UK National Ecosystem Assessment (2011) The UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge

Full text

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 597
Chapter 15:
Provisioning Services
Coordinating Lead Author: Gareth Edwards-Jones
Contributing Authors: Paul Cross, Nicola Foley, Ian Harris, Mike Kaiser, Lewis Le Vay, Mark Rayment,
Matt Scowen and Paul Waller
Key Findings .......................................................................................................................................................... 598
15.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 600
15.1.2 Data Use and Interpretation ......................................................................................................................................600
15.2 Food, Fibre and Energy from Agriculture ...................................................................................................... 600
15.2.1 Historical and Global Perspective on Food Supply ..................................................................................................601
15.2.2 Crops ...........................................................................................................................................................................601
15.2.3 Livestock .....................................................................................................................................................................602
15.2.4 Fibre from Agriculture ...............................................................................................................................................606
15.2.5 Biomass and Bioenergy .............................................................................................................................................606
15.2.6 Drivers of Change in Agriculture ..............................................................................................................................606
15.3 Food from Marine Ecosystems ...................................................................................................................... 608
15.3.1 Data Constraints ........................................................................................................................................................609
15.3.2 Trends in Landings ....................................................................................................................................................609
15.3.3 Drivers of Change in Marine Fisheries ..................................................................................................................... 611
15.4 Food from Aquaculture ...................................................................................................................................611
15.4.1 Drivers of Change in Aquaculture ............................................................................................................................. 612
15.5 Game and Wild Collected Food .......................................................................................................................612
15.5.1 Gamebirds ................................................................................................................................................................... 612
15.5.2 Deer ............................................................................................................................................................................. 613
15.5.3 Salmon and Migratory Trout in Estuaries and Freshwaters ................................................................................... 614
15.5.4 Drivers of Change in Har vesting Game Species ....................................................................................................... 614
15.6 Honey .............................................................................................................................................................. 615
15.6.1 Drivers of Change in Honey Production .................................................................................................................... 615
15.7 Timber and Forest Products ........................................................................................................................... 615
15.7.1 Timber ......................................................................................................................................................................... 616
15.7.2 Christmas Trees .......................................................................................................................................................... 617
15.7.3 Edible Non-Timber Forest Products .......................................................................................................................... 617
15.7.4 Drivers of Change in Timber and Forest Products ................................................................................................... 617
15.8 Peat ................................................................................................................................................................. 618
15.8.1 Drivers of Change in Peat Extraction ........................................................................................................................ 619
15.9 Ornamental Resources ...................................................................................................................................619
15.9.1 Drivers of Change in the Ornamentals Sector .......................................................................................................... 619
15.10 Genetic Resources ....................................................................................................................................... 620
15.10.1 Drivers of Change for Genetic Resources ................................................................................................................620
15.11 Water ............................................................................................................................................................ 620
15.11.1 Bottled Water ............................................................................................................................................................. 621
15.11.2 Drivers of Change for Water Use .............................................................................................................................. 621
15.12 Trade-offs, Synergies and Options for Sustainable Management ................................................................ 623
15.13 Key Questions and Knowledge Gaps............................................................................................................. 624
15.13.1 How Should We Spatially Allocate Productive and Environmental Management Activities? ............................. 624
15.13.2 What Level of Species Redundancy is There in Productive Ecosystems? ............................................................. 624
15.13.3 How Can We Predict When Environmental Pressures Will Serve to Reduce Future Flows of
Provisioning Services in Given Ecosystems? ...................................................................................................................... 624
15.13.4 How Can We Enhance Resource Efficiency and Reduce Levels of Waste and Pollution? .................................... 625
References ..............................................................................................................................................................626
Appendix 15.1 Approach Used to Assign Certainty Terms to Chapter Key Findings ..............................................631

598 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
Key Findings*
* Each Key Finding has been assigned a level of scientic certainty, based on a 4-box model and complemented, where possible, with a likelihood
scale. Superscript numbers and letters indicate the uncertainty term assigned to each nding. Full details of each term and how they were
assigned are presented in Appendix 15.1.
Over the last 60 years, production from owned and managed resources has
grown, but production from wild resources has declined. Policy, technology
and market forces have all played a role, but policy has had the greatest impact. Its
goal has sometimes been to maximise production (e.g. Common Agricultural Policy)
and sometimes been to prevent overexploitation (e.g. Common Fisheries Policy). Some
policies, such as agri-environment schemes, have aimed to reduce the environmental
impacts of production.
It is unlikely that declines in environmental quality have reduced agricultural
production levels, but overexploitation has harmed marine fish populations and some
game species1.
1 well established
Over the last decade, the UK has produced more food per year from crops
than at any other time in histor y. The area of land under crops increased in England
from 3 million hectares (ha) in 1940 to 4.2 million ha in 2009, but crop areas declined in
other regions of the UK: in Wales, for example, there was a 66% decrease over the same
time period. The area of wheat trebled in England between 1940 and 2000, while crops
such as oats, flax, turnips and vetches declined. Increases in the cropped area were
driven by financial returns to farmers1, partially derived from the Common Agricultural
Policy and partially from the market. The changes were facilitated by technologies
such as more effective pesticides, mechanisation, varietal improvement and increased
fertiliser use. Large increases in the productivity of all crops occurred between 1940
and 2008, as exemplified by average UK wheat yields which increased from 2.5 tonnes/
hectare (t/ha) to 8 t/ha.
1 well established
Livestock productivity has increased, while animal numbers have fluctuated
over time. Average milk yields increased from 3,500 litres/cow/year in 1960 to
7,000 litres/cow/year by 2009, and the average dressed carcass weight for steers
increased from 267 kg in 1980 to 316 kg in 2003. These productivity gains have been
accomplished through enhanced breeding and improved feeding regimes. Numbers of
beef cattle peaked at 1.9 million in 1999, dairy cattle at 3.4 million in 1980 and sheep
numbers peaked at 45 million in 2000. Numbers have fallen since these times. In 2009,
the UK dairy herd comprised 1.8 million dairy cattle, while the national sheep flock
was 33 million in 2008. Sheep numbers have fluctuated according to levels of financial
support, while numbers of dair y cattle have been affected by market conditions for
milk1. There has been a large increase in numbers of broiler chickens, largely due to
the changed consumption patterns of UK consumers.
1 well established
The provision of food from marine fisher ies is lower now than at any time
in the last century. Landings into UK ports were around 1.2 million tonnes in 1948
and declined slightly to just over 1 million tonnes in 1970. The total weight of landings
has declined steadily since that time and, in 2008, landings were only 538,000 tonnes.
Large declines have been recorded in demersal species, and smaller declines in pelagic
species. Pressure from fishing has reduced the size of fish stocks1; the development of
new technology for finding and harvesting fish has enabled fishers to maintain higher
catch rates and exploit new grounds. Production from aquaculture has increased
over the last 20 years, especially in Scotland. In 1988, Scotland produced 18 tonnes of
salmon from aquaculture, but by 2008, this had increased seven-fold to 128 tonnes.
1 well established

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 599
Some game species have shown major declines in numbers, while others have
become more abundant and widespread. There were declines in the bags of red
grouse and partridges between 1940 and 2009, but bags of pheasant increased. Changes
in the management of farmland had a major impact on partridge numbers1. Deer are now
more widespread than during the 1940s, and harvests have not shown any evidence of
decline. After 1970, the numbers of wild caught salmon fell in Scotland to a low of less
than 100,000 fish in 2006. Yet, in 2007, there was suggestion of an upturn when 91,053
salmon were caught by rod and line, which was the third largest catch by that method
since 1952. Catches in England and Wales also declined from 1988, and, in 2006, less
than 40,000 fish were caught by all methods. Capture at sea and estuarine netting have
been largely responsible for declining numbers of spawning salmon2.
1 well established
2 established but incomplete
evidence
Overall provision of timber has increased over the last 40 years, but major
increases in softwood harvests mask declines in the harvest of hardwoods.
The production of softwoods in the UK has increased steadily over the last 40 years.
The total harvest of softwood was 8.6 million cubic metres (m3) in 2008, compared
with less than 400,000 m3 of hardwood. Typically, around 60% of the softwood harvest
is derived from Scotland. The increased harvest of softwood reflects the levels of
deliberate and extensive planting that began on the national forest estate in the early
part of the 20th Century. These were driven by policy needs and, later in the century,
were reinforced by financial aid to landowners. The different trends in softwood and
hardwood reflect the fact that softwoods are derived from plantation forests, while
most hardwoods are derived from managed semi-natural woodlands. The total area of
land used for peat extraction fell from 14,980 ha in 1994 to 10,690 ha in 2009. At a Great
Britain scale, 1.6 million m3 of peat were sold in 1999 and 760,000 m3 in 2008.
The amount of water taken from ecosystems by the public water supply
in the UK declined between 1990 and 2009. In 1990, 20 billion litres/day
were taken by the public water supply in the UK. By 2008, this had declined to
about 17 billion litres/day. The greatest declines occurred in England and Wales,
with hardly any declines occurring in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Total levels
of abstractions in England and Wales stayed more or less constant between 1995
and 2007. In Scotland, abstractions decreased between 2002–2003 and 2007–2008
by 4.5% to 2,387 megalitres/day in 2007–2008. Leakage was approximately 41% in
Scotland in 2007–2008, but only 16% in England and Wales—down from 23% in the
late 1990s. Decreased leakage in England and Wales is related to the privatisation
of water supply and its associated legislative requirementsc. Water demand has
decreased due to reduced demand from heavy industry1.
1 well established
C likely

600 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
15.1 Introduction
Although it may not be as apparent now as in earlier periods
of human history, the whole of the human economy is
driven by the goods and services provided by ecosystems
and natural resources. Minerals are derived from geological
deposits. Gas, coal and oil come from ancient deposits of
vegetative matter, while peat, biomass and wood fuel are
derived from living and less ancient plants. Water for human
consumption and industry is extracted from rivers and
lakes, and timber comes from forests. Food and fibre are
derived from managed agricultural ecosystems and are, to
some extent, still harvested from more natural ecosystems.
The role that an ecosystem plays in providing any
one of these goods is termed a ‘provisioning service’,
and nowhere is the relationship between ecosystem
services and human well-being more apparent than when
considering provisioning services. Moreover, because of
the direct relationship between the provision of food and
fibre and its impact on the environment, nowhere is the
risk of damage to ecosystems greater than when deriving
provisioning ser vices from nature. These impacts have
tended to increase over time as the intensity of extraction
from, and management of, ecosystems has increased.
On some occasions, the introduction of new technologies
has mitigated these impacts, for example, drip irrigation
systems save water and reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases from soils (Sanchez-Martin et al. 2008), while low
ground pressure vehicles reduce soil compaction (Tijink et
al. 2000). However, there have also been occasions when the
introduction of new technologies has had adverse impacts
on ecosystems, such as the excessive use of some pesticides
(Cade et al. 1971; Potts et al. 2010). Unfortunately, it tends
to be difficult to identify these adverse impacts before the
technology is introduced as their use and impact is mediated
by humans. As a result, there is a lag between introducing
a technology, identifying a problem, and then undertaking
action to reduce the problem. Thus the provision of food, fuel
and fibre is a relationship between ecosystems and three
sets of human actors: producers, consumers and regulators;
and the dy namics of these relationships are mediated by
politics, policy, technology and markets.
In this chapter, we are concerned with documenting
the trends in supply of the goods provided by the UK’s
ecosystems from 1945 to 2009, and in understanding how
this provision has interacted with ecosystems and UK NEA
Broad Habitats. The supply of these goods is dependent on
many of the supporting and regulating services discussed
elsewhere in this assessment (Chapter 13; Chapter 14).
In addition, because of the historical and social aspects
of producing food and fibre, there are also close links
between provisioning and cultural services (Chapter 16).
These include experiences with nature, landscapes and
community, and also the sensory and social experiences of
consumption (Laplace 2006; Chen 2009).
This chapter presents data on the provision of the
following goods: food from agriculture; wild caught food (i.e.
fish, honey, game); timber; fibre; peat; ornamental goods;
genetic resources; and water. We are not concerned with
either fossil fuels or resources that are derived from mining
or the provision of renewable energy. While some individuals
may argue these resources are also supplied by ecosystem
processes and should, therefore, be considered here, we
decided that these were basically physical processes that do
not interact sufficiently with extant plant and animal species
to warrant inclusion in this ecosystem assessment (where
ecosystems are defined as being an interaction of living and
non-living entities).
15.1.2 Data Use and Interpretation
Much of the data presented here are derived from surveys
undertaken by government and industry over many years.
The use of such data in modern Britain presents several
challenges. Firstly, there is a need to consider the provision
of goods from all four countries in the UK. Secondly, there
is a need to be aware of the limitations of the data that are
available. While all four countries in the UK currently run
separate administrations for many elements of government,
e.g. agriculture and nature conservation, this has not always
been the case. For this reason, individual, long-term data
sets do not necessarily exist on all issues separately for
all four countries, and there has been a need to use some
form of aggregate data on some occasions. Also, not all four
countries have put equivalent efforts into collecting, analysing
and publishing data on all items of concern, and so, there
are differences in the quality and quantity of data available
for each country. Finally, even where long-term data are
available on the supply of particular goods, there may have
been changes in the way data were collected and/or analysed
over the term of data collection. So while we seek to present
the best available data on trends in the supply of goods, there
are inevitably some deficiencies in the data presented here.
For the purposes of description, the amount of provisioning
goods and services produced by the UK’s ecosystems are
reported at the point of production and not at the point of
processing or final use, i.e. yields of wheat are reported in
tonnes/hectare (t/ha) and not in bags of flour or loaves of
breads produced or purchased. The units used to describe
levels of production vary between products, so for crops it
is t/ha, for livestock it is numbers, while for bottled water it
is litres. The historical trends in each service are presented
first, followed by a discussion of the drivers of change for that
service. The chapter concludes with a discussion of trade-
offs, synergies and options for sustainable management
of productive ecosystems, and a review of knowledge gaps
relevant to the future delivery of provisioning services.
15.2 Food, Fibre and
Energy from Agriculture
This section presents an historical perspective on food
supply before considering trends in key agricultural outputs
separately. Several of the topics discussed here are also

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 601
discussed in other chapters in this assessment. Some
issues of grazing and grassland management are discussed
in Chapters 5, 6 and 7, while Chapter 7 also considers the
interaction of crop production and natural ecosystems.
15.2.1 Historical and Global Perspective
on Food Supply
Several factors interact when considering the supply of food
over time. Firstly, it is necessary to consider the amount of land
that is utilised to produce a particular food item. Secondly,
it is necessary to consider the amount of that food item that
is produced per unit of land, i.e. yield. Thirdly, the quality
of the food item may vary nutritionally over time; therefore,
the actual nutritional value of a food item in 1945 may not
be exactly as it was in 2011 (Davis et al. 2004). Fourthly, the
financial value of food items will vary over time. This is a
function of inflation and real price changes brought about
through variations in supply and demand, and occasionally
through the impacts of policy (Harrison et al. 2010). Finally,
it is important to remember that the production of food in
the UK does not directly relate to the consumption of food
by UK citizens. Some food items are produced in the UK and
exported (such as Welsh lamb and Scotch whisky), while
other foodstuffs consumed in the UK are produced overseas
such as tropical fruits (Edwards-Jones et al. 2009).
The balance between domestic supply and demand
has varied over time (Figure 15.1). Before the industrial
revolution, the UK was largely self-sufficient in food;
however, as the population grew during the 19th Century,
a greater proportion of the UK’s food was imported, largely
from countries within the British Empire, and this situation
continued into the early part of the 20th Century (Defra 2006).
After the Second World War (WWII), our self-sufficiency
steadily increased once again, reaching its current level
of about 70 % in temperate foods (and 60% of all foods).
When viewed from an historical context, the UK is currently
feeding more people from home-grown food than at any
other time in history. Thus the food provisioning service of
UK ecosystems is currently greater than at any other time
in recorded history. However, the provision of this food
largely depends on natural resources derived from outside
the UK, such as metals, phosphates and fossil fuels, which
are available to the UK through the global trade network
(Plassmann & Edwards-Jones 2009). The contribution of
these resources to the production of food in the UK is not
considered quantitatively here, but their importance must
not be overlooked.
15.2.2 Crops
The increased provision of food in the UK has occurred
through three main processes: land use change; technological
improvements; and system changes. For example, in England
in 1940, there were just over 3 million ha of land allocated to
the growing of crops, of which, 673,984 ha were allocated to
wheat and 732,066 to oats (Table 15.1). By 2009, the total
amount of cropped land had increased to 4.2 million ha,
of which, 1.7 million ha was under wheat and 102,000 ha
Figure 15.1 Indicative UK self-sufficiency rates during different
historic periods. Source: data on self-suciency from Defra (2006).
Country Crop type
Year
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 2009
England
Cereals 1,980,729 2,554,505 2,488,419 3,096,749 3,290,458 3,075,725 2,811,256 2,393,073 2,729,606 2,595,800
Other crops 1,089,226 1,396,820 1,019,743 996,285 921,020 1,215,362 1,175,735 1,316,323 1,300,688 1,626,000
Wales
Cereals 157,428 182,115 88,225 82,559 74,345 56,039 45,252 36,522 46,000 48,000
Other crops 40,470 79,321 54,635 33,590 28,467 18,369 21,901 30,520 29,000 35,000
Scotland
Cereals 453,868 480,663 418,590 456,899 508,176 481,918 450,047 403,898 447,840 448,783
Other crops 217,051 231,630 204,014 134,207 109,158 132,978 112,719 119,257 115,661
Northern
Ireland
Cereals 45,920 40,726 34,206 40,399 39,240
Other crops 17,471 13,360 16,950 17,950 18,476
Table 15.1 Changes in area of crops in the UK between 1940 and the most recent June census results available in 2010.
Note: although the June agricultural census occurs annually, not all countries make the results available at the same time. Source:
June census records from Defra, Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD), Scottish Government and Welsh Assembly Government;
data available at www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/landuselivestock/junesurvey/index.htm.
0
20
40
90
100
Self-su fficienc y (%)
Pre-1750 1750
–1830
1914 1930s 1950s 1980s 2000s
30
10
50
70
60
80
Population (millions)
10
60
70
0
20
40
30
50
1870s
UK population
UK population supported by domes tic production
Extent of self-sufficienc y

