The inquiry into taxonomy and systematic biology by the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee found that the discipline is in crisis and more needs to be done to ensure the future health of the discipline. Following the inquiry the committee recommended that NERC undertake a study to identify opportunities for improving the prospects of the profession. This study has now been published accompanied by a strategy to ensure sustainability of the profession in the long term.

The review was in three main parts; the current status and trends in taxonomy including research into funding sources, the numbers of taxonomists, trends in the numbers, sources of young skilled staff and gaps in taxonomic expertise, future needs in taxonomy including identification of the elements of NERC’s strategy ‘Next Generation Science for Planet Earth’ that will require taxonomic knowledge, elements of taxonomy that could attract research council funding and elements of taxonomic work requiring the most funding for development, and finally an assessment of operational requirements. Accompanying the review a set of strategic recommendations for the future development of taxonomy and systematic in the UK was also published.

The report found that there are around 1100 active taxonomists in the UK, over half of whom are involved in identification of specimens working in industry, government and academia. Surprisingly they found no evidence for an aging skills base within the professional taxonomy sector, however there is some evidence that the skills base is aging in the voluntary sector. Taxonomists involved in descriptive, delimiting and revisionary studies are not being replaced by universities, leading to a decline in overall numbers. Funding for taxonomic studies comes from a variety of sources both national and international including government departments. Worryingly universities are failing to provide suitably trained graduates and postgraduates for jobs in the commercial biostratigraphy and environmental consultancy sectors. Importantly the study found that although voluntary taxonomists are important for the delivery of government policy they cannot replace professionals.

The review led to a list of over 20 recommendations being published which will ensure that the profession of taxonomy will remain sustainable into the future. These include:
1. Development of a UK Taxonomy Co-ordination Committee (TCC) to review the National Strategy in Taxonomy and Systematics, and monitor levels of investment in taxonomy.
2. A study should be undertaken to determine whether the distribution of the UK’s taxonomic collections is the most efficient for today’s needs
3. As part of a co-ordinated global programme major taxonomic organisations should take the responsibility for leading the provision of resources for particular taxa.
4. NERC should continue to support PhD training in taxonomy and assess the consequences of its recent decision to stop supporting taught masters.
5. NERC should explore whether lack of training opportunities is the reason for the difficulty in recruiting trained taxonomists by environmental consultancies and the skill deficit in micropalaeontology.
6. Provision of small grants for volunteer scientists and recognition of their contributions by learned societies and other bodies should be encouraged.
7. The TCC should bring together the UK taxonomic community to list and prioritise time-limited major research programmes or “grand challenges” that would advance UK taxonomy and systematics.
8. NERC and BBSRC (and where relevant MRC) should ensure their support of taxonomy is coordinated and complementary.

‘Landscapes of the Future’ the new Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology POSTnote written by the current BES POST fellow Eleanor Kean was launched today. ‘Landscapes of the Future’ focuses on the benefits that we derive from our landscapes, and the increasing pressures facing continued delivery of these benefits.

It has been widely established, following the release of the National Ecosystem Assessment, that we gain a variety of benefits and services from the environment including food, clean water, recreation and protection from natural disaster. However these benefits are threatened by the way in which we use land, often exploiting landscapes for a single purpose, without considering the wider detrimental effects.

Demographic change is increasing the pressure we place on land to provide the ecosystem services on which we rely. This coupled with environmental and climate change, societal attitudes and the policy environment will change the way in which we use land over the coming years. It is important to manage the challenges facing the natural environment through existing policies, and also through innovation and novel techniques.

Eleanor identifies opportunities for future landscape planning to adapt to these pressures, and provide multifunctional landscapes that ease competition between different land uses. Many opportunities have arisen as a result of proposed reforms of the planning system, abolition of regional spatial strategies, and introduction of a new National Planning Policy Framework. The establishment of Ecological Restoration Zones as recommended by the Lawton review ‘Making Space for Nature’ are also likely to play a key part in securing ecosystem services for future generations.

Localism may be expected to affect the way landscapes are managed, and the POSTnote emphasises the importance of allowing communities to access good information about the environment, facilitating local people to make good decisions. Green Infrastructure also has great potential to deliver environmental, social and economic benefits. An integrated approach to land use planning is another key message of the POSTnote which recommends that Government departments work together to achieve desirable environmental, social and economic outcomes.

Eleanor Kean, the current BES-sponsored Fellow at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, will be launching her POSTnote on ‘Landscapes of the Future’ on 8th June. This event will take place in Westminster, London from 10.30am – 12pm.

Many pressures, such as population increase and climate change, will exacerbate competition for land in the next few decades. The UK National Ecosystem Assessment, due to be published at the start of June, is the first assessment of the benefits UK society gains from the natural environment, as well as options to secure delivery into the future. Additionally, the government is expected to publish ambitious plans to protect the natural environment at the start of June in the Natural Environment White Paper. Multifunctional landscapes, which balance competing demands for space, can help adaptation and increase resilience to environmental change. This crosses many sectors and policy areas, but in particular land use planning.

Leading experts in the field will contribute to the discussion, chaired by Barry Gardiner MP.

