An All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Development & the Environment (APPG IDE) meeting was held today in Westminster to discuss challenges facing policy-makers ahead of the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June this year. The APPG IDE is a forum for MPs and Peers to discuss the links between poverty and natural resources, and engage with interested people and organisations outside parliament.

The event was chaired by Jon Snow and had a panel consisting of:
Mark Simmonds MP: Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP.
Dr Eilidh Whiteford MP: Scottish National Party spokesperson on International Development.
Dr Caroline Lucas MP: leader of the Green Party.
Martin Horwood MP: Co-chair of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Committee on International Affairs.
Tony Cunningham MP: Shadow Minister for International Development.

Jon Snow welcomed the meeting by pointing out that things have certainly happened during the last 20 years in the UK since the first Rio Earth Summit in 1992. He brought up the UK Climate Change Act and the announcement of the draft Energy Bill today as examples. After this, previously submitted questions were addressed to the panel by the audience.

The first questioner wanted to know how committed the UK Government is towards the outcomes of the Rio+20 Summit and what the key issues are. Mark Simmons listed three main issues that need to be addressed in Rio: sustainable development, GDP+ and a bigger contribution from businesses and the private sector. Eilidh Whiteford emphasised the need to transfer our technology and knowledge to the rest of the world, while Tony Cunningham mentioned poverty eradication as the bottom line of all the main issues which need to be addressed. Caroline Lucas added that human population has to admit its responsibility for the current problems and highlighted the need for financial commitment. Finally, Martin Horwood called for a holistic view to look at environmental problems at the Rio+20 Summit, rather than focusing on climate change to the exclusion of biodiversity loss and other considerations. Although the panellists pointed out slightly different issues they all agreed that the UK has to show leadership in Rio by the Prime Minister leading the delegation. At present, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg MP is due to attend, along with Secretary of State for Defra, Caroline Spelman.

Another question focussed on the North-South difference and poverty issues. The MPs agreed that social justice and sustainability should be at the heart of the new Sustainable Development Goals expected to be discussed in Rio.

The next questioner wanted to know how the global economy can provide the finances needed to meet the successors to the Millennium Development Goals and any new Sustainable Development Goals. Mr Horwood set out the UK government as a good example, applauding its decision to allocate 0.7% of the budget to international development projects. This is particularly impressive in a time of financial austerity, when it would have been easy to cut back on this spending. Mr Simmonds pointed at businesses and the private sector that need to be involved in the funding of the developmental goals. Caroline Lucas suggested that a ‘financial transaction tax’ could be levied on businesses and that a tax on greenhouse gas emissions from shipping could be a further mechanism. Mark Simmonds disagreed, stating that economic considerations are drivers for business and that business leaders will respond when they recognise that sustainable development makes good business sense, not when taxed to do so. Ms Lucas argued however that we cannot afford to wait for the majority of businesses to recognise this; instead Government needs to hold up examples of good practice to business, demonstrating that it is possible to behave sustainably and make a profit.

Then the discussion moved on to the ‘green economy’ and what the MPs think about it. The panellists agree that green economy is not equal to green growth and that there are parts of the world which still need growth but other parts should move towards a steady state economy. Therefore general global goals will not perform well due to differences in countries and regions. Ms Lucas also wondered what impacts would ‘advertisement-free zones’ have on our consumption pattern if these were widespread.

Another question which brought consensus amongst the panellists was about biofuels. They all agreed that biofuels are not all bad and there are some room for them within sustainable development but it is crucial to prioritise regarding to food security, society and environment. Martin Horwood added that the UK Government need to keep the pressure on EU renewable targets to make sure that they are really sustainable.

The last question asked the MPs’ opinion on setting up a new high commission for future generation issues. All of them, except Mark Simmonds, would like to see a new body focussing on future generations. Caroline Lucas brought up Hungary as a good example; Hungary has a Deputy-Commissioner responsible for the protection of the interests of future generations. On the other hand, Mark Simmonds would like to see existing institutions work better rather than introducing a new one. He was also wary about separating sustainable development considerations from mainstream policy, arguing that the UK Government already has a commitment to incorporating sustainable development considerations throughout the Government’s agenda.

