Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC

Peterborough, United Kingdom

Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC

Peterborough, United Kingdom

Time filter

Source Type

Jones L.,UK Center for Ecology and Hydrology | Norton L.,Lancaster University | Austin Z.,Lancaster University | Austin Z.,University of York | And 19 more authors.
Land Use Policy | Year: 2016

There is growing interest in the role that natural capital plays in underpinning ecosystem services. Yet, there remain differences and inconsistencies in the conceptualisation of capital and ecosystem services and the role that humans play in their delivery. Using worked examples in a stocks and flows systems approach, we show that both natural capital (NC) and human-derived (produced, human, social, cultural, financial) capital (HDC) are necessary to create ecosystem services at many levels. HDC plays a role at three stages of ecosystem service delivery. Firstly, as essential elements of a combined social-ecological system to create a potential ecosystem service. Secondly, through the beneficiaries in shaping the demand for that service. Thirdly, in the form of additional capital required to realise the ecosystem service flow. We show that it is possible, although not always easy, to separately identify how these forms of capital contribute to ecosystem service flow. We discuss how applying a systems approach can help identify critical natural capital and critical human-derived capital to guide sustainable management of the stocks and flows of all forms of capital which underpin provision of multiple ecosystem services. The amount of realised ecosystem service can be managed in several ways: via the NC & HDC which govern the potential service, and via factors which govern both the demand from the beneficiaries, and the efficiency of use of the potential service by those beneficiaries. © 2015.


Pavon-Jordan D.,The Helsinki Laboratory of Ornithology | Pavon-Jordan D.,University of Helsinki | Fox A.D.,University of Aarhus | Clausen P.,University of Aarhus | And 20 more authors.
Diversity and Distributions | Year: 2015

Aim: Species are responding to climate change by changing their distributions, creating debate about the effectiveness of existing networks of protected areas. As a contribution to this debate, we assess whether regional winter abundances and distribution of the Smew Mergellus albellus, a migratory waterbird species listed on Annex I (EU Birds Directive) that overwinters exclusively in European wetlands, changed during 1990-2011, the role of global warming in driving distributional changes and the effectiveness of the network of Special Protection Areas (SPAs, EU Birds Directive) in the context of climate change. Location: Europe. Methods: We used site-specific counts (6,883 sites) from 16 countries covering the entire flyway to estimate annual abundance indices and trends at country, region (north-eastern, central and south-western) and flyway scales, inside and outside SPAs. We fitted autoregressive models to assess the effect of winter temperature on the annual abundance indices whilst accounting for autocorrelation. Results: The Smew wintering distribution shifted north-eastwards in Europe in accordance with the predictions of global warming, with increasing numbers in the north-eastern region and declines in the central region. Trends in wintering numbers were more positive in SPAs on the north-eastern and south-western part of the flyway. However, a large proportion of the wintering population remains unprotected in north-eastern areas outside of the existing SPA network. Main conclusions: SPAs accommodated climate-driven abundance changes in the north-eastern region of the wintering distribution by supporting increasing numbers of Smew in traditional and newly colonized areas. However, we highlight gaps in the current network, suggesting that urgent policy responses are needed. Given rapid changes in species distributions, we urge regular national and international assessments of the adequacy of the EU Natura 2000 network to ensure coherence in site-safeguard networks for this and other species. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.


Cook A.S.C.P.,British Trust for Ornithology | Parsons M.,Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC | Mitchell I.,Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC | Robinson R.A.,British Trust for Ornithology
Marine Ecology Progress Series | Year: 2011

Many of the breeding seabird populations in Britain and Ireland are of international importance; consequently, there is a statutory duty to protect these populations, as part of national biodiversity strategies and under Article 4 of the EU's Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (EC/79/409). As part of this process, populations have been monitored annually at a sample of colonies since the mid-1980s and (near) complete surveys have been undertaken twice. Results of this monitoring are currently reported regionally, in an effort to reflect the impact of spatially varying environmental drivers of change; however, there is concern that these regions reflect policy requirements rather than ecological relevance, particularly for mobile species. We used the monitoring data to identify a series of ecologically coherent regions in which trends in abundance and breeding success varied in a consistent fashion and examined how closely the annually sampled data matched the change quantified by the whole population surveys. The number of ecologically coherent regions identified varied from 2 for the northern gannet Morus bassanus and common guillemot Uria aalge to 7 for the great cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo. Trends imputed for ecologically coherent regions more closely matched those observed between whole population censuses and were more consistent than those identified for more policy-driven monitoring regions. By accounting for ecology in the design of monitoring regions, population variation in mobile species can be more accurately represented, leading to the design of more realistic monitoring regions. © Inter-Research 2011.

Loading Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC collaborators
Loading Joint Nature Conservation Committee JNCC collaborators