602 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
was under oats. One reason for the reduction in the amount
of oats being grown in 2009, compared to 1940, relates to
the transition from horses to tractors as the main source
of agricultural power. Up until the widespread adoption of
tractors in the late 1940s and 1950s, horses were used both
as working animals on the farm and as transport for many
rural families. This required that a considerable area of land
be given to the production of oats and other crops suitable
for their feed. As numbers of horses declined, so the land
previously used to grow oats could be switched to other
crops such as wheat.
The yields of cereals increased steadily from the 1940s
onwards. Average UK wheat yields in 1940 were about 2.5 t/
ha, while in 2008 they were approaching 8 t/ha (Figure
15.2). All other major crops also had higher yields in 2008
than in 1940, but few had as great a proportional rise as
those observed for wheat (Defra 2010a).
While rises in crop yields occurred across the UK, not all
regions showed similar increases in the amount of cropped
area during this period (Table 15.1). In Wales, the area of
cereals and other crops dropped significantly from 198,000 ha
in 1940 to 83,000 in 2009, while similar, but less severe,
declines were obser ved in Scotland from around 671,000 ha
in 1940 to 564,000 ha in 2009. These land use changes
probably reflected the switch from horse to tractor power (as
noted in previous paragraph), and also the increasing ease
with which citizens and farmers in outlying areas of these
countries could access sources of both bought-in food and
animal feed.
Interestingly, in England, there was a greater area of
vegetables grown in open fields in 2009 than there was in
1940 (Defra 2009a). As vegetable yields will have increased
over the last 60 years, this means that there was a far greater
vegetable crop available for home consumption in 2009 than
in previous years. The area of orchards was more or less
stable between 1940 and 2000; however, the area of soft fruit
in England fell dramatically from around 102,000 ha in 1940
to just under 26,000 ha in 2000. The area of hops and small
fruit (redcurrants, blackcurrants and gooseberries) showed
a similar decline, and these trends were echoed in Wales and
Scotland, albeit from a lower baseline. Despite this, there
has been a large growth in the area of fruit grown under
some form of protection (i.e. glass or polytunnels) in recent
years: between 1998 and 2008, the value of production for
soft fruit increased from just over £100 million to more than
£300 million (Spedding 2010).
While the area given over to some traditional crops, such
as oats, turnips, mangolds and vetches, declined between
1940 and 2009, several crops are now widely grown that were
not grown at all in 1940s and 1950s. Most notable amongst
these are maize (used as cattle feed), which was first grown
in the late 1960s, and oilseed rape, which was first grown
in significant quantities in the early 1970s (Marks 1989).
By 2009, these crops were substantial components of the
landscape, with 550,000 ha of oil seed rape and 148,000 ha
of forage maize being grown in England, and 33,740 ha of
oil seed rape being grown in Scotland. (Note: Substantial
amounts of forage maize are also grown in Scotland, Wales
and Northern Ireland, but the exact figures are not readily
available). A final point worthy of note is that the amount of
bare fallow declined markedly in the latter half of the 20th
Century. In 1940, over 120,000 ha of land were recorded in
England as being in bare fallow (i.e. not being used for any
productive purpose), although it was probably part of an
active crop rotation. This amount of land constituted 2.3% of
the total crop area, whereas, by 2000, this amount had fallen
to 25,000 ha, just 0.36% of England’s crop land.
15.2.3 Livestock
Between 1940 and 2009, the number of livestock kept in the
UK varied substantially and in a non-linear manner. In 1940,
there were relatively few individuals of all main livestock types
Figure 15.2 Average yields of cereals in the UK from 1945 to 2008 (t/ha). Source: data from Defra (2010a). © Crown
Copyright, 2010.
0
2
4
9
Yield (tonnes/he ctare)
1940 1945 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975
3
1
5
7
6
8
1950
Year of yie ld
1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
1985
Wheat
Barley
Oats
Rye
Mixed corn
Triticale
Oilseed rape

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 603
(cattle, sheep and pigs), probably due to the active engagement
of the UK in WWII. Numbers of these livestock grew in all four
countries of the UK until the late 1980s and early 1990s, but
have declined since then (Table 15.2). The exact patterns and
reasons for these declines vary with species, and are discussed
in subsequent sections.
During the latter half of the 20th Century, developments in
livestock and cropping systems resulted in major changes to
the UK’s grassland habitats. Of particular note is the reduction
in the overall level of grasslands in the UK, and the apparent
shift in grassland between rotational grassland (i.e. lasts less
than five years) and cropland, and also some large declines in
rough grazing that occurred in England, Scotland and Wales.
For example, in Wales there were 730,079 ha of rough grazing in
1940, but only 393,000 ha in 2009 (Table 15.3). The decline in
Scotland was less dramatic, shifting from 4.2 million ha in 1940
to 4 million ha in 2008. It would seem most likely that some of
this grazing land was afforested, while other areas would have
been ‘improved’ though draining, fertilisation and re-seeding,
and would then be classified as ‘permanent grassland’.
Associated with the recent development of livestock
systems is the shift from conserving winter forage as hay,
towards conserving it as silage. This trend began in the
1970s; it quickly became the accepted way of conserving
Table 15.2 Changes in numbers of livestock in the UK between 1940 and most recent results available in 2010. Note:
although the June agricultural census occurs annually, not all countries make the results available at the same time. Source: June
census records from Defra, Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Scottish Government and Welsh Assembly Government; data available at
www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/landuselivestock/junesurvey/index.htm.
Country Livestock type
Year
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 2009
England
Total cattle & calves 6,157,447 7,002,668 7,601,303 7,677,784 8,055,620 7,097,436 6,155,762 5,597,559 5,486,477 5,484,000
Total sheep & lambs 13,169,707 8,506,327 13,031,632 11,627,455 14,554,451 20,775,878 19,144,345 15,436,577 15,535,215 14,984,000
Total pigs 3,155,419 2,096,287 4,139,386 6,166,926 6,476,211 6,308,324 5,442,468 3943444 3,854,388 3,872,000
Wales
Total cattle & calves 843,553 1,011,218 1,167,975 1,349,919 1,408,400 1,362,900 1,273,000 1,164,427 1,143,000 1,130,000
Total sheep & lambs 4,512,823 3,869,962 5,333,340 599,2318 801,3800 10,935,300 11,192,200 8,987,035 8,518,000 8,238,000
Total pigs 23,812 21,000 22,000
Scotland
Total cattle & calves 1,360,123 1,616,390 2,002,824 2,233,720 2,383,185 2,106,237 2,029,330 1,898,538 1,854,749 1,812,416
Total sheep & lambs 7,782,532 7,337,269 8,407,026 7,493,866 7,719,565 9,933,721 9,186,968 7,491,287 7,104,688 6,919,860
Total pigs 271,489 250,830 402,630 611,282 468,043 451,757 558,100 456,669 435,903 396,057
Northern
Ireland
Total cattle & calves 1,625,906 1,676,479 1,643,458 1,622,541 1,599,025
Total sheep & lambs 2,824,527 2,740,586 2,023,978 1,973,593 1,896,722
Total pigs 687,147 413,480 410,450 402,414 433,539
Table 15.3 Changes in the area of grasslands in the UK between 1940 and the recent results available in 2010. Note:
although the June agricultural census occurs annually, not all countries make the results available at the same time. Source: June
census records from Defra, Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Scottish Government and Welsh Assembly Government; data available
at www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/landuselivestock /junesurvey/index.htm.
Country
Grassland
type
Year
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 2009
England
Rotational 628,580 642,843 635,956 637,400
Permanent 5,075,959 3,647,762 3,657,841 3,261,469 3,154,927 3,106,890 2,863,552 3,372,771 3,428,949 3,439,100
Rough grazing 624,611 555,719 578,369 1,018,200
Wales
Rotational 93,486 174,426 208,016 182,520 164,400 148,600 133,253 95,034 87,000 88,000
Permanent 764,883 599,765 704,987 738,982 843,275 903,712 933,008 1,001,081 1,017,000 1,027,000
Rough grazing 730,079 743,839 684,752 628,904 538,398 516,230 441,753 389,808 380,000 393,000
Scotland
Rotational 566,350 583,434 761,817 676,105 490,230 424,862 321,234 316026 300,450
Permanent 592,145 481,170 364,067 412,154 576,546 704,889 865,638 919123 917,720
Rough grazing 4,236,530 4,421,054 5,068,698 4,547,006 4,384,299 4,286,463 3,982,589 4,001,634 4,027,520
Northern
Ireland
Rotational 195,302 141,554 122,108 117,236 120,787
Permanent 600,650 687,883 671,940 672,412 669,894
Rough grazing 186,818 156,543 146,517 147,050 141,926

604 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
forage, and was almost universal by the 1980s (Marks 1989).
The main agricultural benefit of silage is that it provides
a high quality feed which is less weather dependent than
hay. The environmental impacts of this switch relate to the
earlier and repeated cutting of silage fields, when compared
to hay, which has had a significant impact on some farmland
species (Green 1996; Vickery et al. 2001).
15.2.3.1 Dairy
All commercial dairy enterprises currently occur on
improved grasslands. Production is concentrated in the
wetter west of the UK, where conditions for grass growth
are good. However, this has not always been the case—
historically, nearly every farm in the UK would have kept
some dairy cattle in order to supply their own needs and
those of the local market.
Numbers of dairy cattle in England increased from
2.8 million in 1940 to a peak of 3.4 million in 1980, and then
fell to 1.8 million in 2009 (Defra 2009a). Simultaneous to this
shift in numbers has been a massive increase in the milk yield
of the average cow. In the pre-industrial times of the 17th
Century, one cow may have produced 900 litre per year (l/yr).
Yields increased substantially over the following 200 years,
and, in 1960, average yields were 3,500 l/cow/yr. Yields have
continued to increase over recent years: in 1995, average
yields were 5,500 l/cow/yr; while in 2009, the average was
7,000 l/cow/yr (although yields of 10,000 l/cow/yr were
not uncommon) (Capper et al. 2009). The reasons for these
increases are related to better genetics, nutrition (Ferris et
al. 2001; Sutton et al. 1996) and management. Management
issues that affect dairy cow performance include health
management, the status of buildings, herdsmanship,
pasture management and the treatment of dry cows. Many
components of milk yield are heritable (Ojango & Pollott 2002;
Swali & Wathes 2006), but yields also vary between breeds.
Because of this, during the 30 years following WWII, most
farmers switched from low input/low output breeds, such
as Dairy Shorthorn (and their crosses), to high input/high
output cows like the Holstein. This change occurred as farms
became more specialised in producing one product, and,
as a result, herds got larger and greater yields were needed
to maintain profit. In addition to the genetic improvements
in the UK herd, scientific understanding of nutrition and
reproduction in the dairy cow has helped enhance the
management of cattle, and also their pastures. Both of these
factors have helped to increase yields. Furthermore, the
composition of cattle feed has changed over time from one
based on cereals and wastes from the food chain, to a more
specialised feed based on imported products such as soya.
In 1984, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the
European Union (EU) effectively put a cap on the production
of milk by introducing national level quotas of milk across
the community (Harris & Swinbank 1997). These quotas
were passed down to individual farmers and provided a
financial incentive not to increase milk production further.
As a result, farmers tended to maintain levels of overall
yield, while cutting costs. The increasing milk yields per
cow enabled them to achieve this, and dairy cow numbers
began to fall during the mid-1980s. However, it was the first
few years of the 21st Century that saw major reductions in
the national dairy herd due to financial reasons. At this time,
most milk was purchased by supermarkets, but they imposed
low buying-prices on farmers which were often below the
price of production. As a result of several years of low prices,
many farmers withdrew from milk production, which had a
major impact on the size of the national herd (DairyCo 2009).
In 2009, the national herd was lower than it was in 1940, but
it produced much more milk than at that time.
15.2.3.2 Beef
Beef production is not the sole enterprise on many farms
in the UK; in fact, beef is often undertaken in combination
with dairy, arable and/or sheep production. For this reason,
there are no typical ‘beef systems’ in the UK, instead they
tend to vary with the location and management of individual
farms. However, most systems can be classified as one of
three main types: suckler, outdoor reared, and finished and
indoor finished.
Suckler systems are composed of breeding cattle and
their calves. The calves stay with their mother until they
are 6–9 months old, at which point they are either kept for
finishing prior to sale, or sold onto other farms for finishing.
Prior to finishing, suckler beef cattle tend to be largely grass-
fed, and, because suckler cattle are often from traditional
breeds, they tend to occur on poor land in the hills and
uplands, and on moorlands (i.e. in the Less Favoured Areas
(LFAs)). Animals in these systems will spend much of their
time outdoors, although they may be kept indoors in winter
and fed grains and other feed while being finished.
In outdoor rearing and finishing systems the animals are
reared for slaughter and spend some time grazing. During
winter or at times of intensive finishing, however, they will be
kept in cattle houses and fed grains and silage. This type of
system varies greatly and may be found in the uplands where
farmers who are predominantly sheep farmers may keep
10–30 beef cattle as well. These cattle will graze the same
pastures as the sheep in the summer, and will be housed
in winter. Alternatively, they may be kept alongside dairy
enterprises where the farmer has chosen to cross the dairy
cows with a beef bull in order to produce animals for the beef
system. In this system, the beef cattle will graze the same
improved pastures as the dairy cattle. Finally, some systems
keep beef animals housed in sheds or pens for their entire
lives, feeding them silage and feed until they reach slaughter
weight. This type of system is not common in the UK.
Because of the differences in the structure and location
of these different systems, they have been influenced in
different ways by changes in policy and prices. Between 1940
and the 1970s, the number of beef animals in the UK showed
a slight increase. Over that period, as discussed previously,
dairy farming became more specialised and tended to select
specialist dairy breeds, as opposed to the dual purpose
breeds that would have been commoner in earlier times. This
probably had little impact on the suckler beef herd, which
would always have used hardy stock, but it did mean that it
was no longer possible to produce profitable beef from dairy
cattle. For this reason, there was a growth in the use of more
specialist beef breeds such as Charolais and Belgian Blue.
The UK beef breeding herd increased substantially during
the last 20 years of the 20th Century. The number of beef

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 605
cows was 1,478,000 in 1980, and grew to a peak of 1,924,000
in 1999. Increases in the English beef herd were particularly
noticeable, with numbers increasing by 45% between 1981
and 1995. However, the overall number of animals marketed
for beef between 1980 and 2005 fell by nearly 50%, although
the average dressed carcass weight for steers increased
from 267 kg in 1980 to 316 kg in 2003 (Mead 2003).
The decline in the number of animals marketed for beef
seen during this period was a result of the decline in the dairy
herd, which had, until that time, provided over 40% of beef.
As with the beef herd, the dairy herd was affected by policies
relating to the control of Bovine Spongiform Encephalitis
(BSE) and the impact of Foot and Mouth Disease in 2001
(Chapter 14). Following the BSE outbreak, export markets
for UK beef were closed. As a result, both demand and prices
fell and a high proportion of dairy cross calves, which had
previously gone for beef production, were disposed of on-
farm. In addition, a related policy, the Over Thirty-Month
Scheme (OTMS), required that no cattle over 30 months
entered the human food chain, removing many cattle that
may have otherwise gone into beef production.
Subsequently, the continued decline in dairy cow
numbers has reduced the production of calves that can enter
the beef herd. In addition, recent changes in the CAP have
reduced the profitability of many suckler beef herds, causing
a decline in their numbers. However, in some areas, the
extent of these shifts has been counteracted by the support
available under agri-environment schemes for grazing by
traditional breeds on mountains, moorlands and some
coastal regions (Defra 2010b).
15.2.3.3 Sheep
In 1940, there were about 26 million sheep and lambs
recorded in the UK (approximately 13 million in England,
4–5 million in Wales, 8 million in Scotland and an unrecorded
number in Northern Ireland). This number declined a
little during the 1950s, but had again reached 26 million
by 1970. Numbers increased rapidly during the following
20 years, reaching 46 million by 1990 (21 million in England,
11 million in Wales, 10 million in Scotland and 3 million in
Northern Ireland) (Table 15.2). Until 2001, the UK’s sheep
population stayed at around 40 million, but numbers have
been declining steadily ever since, falling to about 32 million
in 2009 (Figure 15.3).
The financial subsidies provided by the CAP was one of
the main drivers that caused the increase in sheep numbers
seen after 1970 (Acs et al. 2010; Brouwer & van Berkum
1996). For much of the 20 years after the UK joined the EU in
1973, these subsidies were related to the number of sheep a
farmer kept, and the payments were of a sufficient amount
to provide a significant incentive for farmers to increase the
size of their flocks. The subsequent rise in sheep numbers
occurred over much of the UK, but the greatest increases
were seen in the upland areas of Wales, northern England,
the Peak District, Exmoor, Dartmoor and some areas of the
Scottish borders (Fuller & Gough 1999). The increase in sheep
numbers in the Enclosed Farmlands of lowland England was
of a lesser magnitude than in these upland areas.
There is a large variation in the size of individuals of
different sheep breeds, with the lowland breeds, such as
Border Leicester (ewe weight of 100 kg) and Wensleydale
(113 kg), tending to be larger than upland breeds like Welsh
Mountain (45–48 kg) and Blackface (50 kg). There is also
some suggestion that the size of sheep has varied over time,
being larger in the early part of the 20th Century than at
its end. Because of these differences in size, both between
breeds and over time, it is not possible to make simple
generalisations about the long-term impact of sheep on
the environment. However, it is well established that, in
the uplands, increased levels of sheep-grazing can affect
the composition of vegetation (Welch & Scott 1995; Oom et
al. 2008), and, conversely, a reduction in grazing pressure
also brings ecological change in upland habitats (Hope et al.
1996; Smith et al. 2003; Chapters 5–7).
15.2.3.4 Pigs and poultry
During the 1940s, many farmers and other householders
kept pigs and poultry for subsistence use. Over the following
decades these sectors became more specialised and
larger units developed where greater numbers of pigs or
poultry were kept indoors and fed specialised diets. These
developments saw the number of pigs in the UK rise from
just under 2 million in 1945 to around 7 million between
by 1980. By 2009, this number had fallen to 4.7 million, the
majority of which were reared in England (3.87 million in
2009) largely due to the proximity of ready sources of feed
(Table 15.2). There are also some large pig businesses
in Scotland, principally in the eastern areas, but after
early increases in the 1960s and 1970s, numbers of pigs
declined slightly from 468,000 in 1980 to 396,000 in 2009.
The reasons for the recent declines in pig numbers in the
UK have been related to a combination of policy and market
conditions that have put the sector through periods of very
low profitability. During these periods, some producers have
reduced stock, while others have gone out of business. The
principal policy drivers for this decline were welfare reforms
for housed animals, which have been applied in the UK, but
not necessarily applied in other pig-exporting countries
(CIWF 2010); this has potentially placed UK producers at a
competitive disadvantage (Bornet et al. 2003). In addition,
0
20
30
40
50
60
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 20 00 2010 2020
Year
Millions of she ep or tonnes of wool
10
Number of sheep
Weight of wool
Figure 15.3 Numbers of sheep in the UK between
1945 and 2008, and the total weight of wool
harvested in each year. Source: data from British Wool
Marketing Board (2010).