The panellists mentioned several times that best practice has to be shared widely and the successes discussed. However, negative lessons learnt from the past could be just as important to share.

At the end of the meeting Jon Snow summarised the three most important points to emerge from the meeting:
- we should brag about our successes;
- the UK should be proud about the allocation of 0.7% of its budget to development goals and similar action by other countries should be pushed in Rio;
- and, most importantly, the Prime Minister should lead the UK delegation to the Rio+20 Earth Summit.

Equality and diversity in science was the focus of last week’s Policy Lunchbox, run monthly at Charles Darwin House by the BES and the Biochemical Society.

Sarah Hawkes, Head of Scientific Engagement at the Royal Society, gave a presentation on her work under the Society’s new 4 year programme focusing on removing the barriers to increasing diversity in the scientific workforce.

The science sector in the UK, and the Royal Society itself, have been the subject of criticism for the notable lack of women amongst their ranks, particularly in more senior positions. In the UK, men are six times more likely than women to work in science, technology, engineering or maths (STEM) subjects, and of the 46 Fellows appointed at the Royal Society in 2012, only two were women.

The RS’s new programme, funded by the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, aims to address this gender imbalance – as well as tackling other issues of diversity incorporating ethnicity, disability and socio-economic status – across both academia and industry. The idea is to learn from and build upon the number of equality initiatives which already exist to work towards three objectives:
1. Defining and understanding the scientific workforce;
2. Identifying barriers to entry and progression within the scientific work force, which a view to removing them, and;
3. In the long-term, increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce
The programme will involve data gathering and a large scale policy study, significant work to engage with the scientific community, organising diversity events and activities, and engaging with the ATHENA swan initiative and actors within education.

The scheme has strong backing from Sir Paul Nurse, President of the Royal Society, who made a statement recently saying that ‘we must have an environment in which all scientists, including those from previously underrepresented groups, have an equal chance to excel’.

Much of the work so far has been to establish the programme and begin to embed it within the Royal Society’s work. An initial scoping study has been carried out to identify existing data on the diversity of the scientific workforce and knowledge gaps that need to be filled. As part of this work, the programme is exploring the possibility of joining up existing datasets to generate long-term trends which may indicate whether the suggestion of some commentators – that it is ‘just a matter of time’ before equality will come about in science anyway – is true.

A consultation and engagement conference held at the end of March also provided vital feedback from the scientific community identifying the barriers and issues people working in the field experience. Areas including careers guidance, career trajectories, improving awareness of STEM careers, the importance of role models and widening Athena SWAN were suggested and will be adopted to shape the RS programme’s work. Further consultation and a large scale policy study this summer will also investigate whether the diversity issues in science are replicated in other sectors and help identify evidence to make a ‘business case’ for improving diversity, such as an MIT study in America which suggested greater team diversity led to better innovation.
Consideration will also be given to different measures of ‘excellence’ within science, as women in particular find it challenging to maintain a reputation through publications due to factors including taking time off for maternity leave and loss of association with their publication record if they change their name when they get married.

The programme will focus initially on the academic sector, but, building on Ms Hawke’s previous experience working on the Athena SWAN Charter, it is hope the RS programme will collaborate with the Charter to broaden its scope beyond universities to pilot work within research institutes and, perhaps in the future, industry.

Of course, in addition to reaching out to pursue diversity externally, the Royal Society must address the significant gender imbalance within its own Fellowship which in the last 10 years, has elected only 43 women as Fellows out of a total of 438. Although low, this is an improvement compared to recent decades, and now with the significant support of the President Paul Nurse, Ms Hawkes feels progress will move faster. A major barrier to overcome is the fact that Fellows are elected based on nominations by existing Fellows, which means the demographic is likely to perpetuate without interventions.

