A report by the International Mathematics Union, profiled in the Times Higher this week, argues that an over-reliance on the use of citation figures is damaging as such statistics can be as subjective as other forms of assessment, such as peer-review. Citation metrics will be used to rate researchers in the forthcoming Research Excellence Framework (REF), the replacement to the RAE.

The report ‘Citation Statistics’, looks at journal impact factors and citation counts. The authors stress that metrics should only be used as part of a wider package which includes peer review and “esteem indicators”, such as conference invitations and membership of editorial boards. Following concerned feedback from the scientific community to a HEFCE consulation published earlier this year, the REF is to include peer-review alongside the use of citation indicators.

Access original article (Blind faith in metrics is ‘unfounded’: 26 June 2008)

Tuesday saw the launch of ‘Root to Branch’, a paper developed by Gregory Barker MP, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, together with the Education Commission, at Frost and Reed Gallery in London. ‘Root to Branch’ explores the place of the Environment in schools, examines the barriers to a hands-on understanding of the natural world amongst school children and highlights the lack of a ‘green’ approach in many school buildings.

Both the BES’s Policy Officer and Education Officer attended this event, at which David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, delivered a short speech on his vision for a green Britain, with sustainability developed using market forces.

The BES contributed to the early stages of development of the policy paper, briefing the Shadow Minister’s office on the Society’s education work and vision for encouraging a greater understanding and appreciation of ecology in our schools. While the paper acknowledges the importance of engaging young people with the natural world and reflects many of the concerns teachers have with delivering practical experiences we feel that it’s disappointing that the paper goes on to make recommendations that seemingly focus on popular sustainability recommendations such as children walking and cycling to school rather than addressing some of the more complex issues it’s own research highlights.

The BES will continue to engage with the Shadow Minister’s office as Root to Branch develops.

The BES, together with Defra, Natural England, the Countryside Council for Wales and the Woodland Trust, today held a workshop in Reading to explore the use of models, experiments and other techniques in assessing the possible future impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Participants were drawn from both science and policy. The morning began with an exploration of the policy context surrounding biodiversity conservation in the UK, followed by a presentation on the science to policy relationship. One key point here was the need to understand that policy does not proceed in a linear way but that multiple factors, aside from scientific evidence, including anecdote and lobbying activities, public perception and the media, all act to influence how policy is produced.

A series of scientific presentations then explored means to project the direct and indirect impacts on climate change. It was clear from the presentation on the ‘indirect impacts’ that models linking socioeconomic factors to changes in biodiversity need further development. Finally, participants received a presentation from Alex Harvey, UK Climate Impacts Programme, on the forthcoming UKCIP08 scenarios, expected in November this year. UKCIP08 should provide a broader range of emissions scenarios for use by the community, along with a greater consideration of socioeconomic factors.

The main themes to emerge from the afternoon session, break-out groups to consider the morning’s issues in more depth, were: the need for greater integration across Europe of the biodiversity monitoring activities already being taken; the need for investment in gathering greater basic data about individual species, their interactions and how this effects ecosystem response to climate change; and the need for greater knowledge transfer between scientists and policy-makers, in both directions. One specific issue highlighted was the limited funding available to allow methodologies developed to study the responses of a small number of species to climate change or other environmental factors, to be ‘rolled out’ and applied more widely across species.

To close the day there was a commitment from Defra to review the day’s findings and use these in developing the Department’s research programmes. The information would also be fed into other research funders, including into the Living With Environmental Change initiative, and into the devolved administrations. The BES looks forward to continuing to work with Defra and others to facilitate knowledge exchange between science and policy as this develops.

The full report of the workshop will be produced in due course and will be published on the BES’s website.

The Science Policy team today attended an extremely interesting conference at New Hall College, Cambridge, on ‘The Root Causes of Unsustainability’. Organised co-jointly by the Faraday Institute and the John Ray Initiative, two organisations which aim to foster the dialogue between science and religion, presentations explored the causes of unsustainable development and consumption from scientific, economic, ethical and theological perspectives.

Sir John Houghton FRS, Chairman of the John Ray Initiative and former Chairman of the Scientific Assessment Working Group of the IPCC, defined sustainability as: not cheating our children; not cheating our neighbours and not cheating the rest of creation. In explaining to the audience, of theologians, philosophers, ecologists and economists, the magnitude of the impacts which could be expected under ‘business as usual’ approaches to climate change, Sir John stressed that tackling environmental change is a moral, spiritual and scientific challenge.

