The Policy Lunchbox network today heard an extremely interesting presentation from Dr Anu Devi, Projects Coordinator at Science for Humanity. Science for Humanity is a charity, registered in 2007 and based at the University of Oxford, which matches science capability to human needs. Through fostering a network of organisations and individuals, Science for Humanity aims to turn science into solutions to alleviate poverty, advance community development and provide economic benefit to the poor.

Anu outlined the projects which Science for Humanity is currently developing and for which she is responsible. There are six projects in total including ‘Peru Coffee’; a project to improve soil fertility for coffee production on the Eastern slopes of the Andes impacted by deforestation and ‘Green Charcoal’, a project seeking innovative technologies to transform crops such as candlenut seed kernel, palm seed kernel and cotton strokes into green charcoal. A further project examines how science can help to supply clean drinking water to a village in Thailand, purifying the water and removing harmful bacteria such as E.coli. This project in particular demonstrates the importance of working with local people to educate them about the benefits and risks of different interventions; strong public resistance to the use of chlorine in the water means that a policy to introduce such a measure will not work without an education programme to overcome this.

Anu described Science for Humanity as playing a brokerage role between communities, building links and facilitating the exchange of information between those who have identified humanitarian problems (termed ’seekers’) and those who have the capacity to solve them (scientists, or ’solvers’). Science for Humanity identifies a project and communicates this to its members (of which there are now around 1,000, joining through the website). Through this mechanism Science for Humanity can match seekers and solvers and hopefully lead to positive outcomes for development.

Although small in scale at the moment, over time Science for Humanity hopes to influence research, aiming to secure funding to support scientists to work on particular projects, and policy making. The organisation envisions changing policy through encouraging the scientific community to think outside their specific research area, encouraging governments (local and national) to consult with scientists and take an evidence-based approach to combating humanitarian problems.

When questioned about scientists’ willingness to get involved with Science for Humanity Anu was very positive, stating that very many scientists wish to apply their research to real-world problems. Science for Humanity’s projects and discussion forums allow them to get involved and do this. Anyone can sign up to become a member of Science for Humanity through the organisations’ website; membership is free. You can also follow Science for Humanity on Facebook and Twitter.

Policy Lunchbox is a monthly forum for policy officers and others to meet one another, exchange ideas and information through free seminars and discussion. The network is maintained by the Biochemical Society and British Ecological Society. Information about forthcoming events is available on the Biochemical Society’s website.

Yesterday the BES Policy Team attended a very interesting symposium at the Royal Geographical Society, London, organised by the University of Nottingham. Over two years, an interdisciplinary programme of seminars has been funded by NERC and ESRC, aiming to encourage new understanding of the links between ecosystem services and human well-being. Yesterday’s conference brought together the various sub-themes which have been running as part of this ‘FRESH’ series (Framing Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being) and saw a large number of participants from policy, social science, economics, consultancy and natural science come together to discuss the series’ findings.

There was much discussion about whether an ‘ecosystem approach’ offers a paradigm shift in conservation. The audience didn’t reach consensus on this, with some suggesting that yes, this is a shift in conservation science and policy from a piecemeal view – individual species and habitats – to a holistic approach. Others felt that integrated natural resource management had been pursued for some time and that lessons could be learned from this to inform an ecosystem approach. There was a feeling that the ‘ecosystem approach’ and its related terminology must not complicate approaches already being taken to conserve the environment, particularly in developing countries. It must map onto what it already happening and provide a framework for existing efforts – not impose an additional burden.

The audience agreed that there was value in the ecosystem services concept: it allows effective transdisciplinary communication, is linked to end-users and can foster improved public/ political understanding. In the words of one presenter, the ecosystem approach ‘links intangible science to tangible benefits from ecosystems’.

For all that, there is still a gap between theory and policy – with policy running someway ahead of the science behind an ecosystem approach – and between science, policy and action. A question was asked from the audience in the afternoon’s discussion, ‘what’s the case record on ecosystem services research informing decision making?’, to which Defra replied that policy is still in a learning phase, collecting case studies to assess how an ecosystem approach might work effectively. Steve Bass, Senior Fellow at the IIED and a member of the afternoon’s panel, suggested that a far simpler framework was needed to translate the ecosystem appproach into real benefits for the world’s poor. Characterising ecosystem services as ‘poverty-environment links’ might help to reduce confusion around the concept and stimulate funding for implementation.

The day closed with a presentation from Paul Ekins, an ecological economist at University College London. He offered a warning to those pushing firmly for the valuation of ecoystem services, so-called ‘commodity fetishism’. If the environment is regarded as only having an economic value, it will be traded off. This is why economic values were invented, to allow trade. Resolving the current environmental crisis will require a recognition that environmental sustainability has both a high economic and a high moral value.

For more information about FRESH visit the website.

The Observer yesterday reported that the UK Government is set to increase support for the development of GM crops in sub-Sarahan Africa to the tune of £100m. In a new White Paper, the Government proposes to spend £80m on the development of biofortified crops (containing additional vitamins), £60m on researching drought-resistant crops for Africa and £24m on the development of pest-resistance.

New research published in Biology Letters indicates that real efforts must be made to maintain green space in our towns and cities as human society becomes ever-more urbanised.