Ms Hawkes suggested that Learned Societies can help the RS programme, and more broadly make progress with addressing diversity issues, by participating in satellite expert groups which the programme is hoping to establish and informing Ms Hawkes of their own diversity initiatives, or providing examples of role models and case studies. There may also be the opportunity to work collaboratively, to run joint mentoring schemes for example, and the RS may provide some funding for this.

See the BES website for information on the BES’s own Mentoring Scheme for Women in Ecology. More details of the Royal Society’s work on equality and diversity are available on their website.

As part of National Science and Engineering Week 2012, young scientists were today given the chance to question Ministers and Members of Parliament on the future of science and engineering in the UK at a meeting organised by the Society of Biology. The innovative event followed the structure of a select committee hearing in which Parliament Ministers ordinarily question stakeholder witnesses in order to gather evidence on an issue. However, today it was the Ministers answering the questions, which were posed by young representatives from a range of societies and institutions.

In the first of three panels, Rt Hon David Willets MP, Minister for Universities and Science, and Professor John Perkins CBE FREng, Chief Scientific Adviser for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills addressed questions on science in politics, science funding, and education and careers. The second session saw members of the Science and Technology Committee discussing the status of science as well as the role and functioning of the Committee. Finally, Chi Onurwah, Shadow Minister for Innovation and Science gave input on a number of science-policy issues.

Science and Policy Making
One of the major messages to come from Ministers during the sessions is that there is an increasing awareness amongst Ministers of the need for scientific evidence in policy making; Mr Willetts MP identified that the Code of Conduct now contains explicit protection for scientific advice in policy debates and Prof Perkins said he has observed that science is increasingly ‘permeating’ the policy process. However, the point was made that politicians make their final decisions based on democratic vote, rather than a ‘technocratic’ decision based purely on science and therefore improved dialogue between scientists, policymakers and the public is critical to ensure voters are well informed about contemporary scientific issues.

The role of Learned Societies, such as the British Ecological Society, was identified as key in developing policy as there are very few scientists or engineers in Parliament. Fostering relationships with Chief Scientific Advisers was suggested as an effective route of engagement between the Societies and Government, as well as the maintenance of quality events, publications and communications by Learned Societies.

Science Education and Careers
Science education and careers was a significant focus of all three sessions. Mr Willetts MP suggested the news was generally positive with science subjects all back in the ‘top 10’ for A-level choices. However, a lack of practical experiments in the classroom was identified as a significant issue, a conclusion made by the Science and Technology Committee in a recent report. Ministers cited Health and Safety concerns as a major barrier as well as a lack of equipment and teacher training. It was suggested that one solution is better collaboration between schools and universities as a way to share resources and attract greater funding from Research Councils.

In order to increase interest in science as a subject, several panel members identified a need for significant improvements to careers advice services, including better promotion of the range of career options available to scientists. Ambassadors in schools, targeted events, and improved representation of science in the media were seen as effective ways to engage young people in science. A need to foster a real passion and curiosity for science, particularly at an early age, was seen as a priority and the current ‘spoon-feeding’ approach of science curriculums was identified as being ineffective in achieving this.

A Precedent for Future Events
The event was very well attended by young scientists from a broad range of institutions and societies and at the end of the sessions, Ministers voiced their appreciation for the opportunity to hear from some of the scientists and engineers of the future. Stephen Benn of the Society of Biology closed the meeting by thanking all those involved and voiced a hope that today’s event sets a precedent for further interactions between policy makers and young scientists.

Presentation slides, audio and video recordings, photos and links from the joint WWF-UK and Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) event ‘Navigating the Perfect Storm’ last month have been made available online.

The evening was chaired by Professor John Beddington, Chief Scientific Advisor to the Government and involved interesting presentations by Ivan Lewis, Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, Professor Bill Adams of University of Cambridge, and Dr Sejal Worah, Programmes Director for WWF India, who all gave perspectives on the action and approaches needed to navigate the ‘perfect storm’ of energy, food and water insecurity facing the world in the near future.

