scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Joe Morris

Bio: Joe Morris is an academic researcher from Cranfield University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Land use & Ecosystem services. The author has an hindex of 7, co-authored 8 publications receiving 2025 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper asks how and why stakeholder analysis should be conducted for participatory natural resource management research, and proposes new tools and combinations of methods that can more effectively identify and categorise stakeholders and help understand their inter-relationships.

2,011 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explored changes in rural land use in floodplains by measuring the range of ecosystem services provided under different management scenarios, identifying potential synergy and conflict, which can help to inform future policy and practice for floodplain management.

136 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present the results from an evaluation of the impacts of the summer 2007 flood events on agriculture, including direct losses in the form of crop loss or yield reduction due to flooding and associated waterlogging of fields.
Abstract: Exceptional rainfall during the summer of 2007 caused widespread flooding in parts of England. While the focus of attention has been correctly placed on the impact on densely populated urban areas, large tracts of rural land were seriously affected by flooding. Summer flooding is particularly damaging to farming. This paper presents the results from an evaluation of the impacts of the summer 2007 flood events on agriculture. High financial losses were incurred in the horticultural sector. Arable farmers incurred direct losses in the form of crop loss or yield reduction due to flooding and associated waterlogging of fields. Livestock farmers incurred indirect losses in the form of additional housing and feeding costs for livestock. Although total costs to agriculture were small compared with urban flood costs, they were typically large at the individual farm scale. Such impacts should be properly acknowledged in future strategies for flood risk management.

92 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The likely economic impacts of the development of flood storage and washland creation are explored and consideration is given to feasibility of this type of development, the environmental implications for a variety of habitats and species, and the financial and institutional mechanisms required to achieve implementation.

48 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compared seven methods of valuing nature-conservation interest and compare their utility, and concluded that monetary valuations are appropriate in some contexts, stakeholder preferences are paramount in others, but where objectivity is key, then assessment against independently defined criteria or targets should be the preferred method.
Abstract: Summary: 1. The ecosystem approach and evaluation of ecosystem services is gaining increasing attention from scientists, practitioners and policy makers. An important part of this process is to establish the ‘value’ of the nature-conservation assets within an area. This value can then be compared with data for other ecosystem services to identify management priorities under different future scenarios. However, there is little consensus on how to perform such an evaluation. In this study, we assess seven methods of valuing nature-conservation interest and compare their utility. 2. Five agricultural land drainage schemes across lowland England were selected for study. The current land-use was determined and four different scenarios of future management were developed. The land-use and habitats predicted under each scenario were assessed using seven methods of determining value, namely: Ecological Impact Assessment method, reserve-selection criteria, target-based criteria, stakeholder-choice analysis, reserve-selection criteria guided by stakeholders, agri-environment scheme payments and contingent valuation. The first three methods derive values based on pre-defined priorities, the next two use stated preferences of stakeholders, and the last two methods derive monetary values based on revealed and expressed preference, respectively. 3. The results obtained from the different methods were compared. The methods gave broadly similar results and were highly correlated, but each method emphasized a different aspect of conservation value, leading to different possible outcomes in some cases. The advantages and disadvantages of each method were evaluated. 4. Synthesis and applications. As the ecosystem services approach becomes embedded in decision-making, ecologists are increasingly called upon to value the biodiversity of a site or to compare the value of different sites. This study has shown that seven different valuation methods, although all giving significantly correlated findings, resulted in seven different rankings of nature-conservation value for the 25 situations studied. This difference occurred in spite of the sites being of the same landscape type and occurring within the same country. The discussion concludes that each method has its strengths; monetary valuations are appropriate in some contexts, stakeholder preferences are paramount in others, but where objectivity is key, then assessment against independently defined criteria or targets should be the preferred method.

26 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Mark Reed1
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a review of the development of participatory approaches in different disciplinary and geographical contexts, and reviews typologies that can be used to categorise and select participatory methods.

