Search

Urban road verges can contain significant biodiversity, contribute to structural connectivity between other urban greenspaces, and due to their proximity to road traffic are well placed to provide ecosystem services. Using the UK as a case study we review and critically evaluate a broad range of evidence to assess how this considerable potential can be enhanced despite financial, contractual and public opinion constraints. Reduced mowing frequency and other alterations would enhance biodiversity, aesthetics and pollination services, whilst delivering costs savings and potentially being publically acceptable. Retaining mature trees and planting additional ones is favourable to residents and would enhance biodiversity, pollution and climate regulation, carbon storage, and stormwater management. Optimising these services requires improved selection of tree species, and creating a more diverse tree stock. Due to establishment costs additional tree planting and maintenance could benefit from payment for ecosystem service schemes. Verges could also provide areas for cultivation of biofuels and possibly food production. Maximising the contribution of verges to urban biodiversity and ecosystem services is economical and becoming an increasingly urgent priority as the road network expands and other urban greenspace is lost, requiring enhancement of existing greenspace to facilitate sustainable urban development., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Debate about how sustainable intensification and multifunctionality might be implemented continues, but there remains little understanding as to what extent they are achievable in arable landscapes. Policies that influence agronomic decisions are rarely made with an appreciation of the trade-offs that exist between food production, biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision. We present an approach that can reveal such trade-offs when used to assess current and future policy options that affect agricultural inputs (e.g. pesticides, nutrients) and practices. In addition, by demonstrating it in a pesticide policy context, we show how safeguarding a range of ecosystem services may have serious implications for UK food security. We suggest that policy change is most usefully implemented at a landscape scale to promote multifunctionality, tailoring pesticide risk assessment and incentives for management that support bundles of ecosystem services to specific landscape contexts. In some instances tough trade-offs may need to be accepted. However, our approach can ensure that current knowledge is used to inform policy decisions for progress towards a more balanced food production system., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)