A previous BES Policy blog post gives a digest of the evening.

To be held on 25th May 2012

UK uplands store 5.1 billion tonnes of carbon in their soils. Can we use management to support the ecosystem services of uplands and their existing carbon stocks – to benefit for our long-term national climate change strategy?

This meeting is a unique opportunity to engage with a range of key stakeholders, which will allow cooperative communication to direct future work in upland conservation and aid policy development.

The aims of the meeting are as follows:

1. To engage with a range of stakeholders with a collective interest in upland conservation
2. Discuss opportunities that exist for carbon storage in suitable upland habitats and the implications of a future elevated CO2 climate
3. Demonstrate the added value that management for soil carbon sequestration can offer in several types of upland habitats
4. Provide a forum to discuss future strategies and directions that will optimise management of upland areas to benefit their ecosystem services, including below-ground carbon storage and carbon capture potential

For further information and to register attendance, contact Dr Alan Jones.

The 2012 conference of the IUCN UK National Committee is taking place on Thursday 26th April, considering the theme of protected areas in the United Kingdom.

“A platform for 21st Century protected area managers and policy makers to share best practice and consider existing and new policy and systems, opportunities and challenges. Development, climate change, economic constraints, and the needs of nature and people are all issues affecting the work of the protected areas community. This is a superb opportunity for protected area practitioners and policy makers from across the UK to come together, share and debate new and innovative ideas.”

Registration is £50 and further details are available from the IUCN UK website.

In 2009, Professor John Beddington, Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government, used the term ‘perfect storm’ to describe the critical combination of food shortages, water scarcity and insufficient energy resources facing the world’s population, predicting these would come to a head in 2030 resulting in significant social unrest and destabilisation. A conference last week, jointly hosted by WWF-UK and Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) , provided an opportunity to consider the solutions available for ‘Navigating the Perfect Storm’.

The well-attended event opened with an introduction by Prof. Beddington who commented that the three years since his oft-quoted statement has been a period of significant and rapid change in factors such as food prices, energy and water demand, and population. It is the latter issue which has really drawn Prof. Beddington’s attention and has emerged as a crucial concern which ‘we haven’t thought enough about’. Projections are for 1 billion more people in just 13 years, meaning that the timetable for action it is incredibly short. Already at current population levels, millions are without access to food, water and electricity. According to Prof Beddington, tackling these issues in a sustainable way is the ‘biggest challenge we’ve got’, yet the international community has so far ‘failed to get to grips’ with it. However, he said, these acute challenges also create opportunities for exciting and important innovations.

Ivan Lewis, Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, reiterated that the current period of ‘momentous international change’ presents both both major challenges and potential opportunities in his keynote speech. He stated that the range and scale of current global challenges mean the ‘business as usual’ paradigm is no longer acceptable or sustainable and a ‘new covenant for development’, replacing the paternalistic relationship between developed and developing countries with a ‘tripartite, dynamic network’ for international cooperation, will be necessary. In this holistic approach, he stated, sustainable development will need to become the foundation of any development framework rather than the ‘bolt on’ it has often been. This change in approach will require strong political leadership and commitment to international development which Mr Lewis feels the current government is lacking but that the Labour party has begun to address in its formation of a ‘Road to Rio’ joint working group, bringing together ministers from various teams ahead of the Rio+20 conference in June this year. Mr Lewis stated that international conferences and agreements have often proved ineffective in the past due to the influence of strong individual interests. However, international binding targets drive action, even if they are not met. Mr Lewis concluded that a one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate in policy making and that scientists and politicians should play to their strengths and break down the barriers between them to cooperate on forming policy.

