Publications

Mapping niches of extension service providers to support nature recovery – a policy briefing

This policy brief sets out the role of agricultural extension services in supporting landscape-scale nature recovery through a novel method of mapping organisational niches and conflicts in service provision.  It uses an example of advice on water pollution, and proposes changes to the provision of advice by organisations.

The Niche Mapper Analytical Framework – technical report

This technical report presents the Niche Mapper analytical framework for visualising the landscape of advice provision for nature recovery. Land managers access advice on land-use changes to support nature recovery, with advice offered by numerous organisations. Organisations have unique motivations for advice provision e.g., regulatory, environmental or financial, leading to crowding within the sector. The Niche Mapper framework, when applied to a set of advisory organisations will produce a visual representation of the niches occupied by those organisations. The framework may be applied at a variety of spatial scales and/or temporal intervals, resulting in analytically comparable outputs.

The results provided by using this framework can support effective policy making and divulge new research directions. An example of how the framework has been applied is illustrated in a case study of organisations providing advice to land managers for the mitigation of diffuse water pollution from agriculture (DWPA).

Rampling, E., zu Ermgassen, S., Hawkins, I., & Bull, J. W. (2023). Improving the ecological outcomes of compensatory conservation by addressing governance gaps: a case study of Biodiversity Net Gain in England. Conservation Biology.

Biodiversity compensation policies have emerged around the world to address the ecological harms of infrastructure expansion, but they have historically experienced weak compliance. The English government is introducing a requirement that all new infrastructure developments demonstrate they achieve a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG). Previous research has highlighted governance gaps that risk undermining the policy’s ecological outcomes, as well as exploring the risks caused by fundamental capacity constraints in regulators, but the magnitude of their effects on the policy’s potential impacts on biodiversity remains unexplored. We collated BNG information from all new major developments across six early adopter councils from 2020-2022. We quantified the proportion of the biodiversity outcomes promised under BNG which are at risk of non-compliance, explored the variation in strategies that developments use to meet their biodiversity liabilities, and quantified the occurrence of simple errors in the biodiversity metric calculations submitted by project proponents.

zu Ermgassen, S. O. S. E., Marsh, S., Ryland, K., Church, E., Marsh, R., Bull, J. W.  (2021). Exploring the ecological outcomes of mandatory biodiversity net gain using evidence from early-adopter jurisdictions in England. Conservation Letters. .

Net outcome-type biodiversity policies are proliferating globally as perceived mechanisms to reconcile economic development and conservation objectives. The UK government’s Environment Bill will mandate that most new developments in England demonstrate that they deliver a biodiversity net gain (BNG) to receive planning permission, representing the most wide-ranging net outcome type policy globally. However, as with many nascent net-outcome policies, the likely outcomes of mandatory BNG have not been explored empirically. We assemble all BNG assessments (accounting for ∼6% of England’s annual housebuilding and other infrastructure) submitted from January 2020 to February 2021 in six early-adopter councils who are implementing mandatory no net loss or BNG requirements in advance of the national adoption of mandatory BNG, and analyze the aggregate habitat changes proposed

Victoria F. Griffiths, Joseph W. Bull, Julia Baker, Mark Infield, Dilys Roe, Dianah Nalwanga, Achilles Byaruhanga, E.J. Milner-Gulland (2020). Incorporating local nature-based cultural values into biodiversity No Net Loss strategies. World Development.

Achieving “No Net Loss” (NNL) of nature from a development typically requires projects to follow a ‘mitigation hierarchy’, by which biodiversity losses are first avoided wherever possible, then minimised or remediated, and finally any residual impacts offset by conservation activities elsewhere. Biodiversity NNL can significantly affect people, including their cultural values. However, empirical research is lacking on how to incorporate impacts on cultural values of nature into NNL strategies. We use the Bujagali and Isimba Hydropower Projects and Kalagala Offset in Uganda as a case study to explore local people’s perceptions of the importance of cultural heritage to their wellbeing, how the developments affected their cultural heritage, and how these perceived impacts could be incorporated into NNL strategies. We sampled six villages experiencing different levels of hydropower development along the Victoria Nile River. Many river features, particularly rapids and waterfalls, are important cultural sites, associated with spirits and are worshipped by local communities. Spiritual beliefs, rituals and ceremonies, nature, and how cultural heritage is changing were frequently mentioned when respondents described cultural heritage. People perceived cultural heritage to be an important component of their wellbeing, but its importance differed between villages and socio-demographic groups

Griffiths, V.F., Bull, J.W., Baker, J. and Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2018). No net loss for people and biodiversity. Conservation Biology.

Badly planned offsets can exacerbate poverty, and development and offset impacts can vary across spatial-temporal scales and by location, gender, and livelihood. We conceptualize the no-worse-off principle in the context of NNL of biodiversity, by exploring for whom and how the principle can be achieved.

BULL, J.W., GORDON, A., LAW, E.A., SUTTLE, K.B. and MILNER-GULLAND, E.J (2016). Importance of Baseline Specification in Evaluating Conservation Interventions and Achieving No Net Loss of Biodiversity. Conservation Biology.

When setting objectives for conservation activities, or judging their efficacy after implementation, an appropriate frame of reference against which evaluation is made should be specified.  We developed 2 models to investigate the implications of setting different frames of reference in regions subject to various biodiversity trends and anthropogenic impacts.

Bull JW, Suttle KB, Gordon A, Singh NJ, Milner-Gulland EJ. (2016). Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. Oryx. .

This review of biodiversity offsetting evaluates implementation to date and synthesizes outstanding theoretical and practical problems.

SMITH, A.CA., BAKER, J.B, BERRY, P.M.A, BUTTERWORTH, T.C, CHAPMAN, A.E, HARLE, T. E, HEAVER, M.F, HÖLZINGER, O.C, HOWARD, BG., NORTON, L.R.H, RICE, P. E, SCOTT, A. I, THOMPSON, A E., WARBURTON, C E. AND WEBB, J E (2021). The Environmental Benefits from Nature Tool – Beta Test Version. Access to Evidence.

The Environmental Benefits from Nature tool is designed to work alongside Biodiversity metric 3.0 and provide developers, planners and other interested parties with a means of enabling wider benefits for people and nature from biodiversity net gain.

Nature seminar Series: Boldly reimagining our approaches to nature recovery – Justin Adams

In this provocative talk Justin will argue that while the increased awareness and understanding of the decline of biodiversity is to be welcomed. Our current approaches and responses at both the global and local levels are woefully inadequate. We are stuck in a cycle of incremental gains that are failing to address the roots causes of the ‘nature crisis’. Moving forward we will need to be much bolder in reimagining the future we want to help build.

Caitlin Hafferty (2024). Harnessing the power of digital tools for community engagement in rewilding. LCNR website.

Social science researchers from the Leverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery are collaborating with Highlands Rewilding to explore innovative digital technologies for enhancing community engagement in rewilding.

To help bring multiple partners together across the landscapes, Highlands Rewilding and the LCNR have co-developed three digital community engagement platforms using software called Commonplace. The Commonplace team provides innovative digital solutions for creating positive change for thriving and resilient places, powered by data and collaboration between diverse groups.

Sophus zu Ermgassen and Sara Löfqvist (2024). Financing ecosystem restoration. Current Biology.

Here, we outline the high-level policy landscape driving restoration finance and explore the roles and potential of both public and private investment in restoration. We explain how some common mechanisms for drawing private investment into restoration work in practice. Then, we discuss some of the shortcomings of past private finance initiatives for ecosystem restoration and highlight essential lessons for how to safeguard the ecological and social outcomes of private investments in ecosystem restoration.