606 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
fluctuations in the exchange rate and the price of animal
feed and energy can have large impacts on the profitability
of pigs and poultry (de Lange 1999), and it is well established
that there are economies of scale to be gained in the pig
sector. As a result, recent increases in the prices of inputs
have adversely affected smaller producers in particular.
The poultry industry has followed a very similar pattern
to that of the pig industry, moving from a population of 60
million birds in 1945 to 166 million in 2008 (Defra 2009a).
In 2008, about 30 million birds were kept for laying, which
produced about 868 million eggs in that year. The majority of
the remainder are chickens kept for meat, but there are also
about 12 million head of other poultry ty pes in the UK such
as geese, ducks and turkeys.
The poultry sector is comprised of some very large
enterprises which specialise in raising either broilers
(poultry for meat) or eggs, and some smaller ones which
tend to offer the highest welfare standards and sell their
produce for a premium. Although there has typically been
a preponderance of poultry enterprises in the east of the
England and Scotland, a significant number of poultry are
also bred in both Wales and Northern Ireland.
Generally, large-scale pig and poultry units have little
interaction with the natural environment, apart from the
production of odours and waste disposal (Nicholson et al.
2002). The disposal of wastes from both pigs and poultry can
be problematic, but uses for these wastes are currently being
researched and include using chicken manure in composts
(White 2000) and using pig and chicken manure in aerobic
and anaerobic energy systems (Boersma et al. 1981; Tait et al.
2009). However, in recent years, there has been an increase
in the number of pigs that are kept outside for at least some
of their lives. These enterprises tend to do best on well-
drained soils, such as sand and chalk, and, in cases where
pigs are kept on a field for a year or two, can be viewed as
part of the arable rotation. The environmental impact of
such pig units is not well studied, but they may have negative
interactions with soil and water quality (Worthington et al.
1992; Haygarth et al. 2009).
15.2.4 Fibre from Agriculture
In the UK, fibre for textiles and ropes has traditionally been
derived from wool, flax and hemp. Historically, hemp was used
to make ropes and flax was used to make linen, but modern
uses focus more on their potential as components of building
materials and plastics (Dimmock et al. 2005; Yates 2006).
Nearly 11,000 ha of flax were grown in England in 1940, but, by
the early 21st Century, plantings of this crop had dropped to
almost nothing. In 2000, more than 11,000ha of flax were once
again reported growing (Defra 2009a). However, this revival
was short-lived as no flax was reported to be grown in 2009.
Hemp for industrial use has been grown in England and
Wales since the mid-1990s (Dimmock et al. 2005). Up until
that time, the growing of hemp had been banned in the UK
under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Varieties of hemp with
low levels of THC (Tetrahydrocannabinol: the psychoactive
drug in Cannabis) were developed in Europe, and, in 1993,
legal agreement was given to grow low-THC hemp in the
UK. Currently, UK hemp is processed and used in a range of
agricultural and industrial products.
The surge in area of flax and hemp grown in the late
1990s and early 2000s reflected both the development of
processing facilities in the UK and active financial support
for these crops from the CAP. This level of support was
subsequently removed from these crops, resulting in a
reduction in growing area in the UK.
Sheep’s wool can be used for making clothes, carpets,
felt, tweeds, furniture and insulation. In 2009, the UK was the
seventh largest producer of wool in the world, responsible for
about 2% of global production and exporting considerable
amounts of wool. The amount of wool harvested in the UK
is closely related to the number of sheep in the country.
For this reason, the amount of wool harvested in 1950
was 26 million kg (from about 20 million sheep), while in
1998 it was 49 million kg from 44 million sheep (British
Wool Marketing Board website; www.britishwool.org.uk).
However, the quality of the wool varies between breeds.
Some breeds, such as the Blue Faced Leicester, have fine
wool, while others, such as some of the more hardy breeds
typical of mountainous areas, produce only a small amount
of poor quality wool. The financial returns from wool are
relatively low, and few UK farmers would consider sheep
wool as a major product. However, some of the specialist
farmers of fine wool from other species, such as goats and
Angora rabbits, may consider their fleeces as major products.
15.2.5 Biomass and Bioenergy
At the turn of the 20th Century, almost no biomass crops
were grown commercially in the UK. Yet, in 2005, 436 ha
of short-rotation coppice willow were recorded in the UK,
and, by 2007, this had increased five-fold (Table 15.4).
Similar increases were noted in Miscanthus and reed canary
grass over the same time-scale, both of which are grown
for biomass. However, the most commonly grown crop for
bioenergy is oilseed rape, with the area planted in the UK
increasing from 10,863 ha in 2004 to 240,032 ha in 2007
(Table 15.3).
Plantings for biomass and bioenergy have largely been
driven by a combination of market opportunity and policy.
Relevant policies are not necessarily agricultural, but
contain incentives for energy generators to include a certain
proportion of renewable materials in their feed stocks, and
for some large establishments to have biomass boilers. This
demand has led energy providers to offer contracts to farmers
to supply biomass. As transport costs can be substantial
for biomass crops, such schemes tend to stimulate farmers
in the immediate locality of the power plant, rather than
benefiting all farmers across the nation.
15.2.6 Drivers of Change in Agriculture
Agricultural production has typically been driven by three
main factors: market price, the policy environment and
technological change. For much of the period between
1945 and 1960, the predominant policy was to increase
food output in order to provide adequate supplies to the
UK’s population during the post-war years. At the same
time, new technologies were becoming available, such as
chemical pesticides, mechanisation and new crop varieties,
enabling farmers to realise increased yields. This trend
continued through the 1960s, and was further energised in

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 607
the 1970s when the UK joined the EU and farmers became
formally involved in the CAP, which offered greater levels of
direct subsidy than had previously been available. The twin
drivers of direct subsidies and further enhanced technology
drove up yields in the 1970s and also encouraged clearance
of marginal lands for agricultural production. The drive for
production started coming to an end in the 1980s, and the
introduction of the first agri-environment scheme in 1987
(Environmentally Sensitive Areas) was a major landmark
in the history of agriculture (Bunce et al. 1998; Hodge &
McNally 1998). Since that date, the amount of land entered
into some form of agri-environment scheme has increased
steadily in all four countries of the UK: by 2008, more
than 4 million ha of land were under an agri-environment
agreement (Table 15.5). It is unclear what factors have
driven this uptake of agri-environment schemes: it may
be related to an enhanced awareness of environmental
issues amongst farmers; yet other hypotheses are more
related to the financial aspects of these agreements which
help farmers diversify their income streams and may offer
an acceptable financial return on land to some farmers.
This latter hypothesis will be tested if market returns for
agricultural produce increase at a faster rate than financial
returns from agri-environment schemes.
The expansion of agri-environment schemes throughout
the 1990s was consistent with the overall policy environment
which sought to make agricultural activities more
‘environmentally friendly’. The policy environment changed
in 2003 when the CAP was reformed in order to break the
link between levels of production and levels of financial
support. As a result, agricultural support in the first decade
of the 21st Centur y is paid on an area basis, in accordance to
complex national-level formulae. The impacts of this reform
are perhaps easiest to see in the sheep sector: numbers
Table 15.4 Area (ha) of energy crop production on non-set-aside land between 2001 and 2007, identified through the
Energy Aid Payment Scheme (UK) and the Energy Crop Scheme (England). Source: data from National Non-Food Crops Centre (2009).
Scheme Crop 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Energy Aid Payment Scheme
(UK)
Oilseed rape 10,862 39,865 75,155 240,032
Short rotation coppice 0 436 1,317 2,085
Miscanthus 0 0 1,959 2,073
Linseed 0 0 56 0
Reed canary grass 0 0 2 0
Barley 0 0 0 2
High oleic acid rapeseed 0 0 0 261
Energy Crop Scheme
(England)
Miscanthus (new plantings) 0 52 0 302 658 2,345 2,413
Short rotation coppice (new plantings) 233 65 94 106 290 392 500
Table 15.5 Area of land (millions of hectares) under agri-environment schemes in the UK from 1992 to 2008. Agri-
environment schemes are classed as either ‘higher level’ or ‘entry level’ schemes. Note: the first agri-environment scheme, the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme, was announced in 1987. Source: data from JNCC (2010).
Scheme type Country
Year
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Higher level schemes *

England 0.18 0.42 0.53 0.63 0.81 1.01 1.22 1.18 1.236
Wales 0.01 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.27 0.29 0.29 0.43 0.394
Scotland 0.12 0.15 0.37 0.54 0.84 0.98 1.07 1.35 1.070
Northern Ireland 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.24 0.46 0.437
Total 0.31 0.62 1.10 1.41 2.08 2.48 2.82 3.42 3.137
Entry level schemes †
England .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.03 3.92 5.024
Wales .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.22 0.293
Scotland .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Northern Ireland .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 4.14 5.317
* The following agri-environment schemes by country have been dened as higher level schemes and included here are: England: Environmentally
Sensitive Areas (ESA), Countr yside Stewardship, and new Higher Level Stewardship (HLS); Scotland: ESA, countryside premium, rural stewardship
and land management contracts; Wales: ESA, Tir Cymen, and Tir Gofal; Northern Ireland: ESA, countryside management. Higher level schemes have
stricter criteria for qualication than other agri-environment schemes. In England, the new HLS was introduced in 2005 and will gradually replace
ESA and Countryside Stewardship schemes which are being phased out. Criteria for qualifying for the old and new schemes are dierent, and
membership of the old schemes does not mean land will automatically qualify for the new scheme.
† The following agri- environment schemes by country have been dened as entry level schemes and included here are: England: Entr y Level
Stewardship (ELS) and Organic ELS; Wales: Tir Cynnal.

608 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
declined between 2000 and 2009 despite the existence of
relatively good market prices for lamb (Table 15.2).
Outbreaks of livestock disease and zoonoses, such as
Salmonella, BSE, Newcastle Disease, Bovine Tuberculosis
(bTB) and Foot and Mouth, have also had impacts on the
livestock sector throughout the last 60 years. While outbreaks
of Foot and Mouth Disease were relatively common during
the first 60 years of the 20th Century (Woods 2004), perhaps
the most important outbreaks occurred in 1966 and 2001.
The former was a large outbreak that, in many ways,
spurred some farmers in the dairy sector to modernise
their systems and enhance the genetic potential of their
stock. The second outbreak was important for at least two
reasons: firstly, it raised the level of public debate about the
social acceptability of different disease control mechanisms,
specifically culling versus vaccination; and secondly, it
showed that the economic benefits of the countryside were
more dependent on tourism and recreation than previously
thought (Donaldson et al. 2002; Phillipson et al. 2004).
It has been well established that these disease outbreaks,
or ‘food scares’ as the media dubbed them, had relatively
large impacts on agriculture and the food processing
industry, principally through the introduction of policies
aimed at reducing risk to humans. However, the social
impact of these disease outbreaks has also been significant
(Millstone 2009; Jackson 2010), and, along with concern over
new technologies, such as Genetic Modification, has served
to fuel a growing interest in various forms of alternative
agriculture such as organics (Burton et al. 2001; Dreezen et
al. 2005; Saher et al. 2006) and ‘local food’ (Edwards-Jones
2010). Between 1997 and 2002, the area of land in the UK
that was certified organic increased massively. The amount
of land in conversion or fully certified was 741,200 ha in 2002
and 743,500 ha in 2008, which suggests some sort of plateau
may have been reached (Table 15.6). In the future, it will
be interesting to see how the increasing concern about food
security will interact with social and political pressures to
support ‘environmentally friendly farming’ in all its forms. To
some extent, trends in both the adoption of agri-environment
schemes and organics are suggesting equilibrium has been
reached; if food prices increase in the future, it may be a
challenge to avoid declines in the areas of land under these
forms of management (Tranter et al. 2007).
In summar y, the main drivers of change in the UK’s
agricultural sector over the last 60 years have been policy
and technology. Since the reform of the CAP in 2003, market
conditions have had an increasing influence on levels of
production, and, in some sectors, farmers respond quickly
to price signals (e.g. wheat in 2007/08). However, when
considered over a longer time span, market conditions have
not had a major impact on levels of overall outputs, although
they have impacted some sectors more than others such as
horticulture, pigs and dairy. During the period 1990 to 2010,
the consolidation of buying power into fewer supermarkets
has impacted the structure and performance of supply chains
(Cotterill 2006; Smith 2006). While some producers may
complain about the absence of contracts and poor prices,
many of the innovations introduced by the supermarkets
have served to reduce the direct environmental impact of
agriculture (Dreschler et al. 2009; Asfaw et al. 2010; Cooper
& Wrath 2010). There is almost no evidence to suggest
that declines in environmental quality have had a direct
and negative impact on levels of agricultural production.
This does not mean that agriculture does not impact on
the environment, but rather that any impacts it does cause
have not had direct and lasting effects on overall levels of
production to date.
15.3 Food from Marine
Ecosystems
This section begins with a brief discussion about the
problems of assigning fisheries catch data to a fixed territory
Table 15.6 Changes in fully organic and in-conversion organic land areas (ha) between 2002 and 2008. Source:
Organic Certier Bodies collated by Defra Statistics; Defra (2009a). © Crown Copyright, 2010.
Country Status
Year
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
England In conversion 67,800 36,800 28,800 53,200 66,500 89,000 91,100
Fully organic 184,000 220,200 229,600 238,400 229,900 258,700 284,000
Wales In conversion 13,700 8,000 8,600 12,800 15,400 30,900 49,500
Fully organic 41,400 50,200 55,600 58,000 63,500 65,100 75,100
Scotland In conversion 121,300 20,400 13,700 16,700 35,200 34,800 6,200
Fully organic 307,300 351,900 331,600 231,200 200,100 193,100 225,100
Northern Ireland In conversion 1,500 800 1,600 3,200 4,000 3,200 2,300
Fully organic 4,100 6,600 5,000 6,300 5,100 7,300 10,100
Total UK In conversion 204,300 66,000 52,700 86,000 121,100 157,900 141,900
Fully organic 536,900 629,000 621,800 533,900 498,600 524,300 594,400
Total Organic Land UK 741,200 695,000 674,500 619,900 619,800 682,200 743,500

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 609
such as the UK. It then proceeds to consider trends in
landings from 1940 to 2009. These topics overlap a little
with Chapter 12, which provides a detailed analysis of the
relationship between fisheries and marine ecosystems.
15.3.1 Data Constraints
There are some difficulties in examining the statistics of
marine fisheries in the context of the UK NEA. These arise
because fishing vessels that are registered in the UK are not
obliged to land all of their catch in the UK, and, similarly,
vessels registered in other countries can land some of their
catch in the UK should they choose to do so. Generally, vessels
choose a landing venue according to the relative market
conditions in different ports. Fortunately, national fisheries
statistics do seek to represent both of these situations, as
discussed below. However, it can be difficult to decide how
to allocate fish caught in the open ocean to specific nations.
Since 1913, records of catches in Northern Europe have been
attributed to statistical areas known as ICES (International
Council for the Exploration of the Sea) rectangles (0.5°
Latitude by 1° Longitude) (Engelhard 2005). Yet these
statistical rectangles transcend national boundaries at sea
which can complicate the attribution of catches to national
waters. As a result, it is difficult to attribute catches to
ecosystems that lie within the boundaries of the UK.
It should also be noted that we do not have complete
historical records from the inshore fleet that fishes within 12
nautical miles from the coast. At present, vessels less than
15m long are not legally obliged to report their catches either
nationally or to the European Commission, and most inshore
vessels are below this length. Some data on inshore catches
are now available from Sea Fisheries committees and from
voluntary logbook schemes in certain sub-samples of the
inshore fleet, but these are not included in the historical
records discussed below.
Finally, it is not possible to relate the contemporary
landings of fish by UK boats to the consumption of fish by
UK citizens; for example, more than 90% of cod consumed
in the UK is now imported from areas such as Iceland
and Greenland. The lack of a direct relationship between
domestic consumption and catches by the UK fishing fleet
reflects the changing status of that fleet over time. Prior to
1983, the UK was a net exporter of fish, but since then the
UK has become a net importer. To some extent, the switch
from being a net exporter to a net importer is related to the
removal of the UK’s ‘distant water fleet’ from water around
Norway and Iceland in the 1970s following the so-called ‘cod
wars’. Despite being an overall net importer of fish products,
the UK is an active exporter of premium species such as
Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), blue mussels (Mytilus
edulis), live edible crab (Cancer pagurus) and whole scallops.
15.3.2 Trends in Landings
In 1948, the total landings of 1.2 million tonnes from all ships
into the UK were the highest recorded since 1888. Landings
have fallen consistently after that date, barring a short-lived
upsurge in the 1970s (Table 15.7). By 2008, total landings
were 538,000 tonnes, which was the second lowest amount
recorded since 1948. Interestingly, landings made only by
UK-registered vessels into both UK and foreign ports were
recorded at 409,000t in 2008, which is the lowest peacetime
catch recorded since 1890 (i.e. outside the years of the two
world wars) (Cracknell 2009).
The pattern of decline in landings has not been consistent
across all fish species and types, and it is apparent that the
three main groups, demersal fish, pelagic fish and shellfish,
have responded differently during the last 60 years. Demersal
fish species, such as cod (Gadus morhua), plaice (Pleuronectes
platessa) and haddock (Melanogrammus aegletinus), live on
or near the seabed, and it is in this group that declines have
been most severe. Landings of demersal fish into the UK fell
from 923,000 tonnes in 1948 to 206,000 tonnes in 2008 (Table
15.7). Landings of pelagic fish species which are typically
found in mid and upper-waters, such as herring (Clupea
harengus) and mackerel (Scomber scombrus), were 287,000
tonnes in 1948 and had fallen to 186,000 tonnes by 2008.
Landings of shellfish have shown a very different pattern
to that of the finfish discussed above (Table 15.7). Total
landings were just below 29,000 tonnes in 1948, and have
increased steadily since then, totalling 97,500 tonnes in 1990
and reaching 145,000 tonnes in 2008—their highest value for
60 years. One of the main reasons for this rise in shellfish
landings has been increased catches of Norway lobster,
commonly known as ‘scampi’. Interestingly, the increasing
prevalence of scampi in UK ecosystems may be related
to the removal of key predators such as cod and haddock
(Dubuit 1995; Bjornsson & Dombaxe 2004).
Approximately 30% of landings by UK vessels are
recorded as having occurred in England and Wales in both
1994 and in 2008, while 68% and 63% occurred in Scotland,
respectively. The majority of the UK’s landings of pelagic fish
occurred in Scotland in both years, while more than 50% of
the UK’s shellfish landings occurred in England and Wales
(Table 15.8).
The recorded declines in landings do not necessarily
reflect the size of the fish population in UK or EU waters;
rather, they are the combined outcome of the results of
stock assessments and the subsequent management
measures designed to control the fishery-related mortality
of fish (Chapter 12). In addition, it is important to consider
the effort expended in catching the fish and also the policy
conditions affecting the fishing fleet. In 1948, there were
13,300 registered fishing vessels in the UK. By 2008, this
number had fallen to 6,573, which itself was a 10% reduction
on the number registered a decade earlier (Cracknell 2009).
However, the number of vessels is not necessarily a good
indicator of fishing effort: larger vessels which utilise the
latest technologies for finding and catching fish may be
able to catch many more fish in a given time period than a
larger number of less efficient, smaller boats. For example, a
UK beam trawling vessel working in the first decade of the
21st Century is 100 times more effective at catching plaice
than a sailing trawler that operated in the early part of the
20th Century (Englehard 2005). In order to move away from
a simple consideration of vessel numbers, other variables
like total fleet tonnage (GT) and power (kW) are used as
indicators of the effort a fleet can expend in catching fish.
These are basically an expression of the catching capacity of
the fleet. In 1996, 8,667 vessels had a total tonnage of 274,532
GT and used 1,054,927 kW of power. By 2008, 6573 UK vessels

