Search

The Environmental Evidence for the Future (EEF) Initiative emerged in response to the challenges and opportunities presented by the UK's decision to leave the European Union and its associated Environmental Frameworks. The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), working closely with the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) and UK stakeholders, developed the initiative to identify and address crucial evidence gaps, offering a long-term vision for environmental policy and sustainability. The EEF Initiative progressed through three stages: strategic priority identification, NERC panel award selection, and the production of Systematic Maps of existing evidence. The first stage involved collaborative workshops across the UK to identify key knowledge gaps in environmental science. The subsequent prioritisation resulted in 65 challenges across 10 thematic areas. The second stage saw NERC initiating, with CEE support, an open call for research proposals emphasising the use of evidence synthesis methodology. The selection process, balancing topic importance and applicant expertise, led to funding for five projects. The final stage involved the production of Systematic Maps of existing evidence based on the CEE Guidelines and Standards, providing a structured overview of existing literature on specific topics. The EEF Initiative demonstrated effective collaboration between UKRI (NERC), an independent non-profit (CEE), academia, and government agencies, addressing critical environmental challenges through rigorous evidence synthesis methodologies. The programme enhanced understanding and utilisation of these methodologies within the research community. Key lessons include the importance of inclusive priority-setting, differentiation between broad policy questions and specific Systematic Map questions, recognition of the value of Systematic Maps, and the role of experience in evidence synthesis teams. As policymakers and researchers navigate environmental policies in a resource-constrained environment, the EEF Initiative highlights the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of systematic mapping and review processes for evidence-based decision-making. The success of funding through NERC sets a precedent for future thematic evidence focused programmes, emphasising the need for continued support in developing synthesis skills among researchers and encouraging direct government commissions for targeted and responsive evidence. The EEF Initiative serves as a model for effective collaboration, providing valuable insights into addressing evidence gaps and shaping evidence-based policymaking in an ever-evolving environmental landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we provide an overview of the UK environmental regulatory framework for subnational policy and planning in devolved English urban areas based on a systematic coding of key legislation and policies against a matrix of sustainability att ributes relevant for human health. Our findings suggest that while elements of sustainability at different scales are addressed to varying degrees, we need to move beyond the 'three-legged stool' of sustainability to assess linked environmental and societal health impacts. Assessing policy using a multi-faceted lens of sustainability such as the one we propose can help to uncover health-development dependencies and the incentives and governance required to enhance these at different scales (planetary, regional, neighbourhood and building). We propose a coordinative role for spatial planning to integrate responses to socio-environmental health priorities for sustainable development and make recommendations for dynamic decisionmaking on environmental and human health impacts in urban development sett ings. Doing so can help promote just (equitable) transitions, decoupled from a pervasive ecological modernization discourse that frames the political economy of planning at both the national and local levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to identify and gain insights into small and medium‐sized enterprises' (SMEs) rationales (why) for engaging in sustainable social and environmental practices (SEPs) that influence social and environmental policy and sustainability changes. Specifically, we depart from the predominately quantitative‐orientated SEPs literature by conducting in‐depth interviews and analysis of owners and managers of SMEs in the United Kingdom within a legitimacy theoretical framework. Our findings from a comprehensive number of interviewees show that SMEs employ a complex mix of both symbolic and substantive SEPs with the aim of enhancing the legitimacy and sustainability of their operations. The results emphasise the strengths of social engagement, reputation and image, environmental embeddedness, industry differentiation and education facilitators. In particular, the paper shows that legitimating strategies can have a dual purpose of being symbolic in nature but also inferring a substantive legitimacy claim. Evidence of SMEs maintaining their legitimacy position stretches further via either a moral and/or a pragmatic standpoint. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on the notions of subjective knowledge (what someone thinks he/she knows about a topic) and receptivity (someone's ability, inclination, and willingness to take in information, ideas, impressions or suggestions), we extend the knowledge‐attitudes‐practice (KAP) model within an environmental sustainability policy (ESP) context: the UK's single‐use bag charge policy, specifically. Based on a cross‐sectional survey with 568 British participants, we illustrate the key role of objective knowledge for ESP compliance/behavioural intentions, whilst subjective knowledge is key for ESP information receptivity. The need for different marketing tactics to promote 'policy products' for sustainable success is illustrated by identifying three distinct segments: the Knowledgeable and Compliant (first to comply, need to maintain information receptivity); the Unknowledgeable But Compliant (need to reduce subjective knowledge); and the Unknowledgeable, Non‐compliant, but Receptive (need objective information the most). Contributing to current and future ESP making, this paper provides multiple avenues for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A principal driver for sustainability in the UK is the influence of European Union law and policy. Sustainability is a key component of the ultimate purposes of the European Union, and is given specific legal force by the requirement that in conjunction with environmental law and policy it must be integrated into all of the EU's activities in whatever field of competence. Part of this success has been the uniformity in which environmental law and policy has been agreed and implemented by the member states, including the United Kingdom. This law is also then subject to coordination, evaluation, oversight, and enforcement by the EU's governance institutions. Following a referendum in which the UK population narrowly voted to separate itself from the EU, specific laws, amongst others those relating to nature conservation, such as the Birds and Habitats Directives and the Bathing Water Directive, will ultimately no longer apply to govern UK policy and practice. Given that waters and biodiversity are often shared resources, this article examines the potential impacts that non-aligned environmental policies consequent upon the UK's separation will mean in terms of the development of effective environmental law and policy, both in the UK and for those who have a stake in the sustainable and effective management of those resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social and environmental justice across generations is a fundamental attribute of sustainable development. In this article, which is also a call for papers for a future theme in Public Money & Management (PMM), we develop our case for further research on how governments and public service organizations seek to address sustainable development in their decision-making processes. We believe that accounting for social and environmental aspects is an underdeveloped area of research and practice that is worthy of further critical enquiry. We therefore call on researchers and practitioners to submit their research to a themed issue of PMM on managing and accounting for sustainable development in public services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insects provide key ecosystem services for our sustainable future, which rely upon effective conservation policies to protect insect biodiversity. To date, however, we still do not know how effective current conservation policies are for protecting insect biodiversity, opening up the possibility that policies are unfit-for-purpose. Given the considerable debate and public awareness on the potential global decline of insect species, it is important to understand whether or not current policies can protect insect biodiversity. Here, we used IUCN listing of species status and developed a quantitative framework to analyse the potential effectiveness and coverage of current conservation policies pertaining to insect biodiversity in the UK and Ireland. We contrasted this against coverage for a well-known group – mammals – as a benchmark, to find that while the vast majority of the UK mammalian species in the European IUCN red list are directly protected by current policies, insects remain largely unprotected. Moreover, for those insect species that are explicitly protected by current policies, there is a taxonomic bias whereby the majority (>50%) of insect species are Lepidopterans (moths and butterflies), while a minority are Coleopterans (beetles), and none are Hymenopterans (bees, ants, wasps). Similar trends were observed in the UK priority biodiversity lists. Based on our data, we conclude that current biodiversity policies in the UK and Ireland have significant gaps in their protection of insect biodiversity and, there is a taxonomic bias that may skew some conservation efforts toward butterflies and moths. We anticipate that our findings are likely to occur worldwide, highlighting the need for more directive policies to manage and protect insect biodiversity for the sustainability of ecosystem services. • UK policies show biases toward Lepidoptera over other large insect orders. • Policy protection of mammals shows greater uniformity between orders than insects. • Policies in Ireland lack protection for any insect species. • UK priority lists do not prioritise all insects assessed as at risk of extinction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Equestrian land could be a potentially important environmental resource, given that pastureland can help to sequester carbon from the atmosphere, prevent soil erosion