http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3487 Electronic copies of Biological and Environmental Sciences research reports. 2026-09-26T03:51:28Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37694 Title: Societal and cultural research opportunities at a deep UK geological carbon dioxide storage research facility: results from a social science ‘sandpit’ discussion Author(s): Napier, Hazel; Dickie, Jennifer; Akhurst, Maxine; Badcock, N; Chang, T; Dunnet, E; Robinson, T; Vincent, C; Akinola, K; Dale, T Editor(s): Pearce, J Abstract: This report describes the outcomes of a sandpit activity in December 2021, and initial follow up discussions, designed to bring together academics from across and beyond the UK, as well as members of public sector organisations. The intended outcomes were to discuss and develop societal and cultural research opportunities as part of a scoping study for a UK CO2 storage research facility. These outcomes are a research community view that inform the questions and knowledge gaps that a research facility would address. The sandpit is the first of many activities that will enable us to build an evidence base to demonstrate how a research facility would benefit from societal and cultural research and unlock new research themes. In particular, how the identified research themes support the UK’s transition to a sustainable future. 2024-03-07T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/37669 Title: Evaluating the relationship between public perception, engagement and attitudes towards underground energy technologies Author(s): Dickie, Jennifer; Watson, Eilidh; Napier, Hazel Abstract: This report summarises key findings from a series of participatory workshops used to evaluate the relationship between public perception, engagement and attitudes towards underground energy technologies. The main aim of this project is to get a better understanding of attitudes towards publicly-funded energy decarbonisation science from a cross section of society by evaluating public awareness and understanding of underground energy decarbonisation techniques, investigating the role of energy literacy and evaluating levels of engagement and public attitudes towards the £31m investment in UK Geoenergy Observatories and the UK earth science decarbonisation research agenda. Participatory workshops were developed to actively engage members of the public in discourse; these included pre and post workshop questionnaires, creative drawing exercises and participant-led discussions. In order to reach the target audience, the non-engaged public, and to encourage peer-to-peer discussions, an experimental approach was used in the recruitment process – that of inviting a variety of existing community groups to take part. Community groups included church groups, U3A, mother and baby and student groups. In total, 7 workshops were held in 3 different locations: Glasgow, Stirling and Lincolnshire; with 41 participants taking part. 2020-11-27T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/33185 Title: Development of a population model tool to predict shooting levels of Greenland barnacle geese on Islay Author(s): Bunnefeld, Nils; Pozo, Rocio A; Cusack, Jeremy J; Duthie, A Bradley; Minderman, Jeroen Abstract: Background As part of the 10-year Islay Sustainable Goose Management Strategy (ISGMS), population management has been carried out on Islay based on a previous Population Viability Analysis (PVA) (Trinder 2005, 2014). However, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) now wishes to update its existing population model because intended Greenland barnacle geese (GBG) reductions during the first years of the ISGMS have proved difficult to achieve. Here, we present a new modelling approach combining data on population size, land-use, climate, and shooting effort that will enable shooting bags to be derived under quantified levels of uncertainty. Main findings - The Greenland barnacle goose (GBG) population on Islay has shown a logistic growth rate. After an initial rapid increase in population size, the population growth rate has declined. - The recent (e.g. 2003-2015) GBG Islay population fluctuates around 45,000 (± 4,082 standard deviation) individuals - The population model (PM) developed here accurately predicts the average winter population of GBG on Islay measured between November and March (inclusive) in the absence of culling on Islay. - Based on previous work, the PM assumes that both climate and the area of improved grassland (AIG) are strong predictors of the size of the GBG population on Islay. Similarly, the PM requires the inclusion of shooting bags implemented on Greenland and Iceland to estimate future population trends. Thus, all of the above (i.e. climate, AIG and shooting bags) need to be updated in the model to obtain future population predictions. - Integration of the PM into the Generalised Management Strategy Evaluation (GMSE) framework provides a tool for forecasting the dynamics of geese based on management targets and maximum allowed shooting bags. - The PM used here to inform shooting bags via the GMSE approach provides a good fit to available historic data and performs better than using the population count from the previous year alone, or using a simpler logistic growth model. - For the PM-GMSE modelling approach to work, it is expected that the user updates the value for each predictor (climate, AIG and shooting bags) in the model so that it can be re-run each year. If such data are not available, a simpler (e.g. logistic growth approximation) population model should be used. - The PM-GMSE approach produces an estimate of the future GBG mean winter count on Islay, as well as a range of shooting bags given a population target. - For an initial run of 1,000 simulated managed populations with a management target of 29,000 and a maximum per year shooting bag of 2,500, most simulations came close to the management target within 10 years. But uncertainty and stochasticity could lead to the target being achieved in a shorter or longer time period, as well as higher or lower population sizes. - Future access to individual-based datasets will allow the implementation of more sophisticated models (e.g. integral population model, IPM) able to account for demographic rates, including processes of immigration and emigration. 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1893/33155 Title: The State of Knowledge and Practice on Human-Wildlife Conflicts Author(s): Hodgson, Isla D; Redpath, Steve M; Sandstrom, Camilla; Biggs, Duan Editor(s): O'Neill, Martin; Villat, Jessica Abstract: Conflicts in conservation are widespread issues of global concern, seriously threatening worldwide goals of biodiversity preservation and sustainable development. As the human population rises, and wider environmental issues, such as climate change and habitat degradation, continue to escalate, conflicts are predicted to increase in both frequency and intensity. In recognition of the severity of such problems and the multiple threats they present, international organisations, governments, and research institutes alike have expanded their efforts into the understanding and resolution of conflicts. Despite this increasing attention from both academic and empirical perspectives, conflicts persist, fostering environmental, social, economic and political problems on a global scale. Scholars and experts have suggested that, in order to progress, a complete overhaul is required in how we frame, think about, and manage conflicts in conservation. However, such suggestions are yet to be translated into a more practical context. A consortium of Griffith University in Australia, the Namibian Nature Foundation, and WWF, being incubated by the Luc Hoffmann Institute, is exploring the potential for a novel initiative that will address the shortcomings of present management efforts. This initiative would involve developing and testing a new process in conflict management: the creation of a standard to guide and improve approaches to conflicts globally. This report provides the starting point for this process. From an extensive review of the literature and interviews with leading experts, we present an overview of current conflict management, associated problems. and knowledge gaps, as well as areas in which management might be improved. We then examine the possibility of combining these insights into a standardised approach to guide future management, focusing on the governance and social outcomes of conflict management. 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z