Obstacles and solutions to maximising biodiversity in major urban development schemes

The current rate of global biodiversity loss led many governments to sign the international agreement ‘Halting Biodiversity Loss by 2010 and beyond’ in 2001. The UK government was one of these and has a number of methods to tackle this, such as: commissioning specific technical guidance and supporting the UK Biodiversity Acton Plan (BAP) targets. However, by far the most effective influence the government has upon current biodiversity levels is through the town planning system. This is due to the control it has over all phases of a new development scheme’s lifecycle.There is an increasing myriad of regulations, policies and legislation, which deal with biodiversity protection and enhancement across the hierarchical spectrum: from the global and European level, down to regional and local levels. With these drivers in place, coupled with the promotion of benefits and incentives, increasing biodiversity value ought to be an achievable goal on most, if not all development sites. However, in the professional world, this is not the case due to a number of obstructions. Many of these tend to be ‘process’ barriers, which are particularly prevalent with ‘urban’ and ‘major’ development schemes, and is where the focus of this research paper lies.The paper summarises and discusses the results of a questionnaire survey, regarding obstacles to maximising biodiversity enhancements on major urban development schemes. The questionnaire was completed by Local Government Ecologists in England. The paper additionally refers to insights from previous action research, specialist interviews, and case studies, to reveal the key process obstacles.Solutions to these obstacles are then alluded to and recommendations are made within the discussion.

Utilisation of analogous climate locations to produce resilient biodiversity plantings for infrastructure developments

Developers have an obligation to biodiversity when considering the impact their development may have on the environment, with some choosing to go beyond the legal requirement for planning consent. Climate change projections over the 21st century indicate a climate warming and thus the species selected for habitat creation need to be able to withstand the pressures associated with these forecasts. A process is therefore required to identify resilient plantings for sites subject to climate change. Local government ecologists were consulted on their views on the use of plants of non-native provenance or how they consider resilience to climate change as part of their planting recommendations. There are mixed attitudes towards non-native species, but with studies already showing the impact climate change is having on biodiversity, action needs to be taken to limit further biodiversity loss, particularly given the heavily fragmented landscape preventing natural migration. A methodology has been developed to provide planners and developers with recommendations for plant species that are currently adapted to the climate the UK will experience in the future. A climate matching technique, that employs a GIS, allows the identification of European locations that currently experience the predicted level of climate change at a given UK location. Once an appropriate location has been selected, the plant species present in this area are then investigated for suitability for planting in the UK. The methodology was trialled at one site, Eastern Quarry in Kent, and suitable climate matched locations included areas in north-western France. Through the acquisition of plant species data via site visits and online published material, a species list was created, which considered original habitat design, but with added resilience to climate change.

Modelling trade offs between public and private conservation policies

To reduce global biodiversity loss, there is an urgent need to determine the most efficient allocation of conservation resources. Recently, there has been a growing trend for many governments to supplement public ownership and management of reserves with incentive programs for conservation on private land. This raises important questions, such as the extent to which private land conservation can improve conservation outcomes, and how it should be mixed with more traditional public land conservation. We address these questions, using a general framework for modelling environmental policies and a case study examining the conservation of endangered native grasslands to the west of Melbourne, Australia. Specifically, we examine three policies that involve i) spending all resources on creating public conservation areas; ii) spending all resources on an ongoing incentive program where private landholders are paid to manage vegetation on their property with 5-year contracts; and iii) splitting resources between these two approaches. The performance of each strategy is quantified with a vegetation condition change model that predicts future changes in grassland quality. Of the policies tested, no one policy was always best and policy performance depended on the objectives of those enacting the policy. Although policies to promote conservation on private land are proposed and implemented in many areas, they are rarely evaluated in terms of their ecological consequences. This work demonstrates a general method for evaluating environmental policies and highlights the utility of a model which combines ecological and socioeconomic processes.