Qualitative impact assessment of land management interventions on ecosystem services (“QEIA”). Report-3 theme-5B: biodiversity - grassland

Keenleyside, Clunie; Costa Dominga, Giulia. 2023 Qualitative impact assessment of land management interventions on ecosystem services (“QEIA”). Report-3 theme-5B: biodiversity - grassland. London, Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), 58pp.

Before downloading, please read NORA policies.

Preview

Text
N538111CR.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Open Government Licence v3.
Download (911kB) | Preview

Official URL: https://randd.defra.gov.uk/ProjectDetails?ProjectI...

Abstract/Summary

The focus of this project was to provide a rapid qualitative assessment of land management interventions on Ecosystem Services (ES) proposed for inclusion in Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes. This involved a review of the current evidence base by ten expert teams drawn from the independent research community in a consistent series of ten Evidence Reviews. These reviews were undertaken rapidly at Defra’s request and together captured more than 2000 individual sources of evidence. These reviews were then used to inform an Integrated Assessment (IA) to provide a more accessible summary of these evidence reviews with a focus on capturing the actions with the greatest potential magnitude of change for the intended ES and their potential co-benefits and trade-offs across the Ecosystem Services and Ecosystem Services Indicators. The final IA table captured scores for 741 actions across 8 Themes, 33 ES and 53 ES-indicators. This produced a total possible matrix of 39,273 scores. It should be noted that this piece of work is just one element of the wider underpinning work Defra has commissioned to support the development of the ELM schemes. The project was carried out in two phases with the environmental and provisioning services commissioned in Phase 1 and cultural and regulatory services in a follow-on Phase 2. Due to the urgency of the need for these evidence reviews, there was insufficient time for systematic reviews and therefore the reviews relied on the knowledge of the team of the peer reviewed and grey literature with some rapid additional checking of recent reports and papers. This limitation of the review process was clearly explained and understood.

Item Type:	Publication - Report (Project Report)
UKCEH and CEH Sections/Science Areas:	Atmospheric Chemistry and Effects (Science Area 2017-) Biodiversity (Science Area 2017-) Pollution (Science Area 2017-) Soils and Land Use (Science Area 2017-) Water Resources (Science Area 2017-)
Funders/Sponsors:	Defra
Additional Information. Not used in RCUK Gateway to Research.:	Open Access report - full text available via Official URL link.
NORA Subject Terms:	Ecology and Environment Data and Information
Date made live:	02 Oct 2024 10:21 +0 (UTC)
URI:	https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/538111

Item Type:

Publication - Report (Project Report)

UKCEH and CEH Sections/Science Areas:

Atmospheric Chemistry and Effects (Science Area 2017-)
Biodiversity (Science Area 2017-)
Pollution (Science Area 2017-)
Soils and Land Use (Science Area 2017-)
Water Resources (Science Area 2017-)

Funders/Sponsors:

Defra

Additional Information. Not used in RCUK Gateway to Research.:

Open Access report - full text available via Official URL link.

NORA Subject Terms:

Ecology and Environment
Data and Information

Date made live:

02 Oct 2024 10:21 +0 (UTC)

URI:

https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/538111