Researchers Richard Fuller, University of Queensland, and Kevin Gaston, University of Sheffield, examined data on urban land cover from the European Environment Agency, selecting 386 cities across Europe as the focus of their investigation, based on land area covered and population size. Cities in Europe tended to have a greater proportion of green space than those in the South. The researchers found that the amount of green space contained within a city varied enormously: from 3 – 4 square metres per person in Cádiz, Fuenlabrada and Almería in Spain and Reggio di Calabria in Italy, to more than 300 square metres per person in Liège in Belgium, Oulu in Finland and Valenciennes in France.

The UK bucked a trend found across Europe: in 67 UK cities selected for the study, the amount of green space did not increase with increasing population size, but with overall city area.

The study suggests that residents will have less access to green space as cities grow, with consequent effects on health and well-being, unless measures are taken to actively preserve and maintain this. The researchers recommend that systematic conservation planning should be built into development plans for cities and that tools should be developed which balance benefits to biodiversity, human well-being and economic growth, when designing urban areas fit for the 21st Century.

Access full paper: Fuller, R. A. and Gaston, K.J. (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology Letters. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0010.

The Natural Capital Initiative, supported by the Science Council and British Library, is holding an event on 15th June focused on ‘Sustainable Cities’. All are welcome. Click here for further information.

The 2008 BA Science Festival has begun in Liverpool. Professor Sir David King, President of the BA, is due to address the Festival this evening and is expected to call for a shift in focus of science research in the UK, with the nation’s most innovative minds applied to the world’s most significant challenges, such as climate change.

It has been widely reported in the media today that Sir David will suggest that less time and resources be spent on space exploration and particle physics: controversial given the imminent opening of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN later this week.

In his speech, Sir David is to criticise anti-GM advocates and to argue that advanced approaches to agriculture, such as GM crops, are the only way that Africa can feed itself. He is quoted in today’s media as saying: “The position taken by non-governmental organisations and international organisations is to support traditional agricultural technologies. These technologies will not deliver the food for the burgeoning population of Africa,”…”Suffering within that continent is largely driven by attitudes in the West which are anti-science and anti-technology. We have the technology to feed the population of the planet. Do we have the ability to understand what we have?”

Click here for further details of events taking place at the BA Festival (6 – 11 September)

New research by the London-based Overseas Development Institute (ODI) indicates the value of intermediary organisations, such as the BES, in bridging the divide between science and policy. Although the research focused on the interface between science and development policy, they can equally be applied to science to ecology/ environmental policy-making. The research has been published as part of the ODI’s RAPID programme (Research and Policy in Development).

More than 600 scientists, intermediaries and policy-makers responded to an electronic survey from the ODI, launched in summer 2007. The findings were combined with a literature review and case studies to generate the conclusions of the project.

The review and case-studies show that, in the developing world particularly, close personal relationships between scientists and policy-makers are extremely important.

Two-thirds of the stakeholders surveyed by the ODI stated that a lack of understanding by policy-makers was a major obstacle to getting scientific information into policy. Poor dissemination of research findings was also identified as a hindrance. Policy-makers found opportunities to exchange opinions with scientists, and other forms of personal interaction, the most valuable means to increase their engagement with the science community.

The BES plays an important role in building the relationships between scientists and policy-makers highlighted as so important by this research. Our Ministerial Shadowing Scheme allows early-career ecologists to spend several days shadowing a Minister or government official, experiencing first-hand how the policy-making process works. The BES also organises workshops each year to bring policy-makers and scientists closer together, so building networks of collaboration.

Access the ODI’s report
Find out more about the BES’s Ministerial Shadowing Scheme and Policy Meetings.

Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for International Development, will be taking part in a live web-chat on the Number 10 Downing Street website tomorrow (7th May) from 13.00.

This is an opportunity to question the Secretary of State about DFID’s work in a range of areas; including how the UK is helping to tackle climate change in Africa, how ethical shoppers can make a difference and progress made towards the Millenium Development Goals.

Visit the Number 10 website for more information.

A proposal launched yesterday to build a barrier across The Wash has been met with widespread condemnation from numerous conservation bodies. Businessman Peter Dawes has launched the Wash Tidal Barrier Corporation, which proposes to build a tidal barrage from Hunstanton to Skegness.

The proposals are in apparent defiance of an internationally recognised agreement, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands as well as the fact the region is recognised as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and designated under European Law as a Special Protection Area and a Special Area for Conservation. It is anticipated The Wash will receive even greater protection under the forthcoming Marine Bill.

Richard Powell, regional director of the RSPB said: ‘This scheme should be dismissed as a non-starter… …we’re talking about a site that supports a phenomenal amount of wildlife.’

The British Ecological Society invites members and readers of the blog to comment on this issue.

The Secretary of State for International Development, Rt Hon Douglas Alexander MP, launched DFID’s new five-year strategy for research yesterday in London. DFID’s portfolio of research is to be broadened from four to six major research priorities, putting research on climate change and growth centre stage. DFID will spend approximately £1 billion on development research over the next five years, working with Research Councils UK and international funding bodies to deliver its priorities.

As part of the over-arching strategy, DFID have launched research strategies for Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change. Funding for research on agriculture, fisheries and forestry will be doubled by 2010. DFID is to expand and diversity its research into climate change, focusing on: climate science, especially in Africa; tackling climate change in national and international policy; strategies for adapting to climate change; and mitigation and low carbon growth. DFID will establish an International Climate Change Network to provide in-country research and advisory services.