610 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
Table 15.7 Landings of finfish and shellfish into the UK by UK and foreign vessels from 1938 to 2008. Source: data from
MMO (2010a).
Year
Fishery
Demersal Pelagic Shellfish Total
Quantity
(‘000 tonnes)
Value
(£million)
Quantity
(‘000 tonnes)
Value
(£million)
Quantity
(‘000 tonnes)
Value
(£million)
Quantity
(‘000 tonnes)
Value
(£million)
1938 807.82 14.63 295.05 2.03 32.06 0.49 1,134.92 17.16
1948 923.50 46.41 287.63 6.00 28.65 1.43 1,239.78 53.84
1960 758.82 51.98 127.81 2.98 28.09 2.08 914.72 57.05
1970 778.61 67.50 204.01 5.80 56.44 6.73 1,039.06 80.03
1980 484.25 194.42 319.16 30.14 70.24 34.47 873.65 259.03
1990 336.71 327.66 267.85 32.09 97.47 105.09 702.03 464.75
2000 280.54 305.75 117.99 22.32 127.74 154.47 526.27 482.54
2001 249.58 277.19 143.53 42.49 136.91 168.38 530.01 488.06
2002 235.80 265.91 169.83 57.93 132.26 166.22 537.90 490.06
2003 234.44 249.53 185.02 58.26 137.86 181.67 557.31 489.46
2004 257.38 265.49 198.35 74.48 128.05 176.24 583.77 516.21
2005 272.69 317.85 239.78 116.47 126.30 186.09 638.77 620.40
2006 214.76 263.33 194.37 97.77 135.30 240.78 544.43 601.88
2007 197.88 243.57 209.48 102.23 142.23 274.99 549.58 620.79
2008 206.82 231.38 186.17 104.44 144.99 260.33 537.98 596.15
Table 15.8 Fish landings by the UK fleet (thousands of tonnes) into the UK and abroad in 1994 and 2008.
Percentages relate to the proportion of total UK landings in that class. Results for separate parts of the UK are made by
department of administration. Islands are Isle of Man and Channel Isles. Source: data from MMO (2010b).
Region
1994 2008
Total landings % UK landings Total landings % UK landings
UK
Total 874.9 588.3
Demersal 371.6 189.9
Pelagic 388.9 247.9
Shellsh 114.4 150.5
England & Wales
Total 248.3 28.38 184.5 31.36
Demersal 115.7 31.14 63.1 33.23
Pelagic 72.0 18.51 52.8 21.30
Shellsh 60.6 52.97 68.6 45.58
Scotland
Total 596.6 68.19 371.7 63.18
Demersal 242.9 65.37 123.6 65.09
Pelagic 308.0 79.20 183.0 73.82
Shellsh 44.8 39.16 65.1 43.26
Northern Ireland
Total 27.4 3.13 29.9 5.08
Demersal 12.1 3.26 2.9 1.53
Pelagic 8.0 2.06 12.1 4.88
Shellsh 7.37 6.44 14.9 9.90
Islands
Total 2.6 0.30 2.2 0.37
Demersal 0.9 0.24 0.2 0.11
Pelagic - 0.00 0.00
Shellsh 1.7 1.49 2.0 1.33

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 611
had a total tonnage of 207,423 GT and 836,485 kW of power.
This indicates that the size and power of the remaining
vessels has not fully compensated for the reduction in vessel
number. The policy environment and the untenable state of
many fish stocks may partly explain why there has not been
more compensation of power and size for numbers in recent
years. Under the Common Fisheries Policy of the EU an
increasing number of restrictions have been placed on fleets
fishing waters around the UK, many of which have been
aimed at stock conservation (e.g. restrictions in permissible
days at sea, closed areas and gear restrictions) (Frost &
Andersen 1996; Laurec & Armstrong 1997; Hadjimichael
et al. 2010). In particular, declines in landings over the last
decade are likely to reflect the impact of these policies, along
with a reduction in the amount of fisheries subsidies that are
provided to domestic fleets.
15.3.3 Drivers of Change in Marine Fisheries
Since joining the EU the community’s fisheries policy has
been the dominant influence on the behaviour of fishers. The
restrictive influences of this policy have intensified in recent
years, with a combination of catch quotas, gear restrictions
and limits on days at sea all seeking to reduce catches to
more sustainable levels. In spite of these policies, the fishing
industry has continued to innovate, and there have been
marked developments in technology in recent years. In
parallel to these policy and technological trends, it is virtually
certain that declining stocks of many fish have resulted in
reduced catches. As a result, the trends in the industry are
a spiralling and interacting function of a profitable industry
investing in technology which causes further declines in
stock, and policy makers responding to these two drivers by
implementing new regulations.
In addition, certain fishing practices (e.g. beam-trawling,
scallop-dredging) can have negative impacts on the marine
environment that directly affect the productivity of the
system and have subsequent negative consequences for
fish populations (Hinz et al. 2009; Benn et al. 2010; but see
also Hiddink et al. 2008 for a different viewpoint). Observed
changes in ecological communities and the size of animals
that occur in areas without fishing disturbance demonstrate
the magnitude of the negative impacts fishing can have on
marine environments (Kaiser et al. 2006).
15.4 Food from Aquaculture
The major finfish products of aquaculture in the UK are the
Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) in coastal waters and rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in freshwater. Several shellfish
species are also produced, of which, mussels (Mytilus edulis)
and oysters (two species are grown in UK; the Pacific oyster
Crassostrea gigas and the European flat oyster, Ostrea edulis)
are the dominant species. Aquaculture occurs across the UK,
but Scotland is responsible for 80% of the UK’s aquaculture
production, largely due to the scale of the salmon industry
(Defra 2009c).
The production of salmon through aquaculture began
in Scotland in the 1970s, and, since then, has grown almost
exponentially at times (Marine Scotland 2009a). In 1988,
Scotland produced 17,951 tonnes of fish, but by 2008, production
had increased seven-fold to 128,606 tonnes (Table 15.9). The
production of salmon is focused in the rural north and west
of the country, bringing economic and employment benefits to
these areas. However, these benefits have not come without
environmental impact, and concerns have been raised over
several issues during the past 30 years including: nutrient
enrichment of the waters around the fish cages caused by the
release of uneaten food and faeces; chemical pollution through
the use of pesticides; the impacts of escaped fish on wild
salmon populations; and the visual impacts of aquaculture in
sensitive landscapes. These issues have been well researched
and considerable effort has been expended by government and
industry to mitigate their impacts (Navarro et al. 2008; Peel &
Lloyd 2008; Mayor et al. 2010).
In 2008, Scottish production was comprised of Atlantic
salmon (128,606 t), rainbow trout (7,670 t), cod (1,822 t), brown
trout/sea trout (Salmo trutta; 311 t) and halibut (Hippoglossus
hippoglossus; 206 t). Shellfish production included mussels
(5,869 t), Pacific oyster (3,785 t), native oysters (250 t), queen
Table 15.9 Annual production of Atlantic salmon
(tonnes) from the Scottish aquaculture sector between
1988 and 2008 (projected production for 2009).
Source: Marine Scotland (2009a).
Year Tonnes % difference
1988 17,951 41
1989 28,553 59
1990 32,351 13
1991 40,593 25
1992 36,101 -11
1993 48,691 35
1994 64,066 32
1995 70,060 9
1996 83,121 19
1997 99,197 19
1998 110,784 12
1999 126,686 14
2000 128,959 2
2001 138,519 7
2002 144,589 4
2003 169,736 17
2004 158,099 -7
2005 129,588 -18
2006 131,847 2
2007 129,930 -1.4
2008 128,606 -1
2009 133,027*
* Farmers’ estimate of projec ted tonnage based on stocks
currently being on-grown.

612 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
scallops (Aequipecten opercularis; 687 t) and king scallops
(Pecten maximus; 15 t) (Marine Scotland 2009ab). However,
both the production of cod and Arctic charr (Salvelinus
alpinus) had ceased by 2010.
In England and Wales, there were 518 registered fish and
shellfish farms in 2008: 193 coarse fish farms, 197 trout and
other finfish farms and 128 shellfish farms. Of the total 8,127
tonnes of finfish produced in England and Wales in 2006,
the majority was rainbow trout (7,294 t). In 2006, there was
also production of brown trout (441 t), carp (Cyprinus carpio;
175 t) Atlantic salmon (63 t), turbot (Psetta maxima; 63.5 t),
barramundi (Lates calcarifer; 45 t) and tilapia (33 t). Farm-
produced shellfish totaled 15,449 tonnes in 2006, with the
main species cultivated being mussels (14,553 t) and Pacific
and native oysters (880 t) (Defra 2009c).
There were 84 licensed fish farms in Northern Ireland
in 2007. Fifty of these were licensed for the cultivation of
shellfish (mussels, Pacific oysters, native oysters and clams)
and 34 for the cultivation of finfish (salmon, rainbow trout
and brown trout). In 2007, production totalled 8,400 tonnes
of shellfish and more than 999 tonnes of finfish.
15.4.1 Drivers of Change in Aquaculture
As catches of sea-caught fish have declined over time, so
the demand for farmed fish has increased. The industry has
adapted technology developed in other countries and has
expanded rapidly, mainly in Scotland. However, constraints
of the technology require that sea-based fish farms have
particular bio-physical requirements. Furthermore, the growth
of the industry has been a function of planning restriction and
market demand. New technologies may permit some of the
future growth in the sector to move further offshore, and the
declines in stocks of marine fish will result in price increases,
which should, in turn, raise demand for competitively priced
products from aquaculture. Thus constraints on future growth
in this sector will be a function of environmental regulation
and technological developments.
15.5 Game and Food
Collected from the Wild
Game species are those species of wild animals, birds, or
fish hunted for food and/or sport. Within the UK, the main
terrestrial game species are red deer (Cervus elaphus), roe deer
(Capreolus capreolus), fallow deer (Dama dama), brown hare
(Lepus europaeus), mountain hare (Lepus timidus), pheasant
(Phasianus colchicus), grey partridge (Perdix perdix), red-legged
partridge (Alectoris rufa), and red grouse (Lagopus lagopus
scoticus). In addition, duck like mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)
and fish species like salmon and trout (Salmo trutta) may also
be classed as game. Many of these game species are hunted
for pleasure; despite this, the majority of game animals that
are killed in the UK will enter the human food chain in some
form, either by being eaten by their hunter or after being sold
to consumers, retailers or game dealers. However, not all
game animals are killed explicitly for consumption; instead,
some may be culled because of their nuisance value or their
role as pests. Species hunted in this way may include deer,
hares, rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) and wood pigeons
(Columba palumbus) (note: the latter two species are not
typically classed as game animals, but they are hunted for
sport and have traditionally been eaten by humans).
Although game species are technically wild animals,
many are subject to management of some form. For example,
heather moorlands are managed to enhance the numbers of
red grouse they support; some agricultural land is managed
for partridge and pheasants (e.g. conservation headlands
and gamebird cover); and some woodlands are managed
to provide opportunities to shoot deer and pheasants. In
addition, some game species have their natural populations
enhanced through the deliberate release of animals reared
domestically prior to the shooting season (especially
pheasant, red-legged partridge and mallard). Finally, the
predators of game species are often actively culled. For
example, the number of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) killed on estate
land (i.e. land managed for game) increased from about 0.5
fox/100 ha of estate land in 1961 to 3/100 ha of estate land
in 2005 (GWCT 2009). The other major predators that are
actively controlled include weasels (Mustela nivalis), stoats
(Mustela erminea), brown rats (Rattus norvegicus), American
mink (Neovison vison), carrion crows (Cor vus corone),
hooded crows (Corvus cornix) and magpies (Pica pica).
15.5.1 Gamebirds
Several species of bird are shot for game and trends in bag
sizes have shown variation over time (Figure 15.4a– d).
For example, annual bags of red grouse shot on upland
moors varied around a consistent mean for much of the
period during 1900 and 1940. Bags then fell during the
war years of 1940 to 1945, increased steadily up to 1970,
and declined again through to 2007. The causes of these
declines have been the subject of much speculation (Barnes
1987; Sotherton et al. 2009). The high bags of the early 20th
Century probably reflect the active and intense management
of grouse moors and associated fauna. Changes in the
structure of large estates in the middle of the 20th Century,
however, reduced the availability of labour for undertaking
moorland management; while long-term changes in land
use and management in the uplands, such as afforestation
and increased sheep numbers, very likely served to reduce
the quality of grouse habitat and enabled the impacts of
predator populations to increase (Thirgood et al. 2000).
Contrary to trends seen in red grouse, the numbers of
pheasant shot per 100 ha of estate land increased steadily
from 1960 to 2007 (Figure 15.4b). These increased bags
largely reflect the greater number of pheasants reared
and released specifically for hunting; in 2004, for example,
35 million pheasants were released in the UK (PACEC 2006).
Interestingly, the average bags of woodcock (Scolopax
rusticola) during the last few decades of the 20th Century
were very similar to those obtained in the first few decades of
that century. In contrast, bags of snipe (Gallinago gallinago)
showed an increase up to the 1940s, followed by a rapid
and continued decline throughout the latter half of the 20th
Century (National Gamebag Census, GWCT 2009).

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 613
Unfortunately, the trends in the bags of another lowland
gamebird, the grey partridge have been in decline since
the 1940s and 1950s (Figure 15.4c). The grey partridge is
typically a bird of lowland grassland and arable habitats, and
considerable scientific enquiry has gone into understanding
the causes of its decline (Potts 1986; Aebischer 1997;
Aebischer & Ewald 2010). As a result, it has been well
established that changes in the management of arable fields
caused a decrease in nesting, brood-rearing and winter
habitat for adults partridges, and a scarcity of invertebrate
food for the chicks. But the introduction of conservation
headlands and other habitats on arable fields has partly
ameliorated this decline.
In a converse pattern to that observed for the grey
partridge, bags of the red-legged partridge, which was
introduced from continental Europe as a game species, have
increased from almost zero in 1970 to about 30/100 ha in
2005 (Figure 15.4d). Simultaneously, there has been a large
increase in the number of red-legged partridge released into
the UK countryside: 6.5 million were released in 2004, of
which, 2.6 million were shot (PACEC 2006).
15.5.2 Deer
Several species of deer are shot as game and trends in their
numbers and distribution are described in the following
paragraphs.
The density of red deer shot in the Scottish Highlands
remained roughly constant from 1960 to 2000, typically
being in the range of 0.1–1 deer shot/100 ha. However,
shooting densities increased to more than 1 deer/100 ha in
the central Highlands in the 1990s. During the period 1960 to
2000, shooting gradually increased in south-west Scotland,
north-west England, East Anglia and south-west England.
No red deer were shot in Wales, the Midlands or south-
east England between 1960 and 2000. The amount of red
deer culled in Scotland on an annual basis between 1996
and 2006 fluctuated between a low of 53,950 in 1996/97 to a
high of 71,536 in 1998/99. Over the next five years, numbers
shot declined from this level and 63,568 deer were culled in
2005/06 (Deer Commission for Scotland 2006).
During the 1960s, bags of roe deer were restricted to
Scotland, north-east England and some southern counties of
England. Over the next few decades, the deer spread across
Figure 15.4c Numbers of grey partridges (
Perdix
perdix
) annually shot (solid line) and released (open
bars) per 100 ha of total estate area in the UK from
1961 to 2005. Error bars represent 95% confidence
intervals. Source: National Gamebag Census (GWCT 2009).
0
80
100
120
140
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Numbe r shot / 100 h a
60
40
20
0
150
200
250
300
1960 1970 1980 1990 20 00
Year
Number / 100 ha
100
50
0
8
12
14
16
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Number / 100 ha
6
2
10
4
0
40
60
70
80
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Number / 100 ha
30
10
50
20
Figure 15.4a Numbers of red grouse (
Lagopus
lagopus scoticus
) annually shot per 100 ha of
moorland in England (upper line) and Scotland
(lower line) from 1961 to 2005. Error bars represent
95% confidence intervals. Source: National Gamebag
Census (GWCT 2009).
Figure 15.4b Numbers of pheasants (
Phasianus
colchicus
) annually shot (solid line) and released
(open bars) per 100 ha of total estate area in the
UK from 1961 to 2005. Error bars represent 95%
confidence intervals. Source: National Gamebag Census
(GWCT 2009).
Figure 15.4d Numbers of red-legged partridges
(
Alectoris rufa
) annually shot (solid line) and
released (open bars) per 100 ha of total estate area
in the UK from 1961 to 2005. Error bars represent
95% confidence intervals. Source: National Gamebag
Census (GWCT 2009).