3,421 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a methodological framework for mapping and assessing ecosystems and their services at European scale, using the water purification service as a case and using functional traits to map ecosystem services.
Abstract: Mainstreaming ecosystem services into policy and decision making is dependent on the availability of spatially explicit information on the state and trends of ecosystems and their services. In particular, the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 addresses the need to account for ecosystem services through biophysical mapping and valuation. This paper reviews current mapping methods, identifies current knowledge gaps and provides the elements for a methodological framework for mapping and assessing ecosystems and their services at European scale. Current mapping methodologies go beyond purely land cover based assessments and include the use of primary data of ecosystem services, the use of functional traits to map ecosystem services and the development of models and ecological production functions. Additional research is needed to cover marine ecosystems and to include the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change in spatially explicit assessments. The ecosystem services cascade which connects ecosystems to human wellbeing is argued to provide a suitable, stepwise framework for mapping ecosystem services in order to support EU policies in a more effective way. We demonstrate the use of this framework for mapping using the water purification service as case.

785 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A template and checklist of information needed for those beginning an ecosystem service modelling and mapping study will reduce the uncertainty associated with quantifying ecosystem services and thereby help to close the gap between theory and practice.
Abstract: The inconsistency in methods to quantify and map ecosystem services challenges the development of robust values of ecosystem services in national accounts and broader policy and natural resource management decision-making. In this paper we develop and test a blueprint to give guidance on modelling and mapping ecosystem services. The primary purpose of this blueprint is to provide a template and checklist of information needed for those beginning an ecosystem service modelling and mapping study. A secondary purpose is to provide, over time, a database of completed blueprints that becomes a valuable information resource of methods and information used in previous modelling and mapping studies. We base our blueprint on a literature review, expert opinions (as part of a related workshop organised during the 5th ESP conference2 ) and critical assessment of existing techniques used to model and map ecosystem services. While any study that models and maps ecosystem services will have its unique characteristics and will be largely driven by data and model availability, a tool such as the blueprint presented here will reduce the uncertainty associated with quantifying ecosystem services and thereby help to close the gap between theory and practice.

635 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that ecosystem responses can exceed the duration of the climate impacts via lagged effects on the carbon cycle, and forests are expected to exhibit the largest net effect of extremes due to their large carbon pools and fluxes, potentially large indirect and lagged impacts, and long recovery time to regain previous stocks.
Abstract: Extreme droughts, heat waves, frosts, precipitation, wind storms and other climate extremes may impact the structure, composition and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems, and thus carbon cycling and its feedbacks to the climate system. Yet, the interconnected avenues through which climate extremes drive ecological and physiological processes and alter the carbon balance are poorly understood. Here, we review the literature on carbon cycle relevant responses of ecosystems to extreme climatic events. Given that impacts of climate extremes are considered disturbances, we assume the respective general disturbance-induced mechanisms and processes to also operate in an extreme context. The paucity of well-defined studies currently renders a quantitative meta-analysis impossible, but permits us to develop a deductive framework for identifying the main mechanisms (and coupling thereof) through which climate extremes may act on the carbon cycle. We find that ecosystem responses can exceed the duration of the climate impacts via lagged effects on the carbon cycle. The expected regional impacts of future climate extremes will depend on changes in the probability and severity of their occurrence, on the compound effects and timing of different climate extremes, and on the vulnerability of each land-cover type modulated by management. Although processes and sensitivities differ among biomes, based on expert opinion, we expect forests to exhibit the largest net effect of extremes due to their large carbon pools and fluxes, potentially large indirect and lagged impacts, and long recovery time to regain previous stocks. At the global scale, we presume that droughts have the strongest and most widespread effects on terrestrial carbon cycling. Comparing impacts of climate extremes identified via remote sensing vs. ground-based observational case studies reveals that many regions in the (sub-)tropics are understudied. Hence, regional investigations are needed to allow a global upscaling of the impacts of climate extremes on global carbon-climate feedbacks.

625 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
20 Jan 2020
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a set of four general principles that underlie high-quality knowledge co-production for sustainability research, and offer practical guidance on how to engage in meaningful co-productive practices, and how to evaluate their quality and success.
Abstract: Research practice, funding agencies and global science organizations suggest that research aimed at addressing sustainability challenges is most effective when ‘co-produced’ by academics and non-academics. Co-production promises to address the complex nature of contemporary sustainability challenges better than more traditional scientific approaches. But definitions of knowledge co-production are diverse and often contradictory. We propose a set of four general principles that underlie high-quality knowledge co-production for sustainability research. Using these principles, we offer practical guidance on how to engage in meaningful co-productive practices, and how to evaluate their quality and success.

607 citations