This was a theme echoed throughout a day that saw presentations from, amongst others: Dr Jim McCarthy, President of the AAAS, on the role of corporations and lobby groups in spreading climate change ‘misinformation’; Professor John Guillebaud, UCL, on tackling ‘the elephant in the room’, population growth, including a highly informative video on world population growth over the past 100 years; Donald Hay, Oxford University, on ‘discounting the future’, and whether such a standard economic tool is ethical or appropriate when applied to the environment and Professor Ian Arbon, Newcastle University, on unsustainable energy.

It was fascinating to explore the ethical and moral, aside from the scientific, impetus to tackle climate change, with a group largely outwith the ecological community, and to consider how the perspectives represented could work together in engaging the public and policy makers with the key issues considered.

Access the presentations and a web-cast of the event at the website of the John Ray Initiative (available shortly)

Access the World Population Video on You Tube

Yesterday, the BES policy team attended the Parliamentary Links Day today at Portcullis House, Westminster, hosted by the Royal Society for Chemistry.

Politicians and leading scientists gave talks throughout the day, followed by the opportunity to interact with them afterwards at the reception.

Speakers included Dr Brian Iddon CChem FRSC MP Member Commons Select Committee on Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills; Rt Hon John Denham MP, Secratary State for Innovation, Universities and Skills, former and present chief scientific Advisors Professor Sir David King and Dr Bob Crawford, and Professor Rosemary Hails of the Institute of Biology and CEH. Numerous politicians and representatives from NGOs were amongst the audience too, including Rt. Hon Tony Benn and Rt. Hon Kenneth Clarke.

Research and Development

John Denham, Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills, led the proceedings citing a doubling in the research budget in the last two years and the UK’s leadership in scientific output – second only to the USA. Mr Denham ranked the energy programme as the chief scientific priority for the UK with Aging research and security coming second and third. The Living With Environmental Change programme was mentioned, being particularly topical since food supply, energy security and terrorism present challenging and uncertain prospects.

Climate Change

Sir David King put forward a compelling and urgent case for the reduction of carbon emissions globally, in light of a projected 2-3 degrees centigrade rise in global temperatures. Historically, some important global and local environmental issues have been identified by scientists, leading to policy change resulting in positive outcomes. These include London smog, addressed by the banning of coal fires in 1963, and global ban on CFC use in refrigerators and aerosols resulting in ‘rebuilding’ of the ozone layer. In this sense, Sir David King believes that, with global ratification of binding reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, through ‘decarbonisation‘ of the global economy, the negative consequences of climate change can be abated.

Questions led by the British Psychological Society prompted Sir David to reiterate the need for government cabinets to really take on board the idea of decarbonising the economy. The need for a frameshift in national psychology, in that as a society we must stop idolising celebrity over-consumption, is imperative.

Ecosystems Approach

Professor Rosie Hails focused on the need for an ecosystems-based approach to valuing biodiversity in future development proposals, given society’s dependence on nature’s goods and services for food, materials and environmental regulation. This approach is also in accordance with the guidelines of the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment and the UNEP-Global Outlook-4 ProfessorHails called for an end to the extensive bureaucracy associated with GM crops applications on the basis of scientifically unvalidated safety and environmental concerns. Particular emphasis was made on the need for regulation that is proportional to benefits and risks, rather than sentiment.

Overall, the day presented the opportunity to both meet high profile scientists and key politicians as well as ascertain the hot scientific topics scientists are hoping politicians and policy-makers will act upon.

New research published recently in Estuaries and Coastal Science indicates that current policy and knowledge of invasive species in coastal and estuarine areas is seriously lacking.

Shipping may introduce invasive non-native species (INNS) through the emptying of ballast water in estuarine areas, or through species attached to the hull, often these may have originated thousands of miles from where they are released. Fish farming and aquariums are also significant potential INNS sources.

The authors of the paper call for further research by scientists and greater attention from policy-makers and stakeholders. The researchers suggest that prevention and early detection are the most effective methods of dealing with INNS. Further, screening using historically invasive-traits and matching previous habitats with potential new habitats, could help predict the likelihood of future invasions into alien environments.