and provide diverse ecosystems for native plant and wildlife species. However, equestrian land has been overlooked in environmental research and policy. This study reports on the ways which horse, pony, donkey and mule keepers in the UK described environmental practices as part of their equid care. Through an analysis of survey responses (N = 758) from equid keepers using alternative grazing systems, we report on three very different management approaches which resulted in keepers aiming to promote healthy pastures and healthy animals. This study provides the basis for future research exploring attitudes to sustainability in equid keepers, as well as evaluating the impact of their efforts. Equestrian grazing management is a poorly researched area, despite potentially significant environmental impacts. This study explored keepers' use of alternative grazing systems in the care of UK horses, donkeys and mules through an internet survey. The survey was available during the summer of 2020 and comprised closed and open questions, which were analysed with descriptive statistics and iterative thematic analysis, respectively. A total of 758 responses was incorporated into the analysis; the most popular system used were tracks (56.5%), Equicentral (19%), "other" (e.g., non-grass turnout) (12.5%), rewilding (7.5%) and turnout on either moorland (0.7%) or woodland (2.5%). The thematic analysis highlighted that equid keepers across the systems were highly engaged in exploring sustainable practices. Their approaches varied according to each system, yet all aimed to fulfil practices in three major categories, i.e., supporting diverse plant life (usually through restricting equid access to certain areas), supporting wildlife (through the creation of biodiverse environments) and sustainably managing droppings and helminths. Additionally, proponents of the Equicentral systems declared to be aiming to support soil health. These data provide a promising insight into equid keepers' behaviour and attitudes to sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the European Union (EU-27) and UK, animal farming generated annually more than 1.4 billion tonnes of manure during the period 2016–2019. Of this, more than 90% is directly re-applied to soils as organic fertiliser. Manure promotes plant growth, provides nutritious food to soil organisms, adds genetic and functional diversity to soils and improves the chemical and physical soil properties. However, it can also cause pollution by introducing toxic elements (i.e., heavy metals, antibiotics, pathogens) and contribute to nutrient losses. Soil organisms play an essential role in manure transformation into the soil and the degradation of any potential toxic constitutes; however, manure management practices often neglect soil biodiversity. In this review, we explored the impact of manure from farmed animals on soil biodiversity by considering factors that determine the effects of manure and vice versa. By evaluating manure's potential to enhance soil biodiversity, but also its environmental risks, we assessed current and future EU policy and legislations with the ultimate aim of providing recommendations that can enable a more sustainable management of farm manures. This review explored the relationship between manure and soil biodiversity by considering 407 published papers and relevant legislative provisions. In addition, we evaluated whether benefits and risks on soil biodiversity are considered in manure management. Thereafter, we analysed the current legislation in the European Union relevant to manure, an important driver for its treatment, application and storage. This review found that coupling manure management with soil biodiversity can mitigate present and future environmental risks. Our analyses showed that manure quality is more important to soil biodiversity than manure quantity and therefore, agricultural practices that protect and promote soil biodiversity with the application of appropriate, high-quality manure or biostimulant preparations based on manure, could accelerate the move towards more sustainable food production systems. Soil biodiversity needs to be appropriately factored in when assessing manure amendments to provide better guidelines on the use of manure and to reduce costs and environmental risks. However, radical changes in current philosophies and practices are needed so that soil biodiversity can be enhanced by manure management. Manure quality in the EU requires greater attention, calling for more targeted policies. Our proposed approach could be applied by European Union Member States to include soil protection measures in national legislation, and at the EU level, can enable the implementation of strategic goals. [Display omitted] • More than 1.4 billion t y−1 of manure are generated in the EU and UK and re-applied to soils with potential harmful effects. • Current European regulations on manure disposal are scattered across different legislations and ignore soil biodiversity. • This review of 407 documents revealed that manure quality is more important to soil biodiversity than manure quantity. • To promote soil biodiversity by manure amendments, a radical transformation in the way agriculture is conducted is needed. • This approach could reinforce EU MS' commitment to protect soils and improve future agricultural policies at the EU level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]