A call for a new policy approach was identified by Professor Bill Adams of University of Cambridge as one of the main topics of conversation surrounding the upcoming Rio+20 conference. Some people have high hopes that the summit will address many of the major global issues and argue that the process is ‘honing in on a solution’. However, others see it as simply a ‘spiral of talk’. Prof. Adams put the upcoming conference in the context of 40 years since the publication of ‘Limits to Growth’ in 1972. Since then, he stated, we have made progress in some ways but are at a point in what he called ‘the Anthropocene’ where ‘the rates, scales, kinds, and combinations of changes occurring now are fundamentally different from those at any other time in history’ (quoted from Vistousek et al). Consequently, we need new policy approaches and innovative solutions which holistically address the needs of society, the economy and the environment. Prof. Adams argued that this will require a transformation of production and consumption to reduce resource demand and improve equity. This ‘contraction and convergence’ will be ‘profoundly difficult’ due to the challenge of persuading populations in both developed and developing to adjust their material aspirations. Prof. Adams concluded that the current situation is ‘an uncomfortable place to be’ but exciting too as important political figures are beginning to recognise that a change in lifestyles and consumption is necessary to address the ‘perfect storm’ of issues facing the world.

Providing a different perspective, Dr Sejal Worah shared observations from her work as Programmes Director for the WWF in India, a country where there has been considerable economic development recently but where acute poverty and inequality, environmental damage and resource depletion persist. Dr Worah stated that efficiency and innovation offer ‘low hanging fruit’ in the pursuit of sustainable development, but that radical transformational changes are also necessary; India ‘has no choice but to develop differently to how industrialised countries developed’. She described a project in the Sundarbans which demonstrates the opportunity for technology ‘leap-frogging’; creation of a solar power station in the region resulted in community empowerment and a reduction in its reliance on unsustainable net-fishing whilst bypassing the use of unsustainable fossil fuels. Another project in the Himalayas restored depleted freshwater springs through various technical solutions developed in partnership with local communities and after a 100-110% increase in stream discharge, the Indian government scaled the approach up to a national scope. The lesson from this, Dr Worah said, is that it successful local solutions are possible and suitable for scaling-up, providing local communities are engaged and technical solutions are matched to the culture, society and economy.

The conference was rounded up with a brief panel discussion involving the four speakers alongside Katie Critchlow of BigGreenChange, Miguel Petana, Vice-President of Global External Affairs at Unilever and Chris Whaley, Head of European and International Co-ordination Division at Defra. The panel agreed that tackling the resource issues facing us will require accounting for the natural environment within economic meaures. Mr Whaley was of the opinion that there is a need to ‘trim down’ on the number of international conventions and review current objectives to focus on feasible goals. Prof. Adams agreed that alongside international policy, there is need to focus on scientific research into specific issues such as crop disease. Mr Petana said consumer education will play a role in reducing the impact of consumption whilst Ms Critchlow suggested a move towards legislating rather than persuading may be necessary.

In answer to a final question as to whether the panel felt optimistic about the current situation, two answered ‘no’, but the remainder were positive about our chances of navigating the perfect storm.

Echoing the call for better interchange between scientists and policy makers made in the draft agenda for the upcoming Rio+20 conference, a UN report published last week stresses that a strong scientific basis is critical in political decisions, particularly in relation sustainable development.

The report, entitled ‘Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future Worth Choosing’, reiterates the importance of science throughout its 56 recommendations and identifies a ‘pressing need’ for better integration between science and policy at all levels. Some recommendations for steps to be taken towards achieving this are made, including the creation of a UN-level science advisory board.

A focus on ongoing scientific research in order to properly define terms such as ‘environmental thresholds’ and ‘tipping points’ is recognised as necessary to allow concrete and effective policy to be made. The panel also recommends that a ‘global sustainable development outlook report’ should be produced, drawing together disparate knowledge on a range of issues including climate change, energy, agriculture, health and development. It is envisaged that this would prompt officials from a diverse range of international organisations to work together, as well as with scientific advisors and governments, to decide a holistic approach to pursuing sustainable development.

The Stakeholder Forum, a civil society pressure group actively engaged in the run-up to Rio+20, has welcomed the report and suggested the although it is ‘meant to be used beyond Rio+20, it should be read as a blueprint of what could be achieved in Rio and as a wake-up call for action’.