This is of particular relevance given that the draft Marine Bill presently does not provide any reference to the introduction of INNS into the marine environment, nor any legislative preventative measures. The CBD and the Codes of Practice on the Introductions and transfers of Marine Organisms set by the International Council for Exploration of the Seas are not binding and carry no fixed penalties, therefore unless the Marine Bill addresses these issues in its final iteration, a great opportunity will have been missed.

Do readers of the blog agree that the Marine Bill should address the introduction of invasive non-native species into the marine environment?


Read the BES’s Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology (POST) fellow’s POSTnote.

Further information on the British Ecological Society’s POST fellowship can be found on the website.

The UK Government is ready to explore once more the use of GM technology in crops, hoping that this will offer a solution to the current world food crisis. Phil Woolas, the UK’s Environment Minister, has reportedly held private talks with the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, an umbrella group to promote the role of biotechnology in agriculture.

In an interview with the Independent newspaper yesterday, Mr Woolas said: “There is a growing question of whether GM crops can help the developing world out of the current food price crisis. It is a question that we as a nation need to ask ourselves.” Prime Minister Gordon Brown yesterday called on leaders at an EU summit to consider relaxing rules on the import of GM animal feed, as a way of lowering food costs for the poorest countries.

The only GM food crops currently available commercially are those which have been grown to be herbicide or insect resistant. There are very legitimate concerns that extensive growth of such crops will severely impact on the biodiversity of the countryside; as broad-spectrum herbicides such as Monsanto’s ‘Roundup’ indiscriminately affect wildlife. However, GM technology could offer benefits to developing countries if the focus was on research into higher yields, drought and disease resistance. Downing Street has commented that “GM crops are to be considered on a case-by-case basis, based solely on the science”.

Does GM offer a solution to hunger and poverty in the developing world as food prices rise and food shortages threaten?
The Science Policy Team invites you to comment on this article

The front page of today’s Guardian reports that the Gallagher Report into the UK’s biofuels policy, to be published next week, will call for greater research into the indirect impacts of biofuels on land use and food production before the Government can set targets for their use. The report will say that there is a place for biofuels, as an alternative to fossil fuels and as a source of income to poor farmers with marginal lands, but that a distinction must be made between “first generation” fuels and “second generation” fuels made from non-food plants.

The Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly, commissioned Professor Ed Gallagher, head of the Renewable Fuels Agency, to conduct the review back in February. Since then, the Government’s “Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation” has come into force, requiring all petrol and diesel sold at Britain’s pumps to contain 2.5% biofuels. The EU is pushing for a 10% target across Europe by 2010.

The paper also reports on comments by the Renewables Advisory Board (RAB) that the UK can at best expect to generate 14% of its energy from sustainable sources by 2020, missing an EU target of 15%. The 14% figure could be met through “significant but achievable policy changes”. The RAB comments that current policies will produce just 6% renewable energy by 2020.

The UK Energy Minister, Malcolm Wicks, has criticised the RSPB and other NGOs for adopting a ‘no’ position to the development of a Severn Barrage.

Mr Wicks, speaking to the House of Commons Welsh Grand Committee, said that the RSPB were “clearly not understanding that unless we are prepared to take some courageous action on climate change the devastation of species will be truly enormous”.

He said:”It is the duty of a sensible NGO (non-governmental organisation) supported by the public that occasionally they say yes to projects and (are) not always seeking the comfort zone of saying no to a barrage, no to a wind farm, no to this, no to that.” “There needs to be a responsibility and a seriousness in all organisations, especially the environmental ones.” Mr Wicks also said that if the Government’s assessment of the Severn Barrage, due to report next year, revealed severe environmental impacts, the project would be suspended.

The RSPB has hit back at the Minister, saying that the development of a Severn Barrage would be an extremely costly means to achieve the same benefits as less expensive renewable energy projects, concomitant with tremendous loss of wildlife in the Severn Estuary.

Read the full story online at BBC.co.uk

£108m is to be invested by Britain and Norway in a scheme said to provide a viable alternative to logging in the African Congo basin. The Congo rainforest is roughly twice the size of France, but is being deforested at a rate equivalent to 25,000 football pitches a week.

At the launch of the funding event, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said: “We are pledging to work together to secure the future of one of the world’s last remaining ancient forests.” Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg added that “By doing something about deforestation we can achieve a big and rapid reduction in emissions.” Cutting carbon emissions this way is an order of magnitude cheaper than carbon capture schemes.

Projects that receive investment from the fund will be monitored by high definition cameras on mounted on satellites, to ensure that progess is made in areas that have received government funding.