Can arable field margins be managed to enhance their biodiversity, conservation and functional value for soil macrofauna?

1. The establishment of grassy strips at the margins of arable fields is an agri-environment scheme that aims to provide resources for native flora and fauna and thus increase farmland biodiversity. These margins can be managed to target certain groups, such as farmland birds and pollinators, but the impact of such management on the soil fauna has been poorly studied. This study assessed the effect of seed mix and management on the biodiversity, conservation and functional value of field margins for soil macrofauna. 2. Experimental margin plots were established in 2001 in a winter wheat field in Cambridgeshire, UK, using a factorial design of three seed mixes and three management practices [spring cut, herbicide application and soil disturbance (scarification)]. In spring and autumn 2005, soil cores taken from the margin plots and the crop were hand-sorted for soil macrofauna. The Lumbricidae, Isopoda, Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Carabidae and Staphylinidae were identified to species and classified according to feeding type. 3. Diversity in the field margins was generally higher than in the crop, with the Lumbricidae, Isopoda and Coleoptera having significantly more species and/or higher abundances in the margins. Within the margins, management had a significant effect on the soil macrofauna, with scarified plots containing lower abundances and fewer species of Isopods. The species composition of the scarified plots was similar to that of the crop. 4. Scarification also reduced soil- and litter-feeder abundances and predator species densities, although populations appeared to recover by the autumn, probably as a result of dispersal from neighbouring plots and boundary features. The implications of the responses of these feeding groups for ecosystem services are discussed. 5. Synthesis and applications. This study shows that the management of agri-environment schemes can significantly influence their value for soil macrofauna. In order to encourage the litter-dwelling invertebrates that tend to be missing from arable systems, agri-environment schemes should aim to minimize soil cultivation and develop a substantial surface litter layer. However, this may conflict with other aims of these schemes, such as enhancing floristic and pollinator diversity.

A framework for revitalisation of rural education and training systems in sub-Saharan Africa: Strengthening the human resource base for food security and sustainable livelihoods

Recent studies of the current state of rural education and training (RET) systems in sub-Saharan Africa have assessed their ability to provide for the learning needs essential for more knowledgeable and productive small-scale rural households. These are most necessary if the endemic causes of rural poverty (poor nutrition, lack of sustainable livelihoods, etc.) are to be overcome. A brief historical background and analysis of the major current constraints to improvement in the sector are discussed. Paramount among those factors leading to its present 'malaise' is the lack of a whole-systems perspective and the absence of any coherent policy framework in most countries. There is evidence of some recent innovations, both in the public sector and through the work of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society organisations (CSOs) and other private bodies. These provide hope of a new sense of direction that could lead towards meaningful 'revitalisation' of the sector. A suggested framework offers 10 key steps which, it is argued, could largely be achieved with modest internal resources and very little external support, provided that the necessary leadership and managerial capacities are in place. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Responses of invertebrate trophic level, feeding guild and body size to the management of improved grassland field margins

P>1. Management of lowland mesotrophic grasslands in north-west Europe often makes use of inorganic fertilizers, high stocking densities and silage-based forage systems to maximize productivity. The impact of these practices has resulted in a simplification of the plant community combined with wide-scale declines in the species richness of grassland invertebrates. We aim to identify how field margin management can be used to promote invertebrate diversity across a suite of functionally diverse taxa (beetles, planthoppers, true bugs, butterflies, bumblebees and spiders). 2. Using an information theoretic approach we identify the impacts of management (cattle grazing, cutting and inorganic fertilizer) and plant community composition (forb species richness, grass species richness and sward architecture) on invertebrate species richness and body size. As many of these management practices are common to grassland systems throughout the world, understanding invertebrate responses to them is important for the maintenance of biodiversity. 3. Sward architecture was identified as the primary factor promoting increased species richness of both predatory and phytophagous trophic levels, as well as being positively correlated with mean body size. In all cases phytophagous invertebrate species richness was positively correlated with measures of plant species richness. 4. The direct effects of management practices appear to be comparatively weak, suggesting that their impacts are indirect and mediated though the continuous measures of plant community structure, such as sward architecture or plant species richness. 5. Synthesis and applications. By partitioning field margins from the remainder of the field, economically viable intensive grassland management can be combined with extensive management aimed at promoting native biodiversity. The absence of inorganic fertilizer, combined with a reduction in the intensity of both cutting and grazing regimes, promotes floral species richness and sward architectural complexity. By increasing sward architecture the total biomass of invertebrates also increased (by c. 60% across the range of sward architectural measures seen in this study), increasing food available for higher trophic levels, such as birds and mammals.