614 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
much of England, and in southern England bag densities
exceeded 1 deer/100 ha in the 1990s. Few roe deer were
shot in Wales or the English Midlands during the period 1960
to 2000, although a low level of shooting was recorded in
Powys in the 1990s and has continued into the 21st Century.
During the 1960s, fallow deer were only shot in a few
localities in the UK. By the 1980s, however, they were being
shot across much of southern England and were first shot
in Wales. During the 1990s, the densities shot were greater
than 1/100 ha in Gloucestershire. In Scotland, fallow deer
were shot in Tayside in every decade between 1960 and
2000. They were first shot in Dumfries and Galloway in the
1970s and in the western Highlands in the 1980s.
15.5.3 Salmon and Migratory Trout in
Estuaries and Freshwaters
Fishing for salmon with fixed engines and nets and cobles
has been undertaken for hundreds of years. Between 1950
and 1970, numbers caught by these methods were constant in
Scotland and increased in England. After 1970, the numbers
of fish caught by these methods fell in Scotland, and, in 2009,
less than 13,000 fish were caught by these methods (Marine
Scotland 2010). Catches by rod and line in Scotland were
Figure 15.5 Catches of salmon in Scotland by different
methods from 1952 to 2007. Source: Scottish Government (2009).
Figure 15.6 Catches of salmon in England and Wales by
different methods from 1956 to 2006. Source: reproduced from
Cefas & Environment Agency (2009).
0
100
200
250
300
1952 1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1992 1997 2002
1987 2007
Year
Numbers caught (’00 0s)
50
150
Fixed e ngine
Net and cable
Rod and line (rele ased)
Rod and line
20
80
120
140
160
Declared catch (thousands)
40
100
60
0
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
Year
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1970
1968
Nets and fixed engines
Rods
more or less constant from 1950 to 1988, after which they
declined until 2007 (Figure 15.5). However, in 2009, 24,228
wild salmon and grilse were caught and killed by rod and line,
while a further 48,367 were reported to have been caught but
released back into the water. The total rod catch for 2009
(killed plus released) was 106% of the average over the period
since 1952. In 2009, catches by rod and line constituted 85%
of the total Scottish catch, compared with just 11% in 1952.
However, it must be noted that numbers caught by rod and line
are not necessarily a reliable indicator of the total returning
population of salmon as fishing effort and fishing conditions
can have a large influence on catch size.
From 1988, catches in England and Wales also declined,
and by 2006 less than 40,000 fish were caught by all
methods (Figure 15.6). The amount of salmon caught by
fixed engines has declined substantially since 2002, being
exceeded by the number of salmon caught by rod and line
during the following six years. These are the only years
this has occurred since records began in 1956 (Cefas &
Environment Agency 2009).
Salmon are not the only migratory fish caught in
freshwater; sea trout are also fished both commercially and
for recreational purposes. Catches of sea trout were steady
in England, Wales and Scotland between 1975 and 1988, but
they have declined in all regions since that time. This decline
is particularly marked in Scotland.
15.5.4 Drivers of Change in Harvesting
Game Species
In the UK, mammals and birds are hunted primarily for pleasure,
and secondarily for consumption and/or pest management.
During the last 30 years of the 20th Century, harvests of
gamebirds declined. However, it is not clear how much the
harvests recorded in late Victorian and Edwardian eras were
a function of very intense ecosystem management aimed
solely at enhancing population densities of game animals. If
this is the case, it could be argued that the observed declines
are due to changes in agricultural landscapes and habitat
management, rather than overharvesting. Therefore, the
future of game may depend more on the future management
of agricultural landscapes than on any activity of the hunters
themselves. Also, social attitudes to game species, and those
who hunt them, will have a large impact on policies related
to game conservation (Ward 1999; Anderson 2006). Should
negative attitudes prevail, it will be difficult to justify public
funds being spent on game management and conservation.
The loss of wild-caught game would have minimal impacts
on food security as any loss of inputs to the food chain could
be replaced by domestically reared animals.
Traditionally, fixed nets across river mouths, fixed nets in
tidal waters and an inshore fleet were all used to catch salmon
in estuaries and coastal margins. Recent policy, driven by
government and private interests, has sought to remove these
interceptor nets through a series of buy-outs and through
regulation. As a result, the number of returning fish entering
rivers for spawning has increased in recent years, and catches
on rod and line have been maintained and even enhanced.
Future investments in improving salmon habitats will depend
on the economic returns from angling, which may themselves
be a function of wider economic factors.

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 615
15.6 Honey
There was an upsurge in the popularity of bee-keeping in
post-war Britain as a response to the severe economic food
shortages prevailing at that time, in particular the lack of
sugar. The numbers of beekeepers and colonies reached
their highest point in 1949 with 87,000 keepers and 465,000
colonies (5.3 colonies per keeper) reported for England
(Showler 1996). There was a subsequent and gradual
decline in popularity of bee-keeping owing to the increased
availability of sugar on the open market, culminating in 1953
with the ending of sugar-rationing. By this time, beekeeper
numbers had declined to approximately 80,000 beekeepers
with 396,000 colonies (5 colonies per keeper) (Figure 15.7),
and this decline continued over the next two decades.
In 1970, the number of beekeepers in England and Wales
was recorded at 32,000, with 158,000 colonies between
them (five colonies per keeper) (Showler 1996). Twenty
years later, in 1990, numbers were showing just a slight
increase with 33,744 beekeepers and 163,822 colonies (4.85
colonies per keeper). However, the numbers of beekeepers
increased shar ply during the first decade of the 21st Century,
and it is estimated that there were 40,000 beekeepers and
200,000 colonies in the UK during 2009 (five colonies per
keeper) (Fera 2011). Of these, approximately 300 commercial
beekeepers managed 40,000 colonies between them.
The early 1990s marked a watershed in British bee-
keeping for two reasons. Firstly, from 1990 onwards, there
was an increase in the number of new beekeepers recorded
in the UK (Showler 1996). Secondly, the mite Varroa destructor
was first recorded in the UK in 1992 (British Beekeepers’
Association 2009). This mite enters hives and increases the
bees’ susceptibility to harmful diseases thereby increasing
bee mortality and decreasing honey production (Berthoud et
al. 2010; Bowen-Walker & Gunn 2001). In order to minimise
the impact of Varroa on honey production, beekeepers have
changed hive management practices by using chemical
controls and altering the feeding regimes of the bees.
There are no reliable figures for annual UK honey yields.
Based on honey production of 11 kg/hive/yr (Jones 2004) and
the number of maintained bee colonies, estimates suggest
that the amount of honey produced in the UK in 2009 was
about 60% of that produced in 1949, all other things being
equal (Figure 15.8).
15.6.1 Drivers of Change in Honey
Production
Current prices would suggest that there is an underlying and
strong demand for honey: average prices rose from £5.00/kg
in 2004 to £8.31/kg in 2009. Weather permitting, national
honey productivity should continue to rise as long as the
number of beekeepers increases and adequate sources of
pollen are available. There appears to be increased demand
for premium UK-harvested bee products, repeating the
pattern of Manuka honey from New Zealand which is used
for dermatological and post-surgical treatment.
Future challenges to the industry will relate to global
warming, disease and landscape change. For example, honey
Figure 15.8 Honey production in England and
Wales. Data for years 1949 to 1990 is estimated by
multiplying the average honey production per hive/
yr (11 kg) (Jones 2004) by the number of colonies for
that year.
Figure 15.7 Number of beekeepers and colonies in
England between 1953 and 1993. Source: reproduced
from Potts et al. (2010b) with permission from the International
Bee Research Association.
0
200
300
Total number (thousan ds)
1953 1963 1973 1993 20031983
Year
400
100
250
350
150
50
Colonies
Beekeepers
0
4,000
5,000
7,000
1949 1953 1970 1990 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009
Year
Weight of ho ney (tonnes)
6,000
1,000
2,000
3,000
2007
production is tightly linked to the prevalent weather of a given
flying season. Wet summers (even if warmer than average)
are likely to lead to increased problems for honey bees as they
may reduce flying time and hence nectar/pollen collection,
and they may also increase the chance of fungal infections.
15.7 Timber and Forest
Products
Trees provide a range of goods that are useful to humans.
Timber of suitable quality can be used as the main structural
material in buildings, while timber with other characteristics
can be used in constructing other elements of buildings that
do not bear structural loads, such as panels and window
frames, and can also be used to craft furniture, utensils and
ornaments. Wood products can be used to manufacture

616 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
paper, cardboard, Medium-density Fibreboard (MDF) and
other fibrous products, and can be used as a fuel for heating
buildings via logs or wood pellets constructed from wood
waste. The focus in this chapter is on the use of produce
from forests and woodlands; Chapter 8 provides a more
holistic discussion of woodlands and their management.
15.7.1 Timber
Wood products can be divided into softwoods (generally
from conifers) and hardwoods (from deciduous trees),
both of which have different qualities and uses. Softwood
is easier to work, and, because of the growth form of
commercial conifers, it is possible to obtain long spans
of intact timber from these trees. Until relatively recently,
hardwoods were principally obtained from tropical trees
such as teak and mahogany. These woods are of greater
density than softwoods and can be used for products that
require such density or longer lifespans such as musical
instruments, some furniture and window frames. Concern
about overexploitation of forests in tropical countries has
reduced the supply of these goods to UK markets, and
there is now increased interest in deriving products from
UK-grown hardwoods. This poses some problems as poor
management of the growing trees reduces the quality of the
timber available (Siry et al. 2004; Thurkettle 1997).
The amount of hardwood harvested in the UK has
declined over the past 40 years, and there is no sign of any
reverses in this decline for most uses (Figure 15.9). The vast
majority of hardwoods are produced in England (88% of 2008
harvest). However, there has been a steady decline in English
production since the late 1970s despite a surge between 1988
and 1992, which was probably related to the major storms
that affected parts of England in 1987 and 1992. Levels of
production in Wales (4%) and Scotland (8%) are relatively
small, and have both declined over the last 30 years. There
are no records of harvested hardwoods in Northern Ireland
(Figure 15.10). Interestingly, the use of hardwoods for wood
fuel has increased in the last five years, perhaps as a response
to concerns over use of fossil fuels for heating.
In contrast to the decline in hardwoods, the production of
softwoods in the UK has increased steadily over the last 40
years (Figure 15.11). The total harvest of softwood was nearly
8,600,000 m3 in 2008, compared with less than 400,000 m3 of
hardwood. To a large extent the increased levels of harvested
softwood reflect the levels of deliberate and extensive
planting that began in the early part of the 20th Century. Since
the mid-1990s, the vast majority of the softwood harvest has
been derived from Scotland (63% of 2008 harvest), although
prior to that date the harvest levels were equivalent between
England (21% of 2008 harvest) and Scotland. Northern Ireland
has tended to produce a small but constant harvest (5%),
while the harvest in Wales has increased three-fold over the
last 30 years (11% of 2008 harvest) (Figure 15.12). Just over
half the softwoods harvested in 2008 were from the Forestry
Commission estate (52%), while only 10% of hardwoods were
from the Forestry Commission estate.
Although softwood production has steadily increased
over the last half-century and hardwood production has
steadily declined, these trends are not directly related,
i.e. softwood production has not been at the expense of
hardwood production. Softwood production has increased
largely through the introduction of forest stands, established
by the Forestry Commission in the first half of the 20th
Century to create a strategic timber reserve for the UK. While
the original stands have now been harvested (as part of a
40–50-year rotation), replanting of this land, combined with
incentives for an increase in private plantations after WWII,
has contributed to the recent surge in softwood harvest.
In the latter half of the 20th Century, policy mechanisms,
such as financial incentivisation of private investment, played
a significant role in increasing the UK’s forest estate. Many of
these incentives were aimed at single-objective forestry for
softwood timber production; although, there were financial
incentives to plant broadleaved woodlands in the 1980s, and
to plant native woodlands from the mid-1990s onwards. As a
consequence of these incentives, only a small proportion of
the UK’s forest estate is managed for hardwood production—
the bulk of hardwood supplied is the result of arboricultural
Figure 15.9 Production of hardwoods in the UK from 1961
to 2007. Source: Forestry Commission; data available from w ww.
forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-7aql5b.
0
1,000
1969 1965 1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2005 2010
Year
Thousands of cubic metres
500
2000
1985
1,500
2,000
Figure 15.10 Harvest of hardwoods in England, Scotland
and Wales from 1975 to 2008. No harvest recorded for
Northern Ireland. Source: Forestry Commission (2010).
Total hardwood
Saw and veneer logs
Other industrial ro undwo od
Pulpwood
Wood fuel
0
1,000
1970 1975 1980 2000
1990 1995 2005 2010
Year of harve st
Thousa nd green tonnes
400
1985
1,200
200
600
800
England
Scotland
Wales

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 617
rather than forestry activity. Although the softwood
production industry is a relatively small component of UK
industrial output, and softwood imports carry a significant
economic advantage, there is no indication that there will
be any change to the UK’s expectation that at least some
domestic softwood production should remain. However, at
the regional scale, the importance of softwood provisioning
services from forests and woodland are set to decline
over most of England and Wales, with production being
concentrated in Scotland and north-east England. This
decline is a reflection of the increased emphasis on other
forestry/woodland ecosystem services, notably recreation,
habitat provision and flood mitigation, where hardwood
species are favoured over conifers. Further discussion of
forests and woodland policy is presented in Chapter 8.
15.7.1.1 Proportion of domestic supply of wood
products from UK sources
Around 85% of the 50 million m3 of timber, paper, boards
and other wood products used in the UK each year are
imported (Forestry Commission 2010). Despite this, there
is an active timber processing sector in the UK, and the
supply of roundwood to UK sawmills is dominated by UK-
grown timber and accounts for 97% of the softwood and
76% of the hardwood processed in 2008. For panel mills, the
proportion of UK-grown timber that is processed is higher,
being close to 100%. The proportion of total sawn wood
produced domestically is somewhat lower, but increasing.
In 2008, around 68% of sawn timber was imported; this
was a marked drop below 2007 levels (73% imported), and
continues a declining trend in imports of sawn wood of
around 1% per annum. Exports of UK-grown sawn wood are
small (around 8% in 2008) and declining.
15.7.2 Christmas Trees
Sales of UK-grown Christmas trees amount to around
7.5 million trees per annum from a growing stock of around
70 million trees. The value of these trees at the farm gate
is around £140 million, with the estimated value at retail
outlets being around twice this figure. The majority of these
trees are cut, with pot-grown trees amounting to only around
5% of the total. Imported trees represent around 12% of total
retail sales, and are largely restricted to species that grow
less well in UK conditions than in those of near neighbours
(e.g. noble fir (Abies procera) imported from Ireland and
nordman fir (Abies nordmanniana) imported from Belgium).
Over the past 20 years, the market has increased by around
100,000 trees per year, but still only represents one live
tree for every three UK households (British Christmas Tree
Growers Association pers. comm.)
15.7.3 Edible Non-Timber Forest Products
In Scotland, the wild mushroom industr y has grown
rapidly over the past two decades. In particular, chanterelle
(Cantharellus cibarius), cep (Boletus edulis) and hedgehog
mushrooms (Hydnum repandum) have become sought-after
foodstuffs. In 2000, the total mushroom harvest from both
natural and plantation forests, principally in the Scottish
Highlands, was worth approximately £406,000/annum. A
total of 20 jobs were directly attributable to the harvest and
approximately 350 pickers benefited from casual earnings
(averaging £28.70/week) (Dyke & Newton 1999).
15.7.4 Drivers of Change in Timber and
Forest Products
Drivers for change in the forestry sector are discussed in
detail in Chapter 8. To a large extent, government policy
has driven investments in forestry in the UK throughout
the period between 1945 and 2009. These policies have
been aimed at a range of targets which include enhancing
timber supply through increasing the size of the state forest,
increasing private ownerships through financial incentives,
and improving the quality of forests for biodiversity and
recreation. However, recent concerns about mitigating
climate change offer new drivers for forest policy. These are
three-fold and relate to potentially increased plantings in
order to sequester carbon, the use of timber as a sustainable
Figure 15.11 Production of softwoods in the UK from 1961
to 2007. Source: Forestry Commission; data available at www.forestry.
gov.uk/forestry/infd-7aql5b.
Figure 15.12 Harvest of softwoods in England, Scotland,
Northern Ireland and Wales from 1975 to 2008. Source:
Forestry Commission; data available at www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/
infd-7aql5b.
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
Thousands of cubic metres
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Total soft wood
Saw and veneer logs
Other industrial roundwood
Pulpwood
Wood fuel
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
Thousand green tonnes
1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year of har vest
1985
5,000
6,000
7,000
England
Scotland
Wales
North ern Ireland

618 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
substitute for other goods, and the use of timber and wood
wastes as a fuel for heat.
For example, in recent years, rising energy prices and
renewable energy commitments have steadily increased
demand for fuel for both domestic and industrial wood-
burners. This, combined with steady wood fuel availability,
is likely to increase the cost of this commodity, at least in the
short-term. As the value of wood fuel increases, it is likely
that woodland owners will be increasingly motivated to bring
small, unmanaged, private woodlands into management,
increasing the wood fuel output from these ecosystems.
Large-scale increases in wood fuel production, however, may
well be constrained by the high transport costs associated
with low energy density fuels, particularly when increased
demand is itself driven by increasing fuel costs.
Furthermore, as wood processing and utilisation
technologies improve, and embedded energy costs are
included in competing raw materials, it is likely that
wood products will again become a mainstay of building
constr uction. Increasingly, bio-composites will take the
place of oil-derived plastics, and many of these will have
a forest-industries precursor. As the range of products (e.g.
timber, wood fuel, bio-materials) extracted from forests
and woodlands increases, the opportunities for income
generation from woodlands will increase, and this will,
in turn, increase the finance available for management
operations both in small, privately-owned woodlands and
the publicly owned forest estate. As a consequence, there is
likely to be a gradual improvement in the productive state
of forests and woodland, for example, where economic
constraints have delayed planned thinning operations in
high-density plantations (although, in many cases, thinning
may not be possible without incurring major wind-throw
losses). Similarly, neglected broadleaved woodlands may
benefit from the removal of over-mature trees, increasing
their age-diversity and habitat provision, as well as
increasing their landscape and amenity value. Therefore,
it is likely that escalating investment in management
interventions will lead to an increase in sustainable
woodland and forest management practices. While from
the perspective of provisioning services this increased
management is to be welcomed, care will need to be taken
to ensure that this increased level of management does
not have adverse impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem
functioning.
The most significant threat to the future supply of
provisioning services from woodlands lies in the spectre
of pests and diseases. For example, over the course of the
last century, Dutch Elm Disease (caused by the fungus
Ophiostoma novo-ulmi and spread by the beetles of
Scolytus species) has severely reduced the abundance and
geographic distribution of elms in the UK. Another example
of the importance of diseases is Sudden Oak Death, where
the fungus Phytophthora ramorum can cause the sudden
death of both native oak species. In addition, the last decade
has witnessed a gradual increase in oak mortality, attributed
to Acute Oak decline, although whether this is a single
virulent disease, a combination of low-virulence diseases,
or a combination of disease and climate change, is subject to
ongoing research. Similarly, Red Band Needle Blight (caused
by the fungus Dothistroma septosporum) has, over the last
couple of decades, dramatically reduced timber yields in
infected plantation pine forests (Anon 2008). These are just
a few of the pests and diseases that have damaged native
and plantation trees in recent decades, and there remains
the potential for other introduced pests and diseases to have
similar, or even greater, impacts in the future.
15.8 Peat
Peat has been used as a resource by humans in the UK since
Neolithic times. In the 19th Century, peat was used as stable
litter and fuel to heat houses. The demand for peat fell in the
middle of the 20th Century as the number of horses declined
and other sources of domestic fuel, such as coal, became
more widely available. The ancient right of turbary bestows
on individuals or households the right to extract peat for use
as a fuel, with specific restrictions. These rights were still in
existence in parts of Northern Ireland and Scotland in 2010,
although there is evidence from Northern Ireland that fewer
people are taking up the these rights than in the previous 30
years (a 95% decrease in 2006 compared to 1983) (Jordan &
Tomlinson 2007).
The use of peat in horticulture as a growing medium
constituent (other than for acid-loving plants) began in
the 1930s with the development and publication of the
John Innes compost formulae. These were designed for
professional growers to improve crop quality and reliability
and employed a potting mixture of seven parts loam, two
part s sand and three parts peat by volume (i.e. 25% peat).
By the 1960s, it was recognised that a more reliable and
consistent medium could be produced without stripping
and preparing loam and, instead, using peat alone (or with
sand, perlite, vermiculite, etc.). These new formulae had the
added advantages of producing crops quicker, having lower
shipping weights and a lower overall cost. These products
began to be commercialised in the mid-1960s and led to an
expansion of peat-harvesting once again. By the 1970s, peat
composts had been introduced to the amateur gardener;
the market grew rapidly, displacing John Innes, and the
demand for peat rose. By 1997, the average peat content
of growing media sold in the UK peaked at 96% of market
share. However, just ten years later, under government
pressure to reduce peat usage and with heavy investment
in alternatives, the average peat content in growing media
was cut to 81% and 72% in professional and retail products,
respectively. During this time, peat use as a soil improver
was almost completely eliminated, accounting for just 2% of
sales by volume in 2007. The total volume of peat used in UK
horticulture in 2007 was just over 3 million m3, of which, less
than half (1.3 million m3) was sourced from within the UK.
In addition to its use in horticulture, peat is still sold for
fuel in the form of briquettes and remains important in the
whisky industry—peat is used to fuel the fires that dry damp
malt. Some of the smoke from the burning peat enters the
malting barley. The amount of smoke in the malt has an