The BES, together with the Biochemical Society, hosted another successful Policy Lunchbox at Charles Darwin House yesterday. The guest speaker was David Bott, Director of Innovation Programmes at the Technology Strategy Board (TSB) who delivered an engaging talk on the process of turning innovative ideas into real products and services. David identified a number of barriers to this progression and outlined how the TSB is working to address them.

One of the biggest issues is the significant risk involved in pursuing innovative ideas as well as a lack of long-term support for innovative projects due to a demand for immediate returns on investments. There is also a lack of long-term political planning. The UK Government does not harness its considerable market influence, which has the potential to drive innovation in its suppliers through forward-thinking procurement and regulation, alongside tax breaks to encourage investment in certain technologies. Since its creation, the TSB has developed a ‘toolbox’ of solutions to these barriers including providing coherent, long-term support to those involved in innovation and encouraging knowledge exchange, for example by hosting ‘Missions’ to introduce innovators to potential competitors, funders and collaborators, and creating _connect, an online social network.

The environment presents an important area in which innovation is key and David stated that the TSB has identified energy and food production as major markets for the coming years due to the considerable logistical challenges they pose. The need to double food production by 2050 will require significant innovation in agriculture, whilst increasing energy production without worsening damage to the environment will require novel design and planning. In response to this energy challenge, one of TSB’s ‘Catapult’ technology and innovation centres will focus on Offshore Renewable Energy. Sustainability, although a relatively small proportion of the budget, is a specific, dedicated programme within TSB and underpins all of the board’s work.

Already, TSB’s work has contributed to innovative environmental projects. A Demonstrator Project (designed to encourage further innovation in the sector) tested consumer responses to newly introduced electric cars, measuring their habits, attitudes and opinions of the vehicles when using them for a year. Another scheme – Retrofit for the Future – used innovative technologies to adapt 118 social houses to reduce their carbon emissions by 80% and found significant energy and money savings for the residents.

With the Business Secretary Vince Cable MP announcing a further Catapult Centre yesterday and a range of funding opportunities and events planned for the new year, the TSB’s valuable work in driving innovation is set to continue.

David Bott’s presentation at the Policy Lunchbox was well received by all the attendees and led to some very interesting discussion afterwards.

We would like to thank David Bott for his participation today, and everyone who attended. The TSB report ‘Concept to Commercialisation’, which discusses the work of the TSB further is available online.

The next Policy Lunchbox event on 6th March will see Beck Smith, Assistant Director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, discuss ‘how can the Government incentivise private sector investment in research and development?’ This event is full, but to join the waiting list contact James Lush at the Biochemical Society.

Tuesday 13th March 2012
The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (IOM3) 1 Carlton House Terrace, London

Business has been put at the centre of the stage to deliver the sustainable economy that the Government pledges to provide in the Natural Environment White Paper (NEWP).This creates real opportunities for businesses, in terms of new markets (e.g. via Payment for Ecosystem Services/Offsets/Restoration) and new collaborations with delivery agencies and other institutions (e.g. via Nature Improvement Areas).

This one-day event, supported by professional and business bodies, will provide a forum for businesses to engage directly with some of the key researchers working in this area.

With top speakers including Prof. Ian Bateman (Co-Leader of the Valuing Nature Network), Prof. Rosie Hails, MBE, (Leader of the Natural Capital Initiative), Prof. Dave Rafaelli (Leader of NERC’s Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Programme) and Dr Rob Bradburne of Defra, as well as key business leaders, the day will provide a mix of speakers, discussion and project-development breakout sessions.

Outcomes of the day will include:
 Identification of specific areas where there are already tools that could be used or developed further by industry in collaboration with academia
 Identification of common themes of interest and actions that would address these
 Initiation of project developments for internship funding

To register for this free event and for full details of the day and directions to IOM please go to http://natural-capital.eventbrite.com.