Suchergebnisse

INTRODUCTION: Many catchments in England are over-abstracted and/or over-licensed and have no spare summer water that can be allocated to support business expansion, meaning that access to water is increasingly becoming a constraint on economic growth. This situation is particularly acute in eastern England. The legislation for managing water abstraction was introduced in the 1960s and is currently under review. A key limitation is its inflexible approach which limits the capacity to cope with the changing environmental pressures of increasing demand for water, or to allow abstractors access to additional water when available (e.g. peak flows). To address these and other water regulatory limitations, the government is implementing a raft of reforms to the abstraction licensing regime in England. While water trading can support more efficient water allocation, high transaction costs and delays in approvals have often limited abstractor uptake. Water sharing is an alternative approach to formal water trading that is gaining more attention in the so-called Priority Catchments2, where the development and testing of innovative abstraction management approaches is underway. However, there remains a widespread lack of understanding of what water sharing means from hydrological and regulatory perspectives - what are the available sharing options along the spectrum from informal to formal arrangements? What are the different scales at which sharing might be feasible (neighbouring businesses to catchment scale) and how might the approval process for authorising and monitoring sharing be operationalized by the Environment Agency (EA)? The aim of this short study was to explore these unresolved issues through the development of a range of realistic water sharing 'scenarios' between agricultural abstractors coupled with a mock evaluation process led by the Environment Agency.

This paper provides a brief review and assessment of the key environmental, regulatory and technical issues facing the turfgrass sector with specific reference to the European context. It considers the range of externalities or 'drivers for change' facing the industry, and the challenges and opportunities available for promoting and achieving more sustainable turfgrass management within the sports, landscape and amenity sectors. The analysis confirms that there are a number of key areas where a concerted research and industrial effort is required. These include responding to the pressures from government demands for greater environmental regulation, the increasing pressure on natural resources (notably water, energy and land), the emerging role of turf management in supporting ecosystem services and enhancing biodiversity, the continued need to promote integrated pest management, and the looming challenges posed by a changing climate, and urgent need to adapt. Whilst many of these externalities appear to be risks to the sports turf industry, there will also be significant opportunities, for those where the labour, energy and agronomic costs are minimized and where the drive to adopt a multifunctional approach to sportsturf management is embraced.

Globally, the area of sugarcane is rising rapidly in response to growing demands for bioethanol and increased sugar demand for human consumption. Despite considerable diversity in production systems and contexts, sugarcane is a particularly "high impact" crop with significant positive and negative environmental and socio-economic impacts. Our analysis is focused on Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), which is a critical region for continued expansion, due to its high production potential, low cost of production and proximity, and access, to European markets. Drawing on a systematic review of scientific evidence, combined with information from key informants, stakeholders and a research-industry workshop, we critically assess the impacts of sugarcane development on water, soil and air quality, employment, food security and human health. Our analysis shows that sugarcane production is, in general, neither explicitly good nor bad, sustainable nor unsustainable. The impacts of expansion of sugarcane production on the environment and society depend on the global political economy of sugar, local context, quality of scheme, nature of the production system and farm management. Despite threats from climate change and forthcoming changes in the trade relationship with the European Union, agricultural development policies are driving national and international interest and investment in sugarcane in SSA, with expansion likely to play an important role in sustainable development in the region. Our findings will help guide researchers and policy makers with new insights in understanding the situated environmental and social impacts associated with alternative sugar economy models, production technologies and qualities of management.

The rise of food security up international political, societal and academic agendas has led to increasing interest in novel means of improving primary food production and reducing waste. There are however, also many 'post-farm gate' activities that are critical to food security, including processing, packaging, distributing, retailing, cooking and consuming. These activities all affect a range of important food security elements, notably availability, affordability and other aspects of access, nutrition and safety. Addressing the challenge of universal food security, in the context of a number of other policy goals (e.g. social, economic and environmental sustainability), is of keen interest to a range of UK stakeholders but requires an up-to-date evidence base and continuous innovation. An exercise was therefore conducted, under the auspices of the UK Global Food Security Programme, to identify priority research questions with a focus on the UK food system (though the outcomes may be broadly applicable to other developed nations). Emphasis was placed on incorporating a wide range of perspectives ('world views') from different stakeholder groups: policy, private sector, non-governmental organisations, advocacy groups and academia. A total of 456 individuals submitted 820 questions from which 100 were selected by a process of online voting and a three-stage workshop voting exercise. These 100 final questions were sorted into 10 themes and the 'top' question for each theme identified by a further voting exercise. This step also allowed four different stakeholder groups to select the top 7-8 questions from their perspectives. Results of these voting exercises are presented. It is clear from the wide range of questions prioritised in this exercise that the different stakeholder groups identified specific research needs on a range of post-farm gate activities and food security outcomes. Evidence needs related to food affordability, nutrition and food safety (all key elements of food security) featured highly in the exercise. While there were some questions relating to climate impacts on production, other important topics for food security (e.g. trade, transport, preference and cultural needs) were not viewed as strongly by the participants.