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 619
impact on the taste of the whisky, giving rise to different,
and consistent, tastes of malt whiskies. In some areas, there
may have been over-extraction for the whisky industry, but
more recently this industry has taken steps to reduce its use
of peat.
The total area of land used for peat extraction has fallen
from 14,980 ha in 1994 to 10,690 ha in 2009. The area of land
used for extractions does not necessarily reflect the amount of
peat extracted from that land in a given period. For example, at
a GB scale, 1,616,000 m3 of peat were sold in 1999 (392,000 m3
derived in Scotland, 316,000 from north-east England and
249,000 m3 from north-west England), while, in 2008, this
figure had fallen to 760,000 m3 (265,000 m3 from Scotland
and 416,000 m3 from north-west England). No commercial
exploitation of peat has occurred in Wales in recent times.
The control of commercial peat extraction lies with local
authorities who hold information on extent, site location
and after-use of extraction sites. In 2003, Scottish Natural
Heritage commissioned a review of commercial peat
extraction in Scotland which listed sites, areas, planning
conditions and relation to nearby protected sites (Special
Areas of Conser vation (SACs) or Sites of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSIs) which intersect or lie within one kilometre
of the extraction area) (Scottish Government 2009). At that
time, 72 peat extraction consent sites were recorded in
Scotland (20 active, 16 expired, three pending, the remaining
33 awaiting confirmation). After-use for sites was varied and
included wetland creation, forestry and agriculture (Scottish
Government 2009).
Seventeen raised bogs in England and 24 in Scotland
have permission for peat extraction, 12 of which have been
(at least partly) notified as SSSIs. Local authorities could
rescind permission to extract from a site, but this may
require the government to pay compensation to owners of
the peat extraction rights as occurred in the cases of Hatfield
and Thorne Moors and Bolton Fell Moss.
15.8.1 Drivers of Change in Peat Extraction
The combination of policy and demand will determine the
amount of peat that is extracted from UK sources in the
future. If consumer demand for peat is reduced, i.e. by further
adoption of non-peat composts, then there will be less call
for peat to be extracted. Similarly, if consumers send strong
signals to commercial growers that they do not want to
purchase products grown in peat, demand would also be
reduced. However, as a lot of peat is currently imported into
the UK from countries such as Ireland and the Baltic states,
the relationship between demand for peat and UK extraction
is not simple. In addition to changing consumer demands,
policy could also lessen peat extraction through a reduction
in extraction licences.
15.9 Ornamental Resources
Ecosystems provide a number of resources that humans use
for ornamental purposes. These include: plants and flowers
used in gardens and for indoor decoration; animal resources,
such as skins, heads and horns, used in taxidermy and as
throws and wall mountings; minerals used as ornaments
in gardens (e.g. river cobbles, limestone and slate) and as
smaller, indoor decorations (e.g. polished stones); mollusc
shells and fossils used in garden and indoor decoration;
and driftwood and other pieces of timber used for various
purposes. Unfortunately, there are very limited data on the
use and production of these resources from UK, but data
are available on the production of flowers and shrubs for
ornamental purposes.
Some flowers are produced in open fields in the UK
(4,578 ha grown in England in 2006), including daffodils and
narcissi (3,871 ha)—many of which are produced in the Isles
of Scilly, Cornwall, Pembrokeshire, Lincolnshire and south-
west Scotland—and gladioli (252 ha) and pinks (56 ha). The
area dedicated to these flowers has declined in recent years
as retailers have tended to source flowers from producers in
Europe and Africa.
Many flowers are also produced under glass; there are
large enterprises in Lincolnshire and the south of England
producing a range of flowers, such as 1,000 tonnes of
narcissi for cut flowers, 84 million tulip bulbs, 151.5 million
bulbs of irises and lilies, 566 ha of bedding plants and 56 ha
of chrysanthemums. In addition, 45.6 million units of pot
plants are produced for indoor use each year, including
11.9 million units of pr imroses and polyanthus, 1.9 million
units of poinsettia and 3.7 million units of begonia. The
relationship between glasshouse-produced flowers and
ecosystems is limited, although glasshouse enterprises
do require resources such as growing media, water and
minerals. They also produce waste that needs to be disposed
of off-site.
The economic importance of this sector is evidenced by
data suggesting that, in 2002, the ornamental sector was
worth around £674 million annually, having increased its
total value by 50% during the 1990s. The largest ornamental
sector was hardy nursery stock, which accounted for 49% of
total production and a total value of £284 million. Between
them, shrubs, roses and ornamental trees accounted for
one third of the sector’s value. The UK fresh-cut flower and
indoor plant market was worth over £1.45 billion at the retail
level, while exports of ornamentals were valued at around
£39 million in 2000 (NFU 2002).
15.9.1 Drivers of Change in the
Ornamental Sector
Although there are no long-term data available on the
production of flowers in the UK, it is very likely that the
increased wealth and house ownership that occurred in the
latter half of the 20th Century served to increase the demand
for shrubs, flowers and pot plants. Supporting evidence for
this postulation comes from data on the total area of outdoor
flowers and hardy nursery stock grown in England which
increased from 6,921 ha in 1940 to 12,775 ha in 2000. If rising
wealth is a driver of demand for ornamentals, then further
increases will result in greater demand for these goods
in the future. However, the opposite is also true: reduced
spending by individuals and government in the future may
reduce overall demand for ornamentals.

620 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
15.10 Genetic Resources
Genes are a resource to humans as the offer potential to meet
future needs. Within-species genetic variation provides a
range of building blocks which can be used to enhance the
desirable traits and characteristics of species that already
provide goods to humans, e.g. crops and livestock. Other
species, which are closely related to existing crop and
livestock species, can also provide genes that can enhance
the benefits provided by their domesticated conspecifics.
Thus desirable genes from wild relatives of domesticated
plants can be transferred into crops through natural breeding
or molecular techniques. At another level, the chemicals
within animals, plants and microbes may themselves be
useful to humans, such as in pharmaceuticals. In essence,
it could be argued that all species are potentially beneficial
to humans, and, as we do not know what our future needs
will be, a prudent strategy would be to ensure that all extant
species survive into the future. While there is some merit
in this argument, it is also possible to identify some genetic
resources that are more likely to be useful than others in the
short-term.
One such group of resources is contained within the
existing breeds and varieties of current livestock and crops.
Commercial production of food tends to rely on relatively
few breeds and varieties, which have been selected because
of their productivity under current farming systems.
However, many other breeds and varieties exist which are
not commercially competitive in modern food production
systems. It is a challenge to maintain viable populations of
non-commercial breeds and varieties. Maintaining varieties
of plants, such as wheat or apples, is relatively easy as seed
banks provide a reliable long-term store of genetic material.
Maintaining animal breeds is more difficult as they need
constant care and attention (although long-term storage
of semen and ova is becoming more viable). Some of the
‘rare livestock breeds’, such as Large Black pigs, are kept
commercially as they offer niche food products, while others
are kept as hobbies. Yet despite best efforts, it has been
estimated that 26 native livestock breeds were lost from the
UK between 1900 and 1973 (RBST 2010).
A second group of genetic resources is held in the wild
relatives of crops and livestock. There are few truly wild
relatives of livestock in the UK, as even the most feral goats
and sheep are managed to some extent. Wild deer are
perhaps the closest example of a wild livestock relative in
the UK, but it could also be argued that brown trout, sea
trout and wild salmon are also wild relatives of domesticated
food animals. There are many more wild relatives of crops
in the UK; Maxted et al. (2007) suggest that there are 413
genera and 195 species that have close genetic relationships
with UK-grown crop plants. Of these, 85% are wild relatives
of medicinal and aromatic plants, 82% of agricultural
and horticultural crops, 15% of forestry plants and 30 % of
ornamentals. Although wheat is the most economically
important crop in the UK, it has no wild relatives in this
country. Consequently, the UK genus of highest economic
importance as a crop wild relative is Brassica; this is because
of the several crop species of this genus grown here and
their numerous wild relatives (Maxted et al. 2007). These
data highlight both the potential importance of many plant
species for future human welfare, and also the international
dimension of any conservation effort aimed at maintaining
these resources.
15.10.1 Drivers of Change for Genetic
Resources
The breeding of new varieties of crops and livestock is a
continuous process, and so, there is an ever-growing list of
varieties that may warrant conservation. Such conservation
is not without cost, and while maintaining rare breeds of
animals may offer some income generation opportunities
through sale of products and/or leisure experiences, seed
banks are costly to build and maintain. For these reasons,
the future conservation of many rare breeds and varieties
depends upon governmental and societal preferences for
spending money on these resources. Although industry may
also benefit financially from the use of genetic resources in
the future, it is hard to envisage a practical system whereby
they would pay now for potential benefits they may accrue in
the future. The conservation of crop wild relatives in the field
is easier to achieve and these species could be conserved
through ongoing habitat conservation initiatives and agri-
environment schemes.
15.11 Water
Since the 1940s, the population of the UK has grown,
introducing a greater demand for potable water. In addition,
although private water supplies are still in use in many rural
areas across the UK, there has generally been a movement
towards greater connectivity to the central mains water
supply. Not only do more people now access water from the
mains supply, but the potable water supply also receives far
greater levels of treatment than in previous decades, thereby
reducing risks to human health. All the same, the amount of
water put into the public water supply in England and Wales
declined between 1990 and 2009. This trend was not evident
in Scotland or Northern Ireland (Figure 15.13).
This decline in the water supply of England and Wales
may be due to reduced demand from industry during that
period. However, another factor that could affect this trend
is the privatisation of the water industry in England and
Wales in 1989; something that did not happen in Scotland or
Northern Ireland. In addition, there is a far higher incidence
of water meters in domestic premises in England and
Wales (approximately 36% of homes) than in Scotland. The
difference in uptake of water meters could be related to the
differences in the cost of installation; in England and Wales
installation is free to homeowners, while in Scotland the
homeowner must bear the cost of installation.
In a similar vein, the total levels of abstractions in England
and Wales stayed more or less constant between 1995 and
2007 (Table 15.10). Abstractions increased from 1995 to

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 621
1998, largely due to abstraction rise in use for electricity
supply and industry, and have declined since then, again in
line with abstractions for electricity supply. The abstractions
for agriculture have declined since 1996, and in 2007 they
represented 0.01% of total abstractions.
Abstractions in Wales were 40 % greater in 2007 than
1995, and were 42% greater in England. The major sources of
abstraction in Wales related to electricity supply, amounting
to 71% of all abstractions for this purpose in England and
Wales, and representing 75% of total Welsh abstractions.
Abstractions for the water supply represented 18% of Welsh
abstractions in 2007, which had increased over 1995 levels.
Not all of the water abstracted for this use in Wales is
consumed in Wales as there are considerable transfers to
English regions.
In Scotland, the management of water resources is
shared between Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment
Protection Agency under the Water Resource Planning and
River Basin Management Processes. Between 2002/03 and
2009/10, estimated water abstractions decreased by 13% to
2,165 million l/d. Over the same period, domestic consumption
increased by 8.5%, while non-domestic consumption fell
by 15%. Although overall consumption rose, there was a
reduction in the production of treated water which was largely
achieved by a decrease in leakage. Leakage remains a major
element of total demand in Scotland: approximately 38% of
treated water was lost in 2009/10, compared with leakage
rates of 16% in England & Wales (down from 23% during the
late 1990s) (Figure 15.14). The differences in leakage rates
could be due to differences in management in a privatised
and non-privatised industry. However, the large size of the
water supply network in Scotland, and the rural nature of
much of the population served by the network, could also
partly explain the higher leakage rates. See Chapter 9 for a
more holistic discussion about water resources and their
interaction with other ecosystems.
15.11.1 Bottled Water
There was a dramatic increase in the consumption of bottled
water in the UK between 1976 and 2009 (Figure 15.15). Total
UK consumption increased from 20 million litres in 1976 to 2.09
billion litres in 2009. Most of this water is bottled from springs
(88% of the UK market), although some originates from treated
mains water (12% of the UK market) (Zenith International
2009). Not all bottled water consumed in the UK is sourced
from the UK, and the environmental costs of trade in bottled
water have not been well studied (Parag & Roberts 2009).
15.11.2 Drivers of Change for Water Use
Drivers for change can be split into demand-led drivers
and policy-led drivers. Demand-led drivers will vary on a
Figure 15.13 Water put into public water supply at the
UK level between 1990 and 2009. Source: Defra (2009b);
data from Oce of Water Services (Ofwat), Scottish Government
Research and Environment Rural Aairs Department (RERAD),
Scottish Government Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries
Department (SOAEFD), Scottish Water, Northern Ireland Water.
0
5,000
10,000
Million litres/day
1990/91
1992/93
1994/95
1998/99
2000/01
2002/03
2004/05
2006/07
Year
1996/97
15,000
20,000
25,000
2008/09
Englan d and Wales
Scotland
Northern Ireland
UK
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
Million litres per day
2,500
3,000
0
2002/03
2003/04
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
Year
2004/05
2009/10*
* 2009/10 data subject to Water Industry
Commission conrmation.
† Figures for raw water abstrac ted and treatment
process losses and raw water mains losses are
estimates. Slight corrections have been made to
years 2007/08 and 2008/09. The 2009/2010 raw
water abstracted gure is an estimate based on a
calculation methodology as for previous years. In
future years, metered data will be used. For
2009/2010, a raw water abstracted gure based
on a mix of metered and estimated data is also
available and has been supplied to Water U.K . for
their Sustainability Report. These gures show
raw water abstracted as 2,290 million l/d and
treatment process losses and raw water mains
losses as 246million l/d.
‡ Total leakage only relates to potable water and is
the combination of customer supply side leakage
and Scottish Water distribution network losses.
Figure 15.14 Water use in Scotland from 2002 to 2010. Source: Scottish Government (2010); data from Scottish Water.
Treatment process losses and raw water mains losses
†
Domestic consumption
Operational use
Raw abstracted water
†
Treated water produced
Non-domestic consumption
Total leakage
‡

622 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
Table 15.10 Estimated abstractions (million litres/day) from all sources (except tidal) by purpose and Environment Agency
region from 1995 to 2007a. Source: Defra (2009b); data from Environment Agency.
Year
Public
water
supply
Spray
irrigation
Agriculture
(excl. spray)
Electricity
supply
Other
industry
Mineral
washing
b
Fish
farming,
etc.
Private
water
supply c Other Total
1995 d 17,346 351 103 8,224 2,325 261 4,268 98 220 33,196
1996 d 17,453 368 136 9,435 3,245 247 4,338 171 528 35,920
1997 d 16,820 291 107 11,909 2,862 295 4,210 162 408 37,065
1998 d 16,765 281 111 15,980 2,485 220 5,495 175 286 41,799
1999 16,255 325 142 12,927 4,939 .. 4,867 91 518 40,063
2000 16,990 291 152 13,918 4,440 .. 4,709 102 556 41,157
2001 16,231 258 108 15,361 3,594 .. 4,657 92 103 40,404
2002 f16,938 248 119 15,146 3,443 .. 3,215 n 54 77 39,240
2003 e16,920 315 131 12,173 4,631 .. 3,077 n 60 86 37,394
2004 g h 17,208 225 122 11,573 4,558 .. 4,068 30 77 37,860
2005 i j 17,370 226 60 9,998 4,194 .. 3,654 26 60 35,588
2006 k l 17,004 277 47 10,364 3,729 .. 3,622 37 86 35,166
2007 m 16,381 161 72 10,304 2,736 n .. 3,412 29 113 33,208
a Some regions report licensed and actual abstractions for nancial rather than calendar years. As gures represent an average for the whole
year expressed in daily amounts, dierences between amounts reported for nancial and calendar years are small. From 01/04/2008 return
requirements were standardised across all the regions and returns are now requested on nancial years;
b In 1999, mineral washing was not reported as a separate categor y. Licences for mineral washing are contained in ‘Other industry’;
c Private abstractions for domestic use by individual households;
d Under-estimate of actual abstraction due to licences being assigned as industrial cooling rather than electricity supply (North East Region);
e Three licences re-assigned to other industry from electricit y supply (Midlands Region);
f No returns received for private water supply licence in 2002 and 2003 led to over-estimate in gures (Midlands Region);
g Increased number of returns received for sh farming licences in South Wessex Area (South West Region);
h Reduced abstraction at Dinorwig and Ffestiniog Power Stations (hydropower) (Wales);
i Reduced hydropower abstraction (North East and Midlands Region);
j Reduction in agricultural abstraction due to deregulation of licences as of 1 April 2005;
k Several licences changed from surface water to tidal (North East Region);
l Increased hydropower abstrac tion (Wales);
m Decrease in actuals for spray irrigation due to wet summer in 2007;
n Estimate requires further investigation and should be treated with caution.
catchment basis. In many largely urban catchments, rising
populations and their increased use of water per capita have
driven increases in demand. In some catchments, the use
of water for industry will also have increased, although the
small-scale use of water in traditional industry (e.g. via mills)
may have reduced in some areas. Use of water by agriculture
remains relatively small in many areas of the UK. Greatest
concern is in south-east England where demand is high and
supply is low, and in some catchments use for irrigation has
increased during the last 20 years (Weatherhead & Knox
2000). This increase has largely occurred on horticultural
crops which have not been in receipt of subsidies, and so,
any increased water demand has been in response to market
demands (Knox et al. 2010).
In addition, policies such as the Water Framework
Directive (WFD) and the Bathing Water Directive (BWD)
could potentially have a large influence on the management
of the UK’s freshwaters in future years. The WFD introduces
new ways of assessing water quality which relate to broad
ecological objectives and, through these, to the structure and
Figure 15.15 Volume of bottled water consumed in the UK
(millions of litres) from 1990 to 2009. Source: data from British
Bottled Water (2010).
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,500
Consumption of bottled water in UK
(millions of litre s)
2,000
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Year