Establishing field margins to promote beetle conservation in arable farms

This study investigates the function of non-cropped field margins in arable farming systems for enhancing the biodiversity value of beetle communities. Three different sown seed mixtures were used to establish field margins, a Countryside Stewardship mix, a fine grass and forbs mix and a tussock grass and forbs mix. The structure of beetle communities in the first full year of establishment was found to show no difference between the tussock grass and Countryside Stewardship margins. However, both differed from the fine grass margins, which supported lower overall abundance and species richness of beetles. This was attributed to small-scale architectural differences between species of fine and tussock grasses, rather than differences in plant composition. Body size distributions of beetles showed distinct similarities between the Countryside Stewardship and tussock margins. A greater abundance of large beetles was found in fine grass margins, although in all cases these body size distributions were attributed to a small number of species or a taxonomically distinct group. All three margin types included beetle species of conservation value. The importance of these results was discussed in the context of the value of these seed mixtures for invertebrate conversation. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Effects of seed mixture and management on beetle assemblages of arable field margins

Beetle assemblages and their response to plant community composition and architectural structure were monitored from 2002 to 2006 within arable field margins. Field margins were sown with either tussock grass and forbs, fine grass and forbs or grass only seed mixtures. After an establishment year, field margins were managed using standard sward cuts, scarification, or graminicide application. For predatory beetles, overall density was greatest where tussock grasses were included within the seed mixtures, while the densities of phytophagous beetles were greatest where forbs were present. Unexpectedly, species rarefaction curves suggested that phytophagous beetle species richness was greatest where field margins were established using a grass only seed mixture. The structure of the beetle assemblages, i.e., the relative abundances of individual species, was largely dependent on seed mixture, although margin management also played an important role. The results suggest that field margins established using seed mixtures containing tussock grasses and forbs would be expected to provide the greatest resources for beetles, at least at local scales. However, the use of a single standardised seed mixture for margin establishment would result in a homogenisation of beetle assemblages at a regional scale. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Effect of field margins on moths depends on species mobility: Field-based evidence for landscape-scale conservation

Agri-environment schemes (AES) are widely used policy instruments intended to combat widespread biodiversity declines across agricultural landscapes. Here, using a light trapping and mark-release-recapture study at a field-scale on nine common and widespread larger moth species, we investigate the effect of wide field margins (a popular current scheme option) and the presence of hedgerow trees (a potential scheme option in England) on moth abundance. Of these, we show that wide field margins positively affected abundances, although species did not all respond in the same way. We demonstrate that this variation can be attributed to species-specific mobility characteristics. Those species for which the effect of wide margins was strongest covered shorter distances, and were more frequently recaptured at their site of first capture. This demonstrates that the standard, field-scale uptake of AES may be effective only for less mobile species. We discuss that a landscape-scale approach, in contrast, could deliver significant biodiversity gains, as our results indicate that such an approach (perhaps delivered through targeting farmers to join AES) would be effective for the majority of wider countryside species, irrespective of their mobility level. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

