

ecologists/scientific view than

public’s

• Farming and biodiversity: from

balance & co-existence to competition &

conflict: positive and negative species

• Farmers as beneficiaries

• Farmers as ‘suppliers’ of

biodiversity benefits: opportunities

and constraints

• Scope for negotiation?

Farmers and BiodiversityFarmer attributes

Farming practices

Biodiversity

Supply of cultural

benefits from farm

biodiversity

Incentives?

• Learning and

understanding

• Being part of nature

• Being creative

• Linking to the past

• Being refreshed

• Communicating

• ‘Stewardship’

Cognitive Pathways: from engagement to benefit

Indifferent Agree Strongly Agree

Responses: Perceptions of nature related benefits (n =550)

Benefit score

King, H.P., Morris, J., Graves, A., Bradbury, R.B., McGinlay, J., Bullock, J.M. (2017). Biodiversity and cultural ecosystem benefits in lowland landscapes in southern England. J Environmental Psychology, 53, 185-197,

• People get more benefit from biodiversity the more they know about it: but emotional attachment is very important

• Difficult to partition the cultural significance of biotic, abiotic and human features: multiple functions and resources.

• Separating cultural benefits from other ecosystem benefits is not helpful

• Cognitive pathways transform ecosystem goods into cultural benefits

Conclusions for Policy and Practice

Assets and Infrastructure

Institutions and organisations

Agents : users, providers, enablers

Building ‘sense of place, identity and attachment’

Biodiversity matters , but not alone :

• King, H.P., Morris, J., Graves, A., Bradbury, R.B., McGinlay, J., Bullock, J.M. (2017).

Biodiversity and cultural ecosystem benefits in lowland landscapes in southern England.

J Environmental Psychology, 53, 185-197,

• McGinlay, J., Parsons, D., Morris, J., Hubatova, M., Graves, A., Bradbury, R.B. Bullock,

J.M. (2017). Do charismatic species groups generate more cultural ecosystem service

benefits? Ecosystem Services, 27, 15-24

• McGinlay, J., Parsons, D.J., Morris, J., Graves, A., Hubatova, M., Bradbury, R.B. &

Bullock, J.M. (2018). Leisure activities and social factors influence the generation of

cultural ecosystem service benefits. Ecosystem Services, 31 (Pt. C), 468-480

• Ridding, L. E., J. W. Redhead, T. H. Oliver, R. Schmucki, J. McGinlay, A. R. Graves, J.

Morris, R. B. Bradbury, H. King, and J. M. Bullock. (2018). The importance of landscape

characteristics for the delivery of cultural ecosystem services. Journal of Environmental

Management 206:1145-1154.

• Wessex-BESS (2015). Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Current and Future

Mutifunctional Lowland Landscapes. http://wessexbess.wixsite.com/wessexbess.

References

j.morris@cranfield.ac.uk