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 623
agri-environment schemes (Carvell et al. 2007; Walker et al.
2007). Similar events have also happened at the large scale
when private organisations, such as the Royal Society for
the Protection of Birds and National Tr ust, buy agricultural
land and then manage it for biodiversity. In both cases,
however, somebody has to pay for the environmental
enhancement. In the former case, it is the tax payer, and
in the latter case it is the charities’ memberships. These
systems raise some questions about fairness of payment
and distribution of benefits; for instance, should all tax
payers contribute to agri-environment pay ments that
increase biodiversity on private land that they will never
see? Or is it fair for charity members to support biodiversity
which potentially benefits more people than themselves?
Are the general public free-riding on the actions of those
charity members?
Similar tensions occur in marine fisheries, and, to a large
extent, much of recent fisheries policy has been trading-off
short-term sector profitability against longer-term stock
protection. While fisheries policy has tried to regulate
fisheries activities though imposing close seasons for certain
stock and restricting the number of days that trawlers may
actively fish, perhaps the best examples of trade-offs relate
to gear restrictions and closed areas. Gear restrictions seek
to limit the types of fishing gear that can be used in certain
locations and/or for catching certain fish species: these are
known as ‘technical measures’. Technical measures can
be used to achieve a range of management objectives. For
example, minimum mesh sizes may be used to encourage
the release of under-sized or juvenile fish, while the use of
separator panels or square mesh codends may eliminate the
catching of species for which the fishers have no quota or
that would be taken as by-catch.
Biodiversity can also be enhanced by extensification of
production practices. These may include reduction in inputs
to crops, wider planting densities in crops and reduced
stocking rates of grazing animals. Similarly, in forestry and
fisheries it is possible to develop techniques that provide
‘more space for nature’, for example, more broadleaved trees
in conifer plantations and ‘no-take zones’ in sea fisheries.
Although such activities enhance biodiversity, they may not
enhance either levels of food/fibre provision or the incomes of
landowners and rural communities. Furthermore, they may
not necessarily serve to reduce the emissions of greenhouse
gases from production activities. For example, low stocking
rates of suckler beef herds may offer biodiversity benefits to
upland and marginal habitats, but the slow growth rates of
stock in these systems results in greater levels of lifetime
methane emissions than in some other beef production
systems. Unfortunately, this argument is complicated by the
fact that some extensive grazing systems serve to protect
extensive carbon stocks in soils, while others may even be
able to enhance carbon sequestration on farms (Taylor et
al. 2010).
Thus the challenge for sustainable management is to find
options that offer advances in more than one dimension of
sustainability at a time. Can we devise food/fibre production
systems that protect biodiversity and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, while still maintaining incomes and cultural
values? There are few examples of such win:win management
function of aquatic ecosystems themselves. These objectives
are to be met through a river basin management planning
system which will seek to deliver integrated management of
ground, fresh and coastal waters. The BWD seeks to monitor
and improve bathing water quality around the coasts of EU
members. In order to achieve this, the EU has set limits for
physical, chemical and microbiological parameters, and
national authorities must ensure that these limits are not
exceeded. Agriculture and land use clearly play important
roles in delivering high quality water resources, and, as a
result of these new policies, there may be greater pressure on
landowners to reduce the amount of chemical and biological
pollutants entering water bodies. Several studies highlight
problems associated with meeting the required standards
(Kay et al. 2007; Howden et al. 2009), while others suggest
that compliance may be financially costly for individual
businesses (Fezzi et al. 2008).
15.12 Trade-offs, Synergies
and Options for Sustainable
Management
Detailed discussions of trade-offs and synergies for many of
the habitats that provide provisioning services are provided
in Chapters 5–9 and 11–12; in order to prevent repetition,
this section provides a summary overview of some of the
key issues in sustainable management of habitats and
ecosystems for the supply of provisioning services.
The provision of food and fibre has large and significant
interactions with many ecosystems. Indeed, much of the
UK’s land and sea is managed to provide these services.
Because of this, the trade-offs and synergies are many.
Generally, if management is intensive, there is a greater
impact on the environment, but the delivery of provisioning
services may also be enhanced, for example, increased yield
in intensive compared to organic wheat. There are occasions
where management can be made less intensive, for example,
when a farmer offers a niche product from an extensive farm
system, however, it is not apparent that all of society’s needs
can be met from such ‘extensive but niche’ systems.
Some foods and fibre are harvested from less intensively
managed ecosystems, e.g. game, sea fish and timber from
broadleaved woodland. In these ecosystems, there are
trade-offs between harvest method, size of harvest, price
and long-term supply of the goods. If regulated properly,
such harvests can be truly sustainable; however, it is unclear
how many of our needs for food and fibre can be met from
such systems.
Within more intensive production systems there are
many known options for introducing management that
can enhance one dimension of sustainability at a time. For
example, levels of farmland biodiversity can be enhanced
by removing land from agricultural production and enabling
re-establishment of natural habitats, as promoted by some

624 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
changes available at the moment. So the question that must
be asked is: which elements of the sustainability agenda are
most important to achieve, and which are least important? If
society can define this, then there are options for enhancing
sustainability on one or two dimensions simultaneously.
However, if demand for provisioning services continues to
increase, society will face some very hard choices: to date,
there are few examples of provisioning services which
meet the highest standards of environmental and social
sustainability while simultaneously being highly productive
and profitable.
15.13 Key Questions and
Knowledge Gaps
The specific knowledge gaps and research needs relating to
many of the habitats discussed in this chapter are presented
in Chapters 5–9 and 12, the purpose here is to present some
of the common and overarching questions and gaps relevant
to provisioning services from all habitats.
15.13.1 How Should We Spatially
Allocate Productive and Environmental
Management Activities?
There is a debate in agriculture about how to spatially
integrate productive and environmental management
activities (Fischer et al. 2008; Ewers et al. 2009; Hodgson et
al. 2010). One option is to separate these two activities and
to prioritise production in some areas and environmental
conservation in others. A second option is to encourage
production and environmental management to occur at the
same spatial scale. This debate is relevant at several spatial
scales. For example, within a field there could be intensively
managed crops in the centre and a wide field margin managed
for wildlife at the edge. Alternatively, the whole field could
be managed less intensively with lower seed rates, reduced
use of agrochemicals and gaps for wildlife, such as skylark
scrapes (Smith et al. 2009), being present throughout the crop.
At larger spatial scales there is potential to have some fields
on a farm managed intensively for production and to allocate
other areas of the farm for environmental purposes. While
at the landscape-scale there is potential to have some larger
areas of land dedicated to production and others dedicated to
environmental purposes (e.g. reserves of some type).
Similar debates are relevant to fisheries and forestry.
Within forestry, the questions are similar to those within
agriculture: should commercial forests focus solely on
maximising timber production, or should they include areas
for wildlife and recreation (e.g. open areas, areas of non-
commercial broadleaved species, wide forest rides, etc.)
(Hale et al. 2009; Tomkins 1990)?
In marine fisheries, debate centres around whether areas
of the sea should be designated as marine reserves or no-
take zones, while others are left for production (Lorenzen et
al. 2008; Richardson et al. 2006), or whether fishers should be
asked to undertake environmentally sustainable activities
in all areas. At the extreme, we could ask if increased use
of intensive aquacultural activities would serve to reduce
fishing pressure on the open ocean.
The environmental and economic costs and benefits
of applying these options at various scales are poorly
understood, and the balance of costs and benefits will
change over time as demand for food and fibre fluctuates.
We need a better understanding of the environmental,
economic and social aspects of applying these alternative
strategies in different locations on land and at sea. Related
to this is a need to understand how the best overall option
could be implemented in an efficient and effective manner.
15.13.2 What Level of Species
Redundancy is There in Productive
Ecosystems?
This question is related to the question set out in Section
15.13.1 but focuses more on the levels of biodiversity we
should aim to see in productive ecosystems. It could be
argued that some of the biodiversity observed on UK farms
has little impact on the productive potential of that farm.
Advocates of the view that some biodiversity is irrelevant
to production could point to the increased trends in wheat
yields observed over the last 50 years in the UK and the
simultaneous decline in farmland birds (Newton 2004;
Fuller & Ausden 2008). They would argue that if farmland
birds really were crucial to the health of the productive
ecosystem then yields would have decreased at the same
time as the populations of farmland birds declined. Indeed,
advocates of such a view may point more widely to global
trends and highlight the fact that, despite species going
extinct at an unprecedented rate (Pimm et al. 1995), levels of
agricultural production tend to be increasing; this suggests
that, at a global level, many species are not that important
to production-related activities. There are many counter
arguments to this viewpoint (Bell et al. 2005; Bunker et al.
2005; Chapin et al. 2000; Hector et al. 2007; Loreau et al.
2001), and, as Ehrlich & Ehrlich (1981) pointed out, species
loss is analogous to losing rivets from an aircraft wing. You
can afford to lose a few rivets without any worry, but you
never know when losing another rivet will lead to the loss of
the wing, and thereby the loss of all life on the aircraft.
If, in the future, we do need to increase the levels of
food and fibre produced from our ecosystems, then it would
be useful to understand which species really are crucial to
maintaining the productive ability of the ecosystems, and
which are effectively redundant from a production point of
view. Such information would ensure that managers of farms,
forests and fisheries do not accidentally cause loss of species
vital to the functioning of their productive ecosystems. It
would also enable conser vation strategies to be developed
for those species that are functionally redundant.
15.13.3 How Can We Predict When
Environmental Pressures Will Serve to
Reduce Future Flows of Provisioning
Services in Given Ecosystems?
All systems which provide food and fibre are vulnerable
to two broad classes of factors which could render them

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 625
unsustainable in the long-term: intrinsic and extrinsic
effects. Intrinsic effects can be defined as the impact of
activities that arise within that production system upon itself.
Extrinsic effects can be defined as the impact of activities
outside the production system on that system. An example
of an intrinsic effect would include the over-cultivation of
some soils which leads to extreme soil erosion and prevents
the further use of that land for crop production. An example
of an extrinsic effect would be the impact of a distant
pollution event on the ability of a piece of land to produce
some provisioning services (e.g. the impact of radioactivity
from the Chernobyl explosion on sheep production in some
areas of the UK).
As described earlier in this chapter, the output of services
(per unit area of land) and labour (measured in terms of weight
and calories from UK agriculture) increased between 1945
and 2009 in nearly all areas of crop and livestock production.
It is also evident that the production of food from agriculture
has had wide and varied impacts on the environment; for
example, overgrazing on the hills and mountains, pesticide-
poisoning of raptors in the 1950 and 1960s, water pollution
from phosphorus and nitrogen, and cropping system impacts
on populations of farmland birds (Cade et al. 1971; Newton
2004; Haygarth et al. 2009; Potts et al. 2010a). However, the
fact that more food is produced in the UK now than in 1940s
suggests that the environmental impacts of agriculture have
not yet reduced its own productive capacity. In other words,
the productive activities of agriculture have not had long-
term and lasting intrinsic effects on its ability to provide
provisioning goods and services.
The situation in sea fisheries is very different; there
have been continued declines in catches of fish over the
period 1945 to 2009. The main hypothesised cause for these
declines relates to overharvesting of the fish resource (Cook
et al. 1997; Hutchings 2000; Pauly et al. 1998). In effect, the
activities of fishers themselves had had a long-term impact
on the level of provisioning services provided by the UK’s
marine ecosystems.
It would be useful to develop indicators that would alert
managers to the risk of intrinsic effects decreasing their
productive activities in the future. This would enable them to
alter their management regimes and, hopefully, ensure the
long-term flow of provisioning services from their systems.
However, while the development of some indicators may be
relatively straightforward at a biophysical level, it may be
more difficult to ensure that managers act on the signals
they provide. For example, it was evident for many years that
the total catch and catch per unit effort of many species of
sea fish were in decline (both of which may be indicators
of the stock’s long-term health), but neither policy makers
nor fishers acted effectively on this information. Similarly,
in some areas of the world, soil salinity was identified as a
problem for cropping systems but no effective action was
taken to effectively manage salinity levels; as a result, these
areas have now been abandoned (Edwards-Jones 2003).
The reasons why managers may not act on such
indicators are complex and varied. Some resource users
may not have any options for changing their management
regimes, and/or science may not be able to suggest viable
alternative management systems to farmers and fishers.
There may also be dispute over the cause of an observed
change in the indicator, for example, some people may argue
that reduced fish stocks are not related to overfishing, but
to other causes instead, such as climate change (Brander
2010; Halliday & Pinhorn 2009). Finally, other factors may
serve to obscure the signal provided by the indicator. For
instance, technology that enables production to increase
despite the impact of declining environmental quality may
serve to mask underlying trends in the productive capacity of
the ecosystem; new crop varieties may offer enhanced yields
despite deteriorating soil quality; and better management
of inputs may serve to maintain yields despite declines in
natural predators of pests.
Several questions which are relevant to the future
management of the UK’s productive ecosystems arise from a
consideration of the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic factors
on these systems:
a) Can we rely on the continued investment in agricultural
science and technology to ensure that negative intrinsic
effects will not affect the continued flow of provisioning
goods and services?
b) How should society balance the impacts of intrinsic and
extrinsic effects of production?
c) Are there any early indicators that intrinsic effects
are starting to have negative impacts on the ability of
production systems to provide a flow of provisioning
goods and services?
d) In the future, are the flows of provisioning services
from the UK more likely to be interrupted by intrinsic or
extrinsic factors?
e) Can the flow of provisioning services from production
systems, such as sea fisheries and forestry, be enhanced by
altered patterns of investment in science and technology?
15.13.4 How Can We Enhance Resource
Efficiency and Reduce Levels of Waste
and Pollution?
Natural resources are finite, yet nearly all of human activity
depends upon the use of these resources. Recently, there
has been much focus on the quantities of oil that remain
to be mined (Charpentier 2002; Verbruggen & Marchohi
2010), but many other inputs to production systems are
derived from non-renewable sources such as metals,
phosphorus and other minerals (Edwards-Jones & Howells
2001). Technological improvements in mining and related
industries, combined with increased prices for some non-
renewable materials due to increased scarcity, make it more
economically viable to access previously untapped pockets
of many resources. But this does not remove the fact that
these resources are ultimately finite, and it would be a wise
long-term strategy to minimise their use.
Similarly, it would seem wise to reduce the amount of
waste and pollution that productive activities cause. This
is particularly relevant in the context of climate change.
Currently, there is much interest in reducing greenhouse
gas emissions from agriculture (Burney et al. 2010; Huang
& Tang 2010; Smith et al. 2010), but there remains a
considerable challenge in achieving real and meaningful
reductions in overall levels of emissions, particularly in
levels of greenhouse gases per unit of production.

626 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
For these reasons, a very real and immediate challenge
across agriculture, fisheries and forestry is to increase
the resource efficiency of production by developing
systems of production that use fewer non-renewable
resources (including water) per unit of production, while
simultaneously producing lower levels of pollution per
unit of production. This task can only be achieved by the
active and positive interaction of scientists, engineers and
industry. Recent multi-disciplinary research initiatives
and partnership between academia and industry offer
some hope for progress in this field. However, the relevant
research questions are very applied in nature, and to
date many of state funders of research have struggled to
divert substantial funds to such applied fields. Developing
suitable mechanisms to fund the necessary applied multi-
disciplinary research presents a challenge for government
and the research community.
References
Acs, S., Hanley, N., Dallimer, M., Gaston, K.J., Robertson, P.,
Wilson, P. & Armsworth, P.R. (2010) The effect of decoupling on
marginal agricultural systems: Implications for farm incomes,
land use and upland ecology. Land Use Policy, 27, 550–563.
Aebischer, N.J. (1997). Gamebirds: management of the
grey partridge in Br itain. Conservation and the Use of Wildlife
Resources (ed. M.Bolton), pp. 131-151. Chapman & Hall, London.
Aebischer, N.J. & Ewald, J.A. (2010) Grey Partridge Perdix
perdix in the UK: recovery status, set-aside and shooting. Ibis
152, 530–542.
Anderson, A. (2006) Spinning the rural agenda: The
countryside alliance, fox hunting and social policy. Social Policy
& Administration, 40, 722–738.
Anonymous (2008) New Research Note: Red band needle
blight. Scottish Forestry, 62, 30.
Asfaw, S., Mithofer, D. & Waibel, H. (2010) Agrifood supply
chain, private-sector standards, and farmers’ health: evidence
from Kenya. Agricultural Economics, 41, 251–263.
Barnes, R.F.W. (1987) Long term declines of red grouse in
Scotland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 24, 735–741.
Bell, T., Newman, J.A., Silverman, B.W., Turner, S.L. & Lilley,
A.K. (2005) The contribution of species richness and composition
to bacterial services. Nature, 436, 1157–1160.
Berthoud, H., Imdorf, A., Haueter, M., Radloff, S. & Neumann
P. (2010) Virus infections and winter losses of honey bee colonies
(Apis mellifera). Journal of Apicultural Research, 49, 60–65.
Benn, R., Weaver, P.P,. Billet, D.S.M., van den Hove, S.,
Murdock, A.P., Doneghan, G.B. & Le Bas, T. (2010) Human
Activities on the Deep Seafloor in the North East Atlantic: An
Assessment of Spatial Extent. PLoS One, 5: Article No.: e12730
Art No. 2010.
Bjornsson, B. & Dombaxe, M.A.D. (2004) Quality of
Nephrops as food for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L .) with
possible implications for fisheries management. ICES Journal of
Marine Science, 61, 983–991.
Boersma, L., Gasper, E., Oldfield, J.E. & Cheeke, P.R. (1981)
Methods for the recovery of nutrients and energy from swine
manure. 1. Biogas. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, 29,
3–14.
Bornett, H.L.I., Guy, J.H. & Cain, P.J. (2003) Impact of
animal welfare on costs and viability of pig production in the UK.
Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics, 16, 163–186.
Bowen-Walker, P.L. & Gunn, A. (2001) The effect of the
ectoparasitic mite, Varroa destructor on adult worker honeybee
(Apis mellifera) emergence weight s, water, protein, carbohydrate,
and lipid levels. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 101,
207–217.
Brander, K.M. (2010) Cod Gadus morhua and climate
change: processes, productivity and prediction. Journal of Fish
Biology, 77, 1899–1911.
British Beekeepers’ Association (2009) Honey Bee Health
Research Concepts, January 2009.
British Bottled Water (2010) Water’s vital statistics:
industr y data. [online] Available at <http://www.
britishbottledwater.org/vitalstats2.html> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Brouwer, F.M. & van Berkum, S. (1996) CAP and
environment in the European Union: Analysis of the effects
of the CAP on the environment and assessment of existing
environmental conditions in policy. Wageningen Pers, The
Netherlands pp vii+171p ISBN: 90-74134-39-4.
Bunce, R.G.H., Bell, M. & Far ino, T. (1998) The
environmentally sensitive area legislation in the United Kingdom
and its potential application to the Picos de Europa mountains in
north-west Spain. Environmental Conservation, 25, 219–227.
Bunker, D.E., DeClerck, F., Bradford, J.C., Colwell, R.K.,
Perfecto, I., Phillips, O.L., Sankaran, M. & Naeem, S. (2005)
Species loss and aboveground carbon storage in a tropical forest.
Science, 310, 1029–1031.
Burney, J.A., Davis, S.J. & Lobell, D.B. (2010) Greenhouse
gas mitigation by agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Amer ica, 107,
12052–12057.
Burton, M., Rigby, D., Young, T. & James, S. (2001)
Consumer attitudes to genetically modified organisms in food in
the UK. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 28, 479–498.
Cade, T.J., Lincer, J.L., White, C.M., Roseneau, D.G. &
Swartz, L.G. (1971) DDE residues and eggshell changes in
Alaskan Falcons and hawks. Science, 172, (3986), 955–1971.
Capper, J.L., Cady, R.A. & Bauman, D.E. (2009) The
environmental impact of dairy production: 1944 compared with
2007. Journal of Animal Science, 87, 2160–2167.
Carvell, C., Meek, W.R., Pywell, R.F., Goulson, D. &
Nowakowski, M. (2007) Comparing the efficacy of agri-
environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and
diversity on arable field margins. Journal of Applied Ecology 44,
29–40.
Cefas (Centre for Environment, Fisheries and
Aquaculture Science) & Environment Agency (2009)
Annual Assessment of Salmon Stocks in England and Wales
2008. Preliminary assessment prepared for ICES, March 2009.
Environment Agency & Cefas, 117 pp.
Chapin, F.S., Zavaleta, E.S., Eviner, V.T., Naylor, R.L.,
Vitousek, P.M., Reynolds, H.L. & Hooper, D.U., Lavorel, S., Sala,
O.E. Hobbie, S.E. Mack, M.C., Diaz, S. (2000) Consequences of
changing biodiversity. Nature, 405, 234–242.
Charpentier, R.R. (2002) Hubbert’s peak – The impending
world oil shortage. Science, 295, 1470 –1470.