To attend, please email POST events or call 020 7219 8377.

A full programme will be available from the POST website shortly.

The BES policy team yesterday attended a meeting of the All party Parliamentary Conservation and Wildlife Group. The meeting commenced with a talk about future priorities of Natural England from Dr Helen Phillips, Chief Executive of Natural England, followed by a question and discussion session. The talk focussed on the effects of the budget cuts on the services that natural England provides, and the direction of Natural England’s efforts over the coming years. The recent reform of Natural England has resulted in budget cuts, a ban on lobbying activities, and a keener focus on customer service. However there has been no legislative change and the main purpose of natural England remains the government’s independent advisory body on the natural environment. Dr Phillips explained to the group how Natural England will continue to provide this service despite the funding cuts.

Dr Phillips started by focussing on the successes of Natural England in the past five years, of which there have been many. A survey of farmers enrolled in agri-environment schemes revealed that 84% thought that Natural England gave good or excellent customer service. 70% of agricultural land is now under some sort of environmental management which is up from 45% in 2006. This has made a noticeable difference to protected species and habitats on which agricultural land has an important impact. 96% of (Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) are in good or excellent condition compared with only 73% 5 years ago. A slowing of farmland bird decline has occurred with signs of recovery. 30% of the UK landscape is under some form of protection whether that be SSSIs or national parks. There have also been a variety of very successful programmes to connect people with their environment.

However Natural England faces many challenges in protecting the natural environment. England is still experiencing ongoing habitat losses and biotic homogenisation, with many once common species rare and declining. The natural environment is also experiencing increased pressures from an increasing human population demanding more from the same land area. Importantly Lawton’s vision of more, bigger, better, and joined protected areas still has not been realised. There are lots of imminent opportunities to respond to these challenges: the Defra white paper, European biodiversity strategy, the National Ecosystem Assessment. Natural England aims to make sure that people reconnect with nature, our natural assets are protected and we maximise the opportunities offered to society by a green economy. Dr Phillips noted that there is also strong cross party support for these ideas, improving the chances of success.

The talk ended with Dr Phillips outlining the main strategies Natural England will employ to achieve these goals over the coming years:
• Improving protection of priority species and habitats.
• Continuing the success of the agri-environment schemes.
• Establishing a coherent network of Marine Protected Areas.
• Taking a landscape scale approach to conservation.
• Creating “ecological restoration zones” led and funded by a wide variety of organisations.
• Forming partnerships with businesses, local authorities, and NGOs.

One of the main themes to the questions was the effect of budget cuts on the ability of Natural England to provide sound advice to local people, who have become more involved in local decision making because of the Government’s “Big Society” initiative. Natural England have collaborated with the Environment Agency, Forestry Commission, and Wildlife Trusts to share information and identify priority areas in which to act. Defra is also developing an evidence portal for local people to enable access to sound scientific evidence to empower local communities to make more decisions.
Dr Phillips suggested that the BES could also have an important role to play in ensuring good decisions are made at the local level, by providing accreditation for learning and education programmes. This could be particularly useful when training members of local authorities tasked with making decisions about protected species and habitats in planning applications. She also suggested that the BES could support and contribute to research work done by Natural England, by providing quality assurance or peer review.

Biodiversity offsetting is a method intended to help compensate for the detrimental impacts of development on biodiversity. Such an approach is designed to work by creating a credit based market that developers could use to offset actions deemed harmful to the environment by investing in habitat restoration for biodiversity elsewhere.

Today the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) hosted a seminar in Westminster to discuss the scope for implementing biodiversity offsetting in the UK. The talks bought together a number of expert speakers to explore the potential benefits and risks associated with introducing this market-based strategy as a conservation approach.

The discussion aimed to stimulate conversation on the subject of offsets, and further encourage response to DEFRA’s consultation on biodiversity offsetting for the 2011 Natural Environment White Paper which is due to be published this spring.

The seminar was led by presentations from Claire Lewis from the Biodiversity Offsetting Team at DERFA, Dr Jo Treweek of Treweek Environmental Consultants, Prof David Hill from the Environment Bank Ltd, and finally Michael Oxford speaking for the Association of Local Government Ecologists.

DEFRA said that they were not looking to develop a mandatory approach, (which many argue is required), but instead create a voluntary system in which to pilot offsetting following the consultation. Discussion then focused on how to proceed with implementing offsetting, and get it right by ensuring a simple standardised system is in place.

The role of both government (to lay out a national framework), and local authorities (to guide and monitor progress over the long term) was highlighted, as was the need to provide the capacity to do so. To bridge gaps in funding, it was suggested that all associated costs were reflected in the market value of habitat, and that only habitats of a similar value could be traded. It was recommended that restoration areas should be pooled to increase their size, and that these areas should represent an effective network within the UK.

There was discussion about avoiding the risk of providing developers with ‘a license to destroy’, which emphasised the underlying offset principle of ‘no net loss’ and reiterated that offsetting should only be used in cases where no alternative development sites are available, and when detrimental impacts cannot be mitigated on-site. Attention was also given to the fact that it is not possible to re-create all habitat types, and that there will often be a lag time before restoration is complete.