An integrated assessment of carbon dioxide capture and storage in the UK

Geological carbon dioxide storage (CCS) has the potential to make a significant contribution to the decarbonisation of the UK. Amid concerns over maintaining security, and hence diversity, of supply, CCS could allow the continued use of coal, oil and gas whilst avoiding the CO2 emissions currently associated with fossil fuel use. This project has explored some of the geological, environmental, technical, economic and social implications of this technology. The UK is well placed to exploit CCS with a large offshore storage capacity, both in disused oil and gas fields and saline aquifers. This capacity should be sufficient to store CO2 from the power sector (at current levels) for a least one century, using well understood and therefore likely to be lower-risk, depleted hydrocarbon fields and contained parts of aquifers. It is very difficult to produce reliable estimates of the (potentially much larger) storage capacity of the less well understood geological reservoirs such as non-confined parts of aquifers. With the majority of its large coal fired power stations due to be retired during the next 15 to 20 years, the UK is at a natural decision point with respect to the future of power generation from coal; the existence of both national reserves and the infrastructure for receiving imported coal makes clean coal technology a realistic option. The notion of CCS as a ‘bridging’ or ‘stop-gap’ technology (i.e. whilst we develop ‘genuinely’ sustainable renewable energy technologies) needs to be examined somewhat critically, especially given the scale of global coal reserves. If CCS plant is built, then it is likely that technological innovation will bring down the costs of CO2 capture, such that it could become increasingly attractive. As with any capitalintensive option, there is a danger of becoming ‘locked-in’ to a CCS system. The costs of CCS in our model for UK power stations in the East Midlands and Yorkshire to reservoirs in the North Sea are between £25 and £60 per tonne of CO2 captured, transported and stored. This is between about 2 and 4 times the current traded price of a tonne of CO2 in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. In addition to the technical and economic requirements of the CCS technology, it should also be socially and environmentally acceptable. Our research has shown that, given an acceptance of the severity and urgency of addressing climate change, CCS is viewed favourably by members of the public, provided it is adopted within a portfolio of other measures. The most commonly voiced concern from the public is that of leakage and this remains perhaps the greatest uncertainty with CCS. It is not possible to make general statements concerning storage security; assessments must be site specific. The impacts of any potential leakage are also somewhat uncertain but should be balanced against the deleterious effects of increased acidification in the oceans due to uptake of elevated atmospheric CO2 that have already been observed. Provided adequate long term monitoring can be ensured, any leakage of CO2 from a storage site is likely to have minimal localised impacts as long as leaks are rapidly repaired. A regulatory framework for CCS will need to include risk assessment of potential environmental and health and safety impacts, accounting and monitoring and liability for the long term. In summary, although there remain uncertainties to be resolved through research and demonstration projects, our assessment demonstrates that CCS holds great potential for significant cuts in CO2 emissions as we develop long term alternatives to fossil fuel use. CCS can contribute to reducing emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere in the near term (i.e. peak-shaving the future atmospheric concentration of CO2), with the potential to continue to deliver significant CO2 reductions over the long term.

Hitting emissions targets with (statistical) confidence in multi-instrument Emissions Trading Schemes

A means of assessing, monitoring and controlling aggregate emissions from multi-instrument Emissions Trading Schemes is proposed. The approach allows contributions from different instruments with different forms of emissions targets to be integrated. Where Emissions Trading Schemes are helping meet specific national targets, the approach allows the entry requirements of new participants to be calculated and set at a level that will achieve these targets. The approach is multi-levelled, and may be extended downwards to support pooling of participants within instruments, or upwards to embed Emissions Trading Schemes within a wider suite of policies and measures with hard and soft targets. Aggregate emissions from each instrument are treated stochastically. Emissions from the scheme as a whole are then the joint probability distribution formed by integrating the emissions from its instruments. Because a Bayesian approach is adopted, qualitative and semi-qualitative data from expert opinion can be used where quantitative data is not currently available, or is incomplete. This approach helps government retain sufficient control over emissions trading scheme targets to allow them to meet their emissions reduction obligations, while minimising the need for retrospectively adjusting existing participants’ conditions of entry. This maintains participant confidence, while providing the necessary policy levers for good governance.