The seminar made clear that there is still a lot of research to be done in terms of valuing and measuring biodiversity appropriately. If we get it right however, offsets could represent a paradigm shift towards tackling issues in conservation by no longer looking at developers as the problem but the solution.

The chair of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, Andrew Miller MP, joined the Policy Lunchbox network yesterday to discuss the Committee’s current and near-term priorities. Andrew Miller, MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston since 1992, took up the chairmanship of the Committee following the May 2010 election. He has a long history of involvement with science in parliament, having served on the Science and Technology Committee from 1992 – 1997 and as a member of the Board of POST from 1993-1997. He is currently also chair of the Parliamentary and Scientitifc Committee.

Andrew highlighted recent and current inquiries led by the Committee, into the Government’s use of scientific evidence during emergencies – such as the 2009 Swine Flu pandemic and 2010 volcanic eruption in Iceland – and into Technology Innovation Centres. Moving forward, priorities for the Committee included the science budget allocations; Departmental research and development; capital funding; the immigration cap; the impact of the abolition of quangos, and higher education funding. The Committee was also considering an inquiry on how Freedom of Information works in science, in light of the University of East Anglia’s climate change e-mail controversy in 2009.

A lively question and answer session ensued, with some interesting points raised around the Government’s ‘Big Society’ agenda and what this may mean for the use of science advice. If decision-making is devolved increasingly to the local level, efforts must be made to ensure that decision-makers in local authorities have access to the scientific evidence and capability that they require. Andrew Miller highlighted the importance of public engagement in this context – for decisions to be made locally, it’s vital to ensure that these are well-informed, and that those making them and engaging with them are scientifically literate. One interesting point was raised around the ‘kite marking’ of sources of information. How can the public be sure that they are accessing truthful and verified information, if the public is going to be increasingly called upon to seek this out in order to make decisions in their communities? Andrew Miller was supportive of this concept and called upon Learned Societies to take a leading role in public engagement and particularly in the production of accurate resources which the public could access for scientific information.

Policy Lunchbox will resume in the New Year. Full details of speakers currently confirmed for 2011 can be found on the Policy Lunchbox webpage. Further details will appear as speakers are added to the programme.

In co-operation with the Royal Academy of Engineering, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Institute of Physics and the Society of Biology, the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee will again be holding a SET for BRITAIN poster competition for early-stage researchers. The competition will conclude with an exhibition in the House of Commons on Monday 14th March 2011.

In order to accommodate as many different disciplines as possible, the day will be divided into three sessions:

Engineering
Biological and Biomedical Sciences
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and Physics)

Full details, including the Chairman’s letter inviting applications, can be found on the website www.setforbritain.org.uk

The closing date for entries is Friday 24th December 2010.

EVIDENCE SESSION

Wednesday 15 September 2010

House of Commons

Witness:
At 3.00 pm
* Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee will hold this oral evidence session in relation to Defra’s priorities and annual accounts.
The meeting will take place in a committee room in the House of Commons. Visitors should check the exact location nearer the time on http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/.

The BES Policy Team attended yesterday’s launch of a POSTnote on Genetically Modified Insects (GMI), and their future potential benefits and possible risks for disease and pest control, with speakers higlighted several issues and challenges that may be faced by the use of GMI.

For example, Dr Jon Knight raised the issue of scale; if the release of GM insects were to be conducted at a national level, there would be several implications for regulations due to their likely spread across country borders. He did, however, point out that GMI methods can be very similar to existing pest control methods already in use, such as the release of alien biological control agents.

On a related issue, Dr Ricarda Steinbrecher pointed out that whilst those involved in developing GMI’s can learn from the problems faced in the development of GM crops, there are several important differences, such as in mobility, the degree of domestication of the two, and the fact that GM insects are specifically designed to spread genes. She also highlighted the importance of the precautionary principle on the issue, stressing the importance of not pressing the GMI issue before the science suggests the technology is ready to be used, and risks have been adequately assessed.

Yesterday’s budget included some policy changes which could impact science, the environment and innovation.

A relatively long section on a “low carbon economy” included a pledge “to make this the greenest government ever.” The document also stated that order to move towards a secure low carbon economy, the UK needs “£200 billion of investment to 2020″, which would require a “reform of the energy market and action to attract additional private sector funding.”

More specifically, the budget outlined that a report will be published in the autumn to reform the climate change levy in order to “provide more certainty and support to the carbon price”, setting a provisional date of 2011 for relevant legislation. The government has also pledged to “help individuals invest in home energy efficiency improvements that can pay for themselves from the savings in energy bills.”

On the subject of oil and fuel duties, the case is being considered for introducing a fuel duty discount in remote rural areas, including a possible pilot scheme in Scotland. Following an assessment by the Office for Budget Responsibility on the effect of oil price fluctuations on the public finances, the government will consider options for the design of a “fair fuel stabiliser.” Furthermore, the government is considering changing the aviation tax system to a per-plane rather than per-passenger duty, which could “encourage fuller planes.”

Finally, regarding business innovation, a consultation with business will be conducted in autumn 2010 to “review the taxation of Intellectual Property and the support R&D tax credits provide for innovation.”

The full budget can be read here.