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 627
Chen, J.S. (2009) Food oral processing – A review. Food
Hydrocolloids, 23, 1–25.
CIWF (Compassion in Wild Far ming) (2010) Pigs in
Europe still suffering says Compassion. [online] Available at:
<http://www.ciwf.org.uk/news/pig_farming/pigs_in_europe_
still_suffering.aspx> [Accessed 16.10.10].
Cook, R.M., Sinclair, A. & Stefansson, G. (1997) Potential
collapse of North Sea cod stocks. Nature, 385, 521– 522.
Cooper, M.D. & Wrathall, J.H.M. (2010) Assurance schemes
as a tool to tackle genetic welfare problems in farm animals:
broilers. Animal Welfare, 19, 51–56.
Cotterill, R.W. (2006) Antitrust analysis of supermarkets:
global concerns playing out in local markets. Australian Journal
of Agriculultural and Resource Economics, 50, 17–32.
Cracknell, R. (2009) Sea fisheries statistics. House of
Commons Library Standard Note: SN/SG/2788 16pp.
DairyCo (2009) Confidence key to halting decline in milk
supply. [online] Available at: <http://www.dairyco.org.uk/news/
press-archive/january-2009/confidence-key-to-halting-decline-
in-milk-supply.aspx> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Davis, D.R., Epp, M.D. & Riordan, H.D. (2004) Changes in
USDA food composition data for 43 garden crops, 1950 to 1999.
Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 23, 669–682.
de Lange, K . (1999) Feeding growing-finishing pigs for profit
– Main concepts and new opportunities. (Ed. Ball, R.) Advance
in Pork Production, 10123–144, 28th Banff Pork Seminar, Banff,
Canada.
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2006) Food Security and the UK: An Evidence and
Analysis Paper. Food Chain Analysis Group, Defra, 87pp. [online]
Available at: <http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/economics/
foodfarm/reports/documents/foodsecurity.pdf>.
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2009a) Agriculture in the UK 2009 Report. [online]
Available at: <http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/2010/03/18/
auk-2009/> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2009b) Environmental and Wildlife Statistics – Inland
water. [online] Available at: <http://www.defra.gov.uk/
evidence/statistics/environment/> [Accessed: 28.04.11].
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2009c) Strategic Review of Aquaculture Potential
England. [online] Available at: <http://archive.defra.gov.uk/
foodfarm/fisheries/documents/aquaculture-report0904.pdf>
[Accessed 07.03.11].
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2010a) Yield and production time series. [online]
Available at: <http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/foodfarm/
food/cereals/cerealsoilseed/> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs) (2010b) Environmental Stewardship. [online] Available
at: <http://www.defra.gov.uk/food-farm/land-manage/>
[Accessed 16.10.10 ].
Dimmock, J.P.R.E., Bennett, S.J., Wright, D., Edwards-
Jones, G. & Harris, I.M. (2005). Agronomic evaluation and
performance of flax var ieties for industrial fibre production.
Journal of Agricultural Science, 143, 299–309.
Dittirch, P., Senser, M. & Frielinghaus, J. (1989).
Comparative study on the turnover of quinic acid and shikimic
acid and its derivaties in the needles of Norway Spruce,
Picea abies (L) Karst affected by Waldsterben syndrome.
Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt, 108, 103–110.
Donaldson, A., Lowe, P. & Ward, N. (2002) Virus-crisis-
institutional change: The foot and mouth actor network and the
governance of rural affairs in the UK. Sociologica Ruralis, 42,
201–214.
Dreezens, E., Martijn, C., Tenbult, P., Kok, G. & de Vries,
N.K. (2005) Food and the relation between values and attitude
characteristics. Appetite, 45, 40–46.
Dubuit, M.H. (1995) Food and feeding of cod (Gadus morhua
L ) in the Celtic Sea. Fisheries Research, 22, 227–241.
Dyke, A. & New ton, A. (1999) Commercial harvesting of
wild mushrooms in Scottish forests: is it sustainable? Scottish
Forestr y, 53 (2) 77–85.
Edwards-Jones, G. (2003) Agricultural policy and
environment in Syria: The cases of rangeland grazing and
soil management. Syrian Agriculture at the Crossroads, FAO
Agricultural Policy and Economic Development Series. No 8.
Rome pp 117–133.
Edwards-Jones, G. (2010) Are eating local food and
increasing national levels of self-sufficiency good for the health
of the environment and consumers? Proceedings of the Nutrition
Societ y, 69, 582–591.
Edwards-Jones, G. & Howells, O. (2001) The origin and
hazard of input s to crop protection in organic farming systems:
Are they sustainable? Agricultural Systems, 67, 31–47.
Edward s-Jones, G., Plassmann, K., York, E.H.,
Houn some, B., Jones, D.L. & Milà i Canals, L. (2009)
Vulnerabilit y of Exporting Nations to the Development of a
Carbon Label in the United Kingdom. Environmental Science
and Policy, 12, 479–490.
Ehrlich, P.R. & Ehrlich, A.H. (1981) Extinction: the Causes
and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species. Random
House, New York, NY.
Engelhard, G.H. (2005) Catalogue of Defra historical catch
and effort charts: six decades of detailed spatial statistics for British
fisheries. Sci. Ser. Tech. Rep., Cefas Lowestoft, No. 128: 42pp.
Ewers, R.M., Scharlemann, J.P.W., Balmford, A. & Green,
R.E. (2009) Do increases in agricultural yield spare land for
nature? Global Change Biology, 15,1716 –1726.
Fera (Food and Environment Research Agency) (2011)
Honey bees. [online] Available at: <http://www.fera.defra.gov.
uk/plants/beeHealth/> [Accessed 25.01.11].
Ferris, C.P., Gordon, F.J., Patterson, D.C., Kilpatrick, D.J.,
Mayne, C.S. & McCoy, M.A. (2001) The response of dairy cows
of high genetic merit to increasing proportion of concentrate
in the diet with a high and medium feed value silage. Journal of
Agricultural Science, 136, 319 –329.
Fezzi, C., Rigby, D., Bateman, I.J., Hadley, D. & Posen, P.
(2008) Estimating the range of economic impacts on farms of
nutrient leaching reduction policies. Agr icultural Economics, 39,
197–205.
Fischer, J. Brosi, B. Daily, G.C., Ehrlich, P.R., Goldman,
R., Goldstein, J., Lindenmayer, D.B., Manning, A.D., Mooney,
H.A., Pejchar, L., Ranganathan, Jai. & Tallis, H. (2008) Should
agricultural policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly
farming? Frontiers in Ecolog y and the Environment, 6, 380–385.
Forestry Commission (2010) Timber Sales. [online]
Available at: <http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-
7BADDP> [Accessed 07.03.11].

628 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
Frost H. & Andersen, P. (2006) The Common Fisheries Policy
of the European Union and fisheries economics. Marine Policy,
30 (6) 737–746.
Fuller, R.J. & Ausden, M. (2008) Birds and habitat change
in Britain Part I: a review of losses and gains in the twentieth
century. British Birds, 101, 644 –675.
Fuller, R.J. & Gough, S.J. (1999) Changes in sheep
numbers in Br itain: implications for bird populations. Biological
Conser vation, 91,73–89.
Green, R.E. (1996) Factors affecting the population density
of the corncrake Crex crex in Britain and Ireland. Journal of
Applied Ecology, 33, 237–248.
GWCT (Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust) (2009)
National GameBag Census. [online] Available at: <http://www.
gwct.org.uk/research__sur veys/wildlife_surveys/national_
gamebag_census/trends_in_game_bags/default.asp> [Accessed
07.03.11].
Hadjimichael, M., Edwards-Jones, M. & Kaiser, M.J. (2010)
Distribution of the burden of fisheries regulations in Europe: The
north/south divide. Marine Policy, 34,795–802.
Hale, S.E., Edwards, C., Mason, W.L., Price, M. & Peace, A.
(2009) Relationships between canopy transmittance and stand
parameters in Sitka spruce and Scots pine stands in Britain.
Forestr y, 82, 503–513.
Halliday, R.G. & Pinhorn, A.T. (2009) The roles of fishing
and environmental change in the decline of Northwest Atlantic
groundfish populations in the early 1990s. Fisheries Research, 97,
163–182.
Harr is, S. & Swinbank, A. (1997). The CAP and the Food
Industr y. The Common Agr icultural Policy (Eds. C Ritson & D R
Harvey). CAB, Wallingford UK.
Harr ison, M., Lee, A., Findlay, M., Nicholls, R., Leonard, D. &
Martin, C. (2010) The increasing cost of healthy food. Australian
and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 34, 179–186.
Haygarth, P.M., ApSimon, H., Betson, M., Harris, D.,
Hodgkinson, R. & Withers, P.J.A. (2009) Mitigating Diffuse
Phosphorus Transfer from Agriculture According to Cost and
Efficiency. Journal of Environmental Quality, 38, 2012–2022.
Hector, A. & Bagchi, R. (2007) Biodiversity and ecosystem
multifunctionality. Nature, 448,188 –U6.
Hinz, H. Prieto, V. & Kaiser, M.J. (2009) Trawl disturbance
on benthic communities: chronic effects and exper imental
predictions. Ecological Applications, 19, 761–773.
Hodge, I. & McNally, S. (1998) Evaluating the
environmentally sensitive areas: the value of rural environments
and policy relevance. Journal of Rural Studies, 14, 357–367.
Hodgson, J.A., Kunin, W.E., Thomas, C.D., Benton, T.G. &
Gabriel, D. (2010) Comparing organic farming and land sparing:
optimizing yield and butterfly populations at a landscape scale.
Ecology Letters, 13, 1358–1367.
Hope, D., Picozzi, N., Catt, D.C. & Moss, R. (1996) Effects
of reducing sheep grazing in the Scottish Highlands. Journal of
Range Management, 49, 301–310.
Howden, N.J.K ., Bowes, M.J., Clark, A.D.J., Bowes, M.J.,
Clark, A.D.J., Humphries, N. & Neal, C. (2009) Water quality,
nutrients and the European union’s Water Framework Directive
in a lowland agricultural region: Suffolk, south-east England.
Science of the total Environment, 407, 2966–2979.
Huang, Y. & Tang, Y.H. (2010) An estimate of greenhouse
gas (N2O and CO2) mitigation potential under various scenarios
of nitrogen use efficiency in Chinese croplands. Global Change
Biology, 16, 2958–2970.
Hutchings, J.A. (2000) Collapse and recovery of marine
fishes. Nature, 406, 882–885.
Jackson, P. (2010) Food stories: consumption in an age of
anxiety. Cultural Geographies, 17, 147–165.
JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) (2010)
8. Area of land under agri-environment scheme management.
[online] Available at: <http://www.jncc.gov.uk/default.
aspx?page =4243> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Jones, R. (2004) European beekeeping in the 21st century:
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats. Bee World,
85:77–80.
Jordan, C. & Tomlinson, R.W. (2007) Soil carbon and peat
extraction in Northern Ireland. Inventor y and projections of UK
emissions by sources and removals by sinks due to land use,
land use change and forestry (Eds: A.M. Thomson & M. van
Oijen). Annual Report, June 2007. Defra: Climate, Energy, Science
and Analysis Division.
Kaiser, M.J., Clarke, K.R., Hinz, H., Austen, M.C.V.,
Somerfield, P.J. & Karakassis, I. (2006) Global analysis and
prediction of the response of benthic biota and habitats to
fishing. Marine Ecolog y Progress Series, 311, 1–14.
Kay, D., Aitken, M. & Crowther, J. (2007) Reducing fluxes of
faecal indicator compliance parameters to bathing waters from
diffuse agricultural sources: The Brighouse Bay study, Scotland.
Environmental Pollution, 147, 138–149.
Knox, J.W., Kay, Rodriguez-Diaz, J.A., Weatherhead, E.K. &
Kay, M.G. (2010) Development of a water strategy for horticulture
in England and Wales. Journal of Horticultural Science and
Biotechnology, 85, 89–93.
Laplace, J.P. (2006) Farming and food. Crossed
perspectives. Cahiers Agricultures, 15, 375–378.
Laurec, A., & Armstrong, D. (1997) The European Common
Fisheries Policy and its evolution. Global trends: fisheries
management (Ed. Pikitch, E.K., Huppert, D.D., & Sissenwine,
M.P.). American Fisher ies Society Symposium, 20. Bethesda,
Maryland. pp. 61–72.
Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime,
J.P., Hector, A., Hooper, D.U., Huston, M.A., Raffaelli, D., Schmid,
B., Tilman, D. & Wardle, D.A. (2001) Ecology – Biodiversity
and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future
challenges. Science, 294, 804–808.
Lorenzen, K., Steneck, R.S., Warner, R.R., Parma, A.M.,
Coleman, F.C. & Leber, K.M. (2008) The spatial dimensions of
fisheries: putting it all in place. Bulletin of Marine Science, 86,
169–177.
Marine Scotland (2009a) Scottish Fish Farms Annual
Production Survey 2008. Marine Scotland, Scottish
Government.
Marine Scotland (2009b) Scottish Shellfish Production
Survey 2008 Report. Marine Scotland, Scottish Government.
Marks, H.F. (1989) A hundred years of British Food and
Farming. A statistical Survey. Taylor & Francis, London, 275 pp.
Maxted, N., Scholten M, Codd R & Ford-Lloyd B (2007)
Creation and use of a national inventor y of crop wild relatives.
Biological Conservation, 140, 142–159.
Mayor, D.J., Zuur, A.F., Solan, M., Paton, G.I. & Kilham, K.
(2010) Factors Affecting Benthic Impacts at Scottish Fish Farms.
Environmental Science & Technolog y, 44, 2079–2084.

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 629
Mead, S.J.H. (2003) An analysis of trends in the UK beef
industr y and key dynamics of change for 2015. Journal of the
Royal Agricultural Society of England 164.
Millstone, E. (2009) Science, risk and governance: Radical
rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance.
Research Policy, 38, 624–636.
MMO (Marine Management Organisation) (2010a) UK
Sea Fisher ies Statistics 2009, Table 3.3 [online] Available at:
<http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/fisheries/statistics/
annual2009.htm> [Accessed 28.01.11].
MMO (Marine Management Organisation) (2010b) UK
Sea Fisher ies Statistics Archive [online] Available at: <http://
www.marinemanagement.org.uk/fisheries/statistics/annual_
archive.htm> [Accessed 28.01.11].
National Non-Food Crops Centre (2009) Area Statistics
for Non-food crops. [online] Available at: <http://www.nnfcc.
co.uk/metadot/index.pl?id=2179;isa =Category;op =show>
[Accessed 28.01.11].
Navarro, N., Leakey, R.J.G. & Black, K.D. (2008) Effect
of salmon cage aquaculture on the pelagic environment of
temperate coastal waters: seasonal changes in nutrients and
microbial community. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 361, 47–58.
Newton, I. (2004) The recent declines of far mland bird
populations in Britain: an appraisal of causal factors and
conservation actions. Ibis, 146, 579–600.
NFU (National Farmers Union) (2002) Growing Great
Britain: Horticulture Fact s and Figures. NFU Public Affairs,
August 2002.
Nicholson, R.J., Webb, J. & Moore, A. (2002) A review of
the environmental effects of different livestock manure storage
systems, and a suggested procedure for assigning environmental
ratings. Biosystems Engineering, 81, 363–377.
Ojango, J.M.K. & Pollott, G.E. (2002) The relationship
between Holstein bull breeding values for milk yield derived in
both the UK and Kenya. Livestock Production Science, 74, 1–12.
Oom, S.P., Sibbald, A.M., Hester, A.J., Miller, D.R. & Legg,
C.J. (2008) Impacts of sheep grazing a complex vegetation
mosaic: Relating behaviour to vegetation change. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment, 124, 219–228.
PACEC (Public and Cor porate Economic Consultants)
(2006) The Economic and Environmental Impact of Sporting
Shooting in the UK. Public and Corporate Economic Consultants.
PACEC, London.
Parag, Y. & Roberts, J.T. (2009) A Battle Against the Bottles:
Building, Claiming, and Regaining Tap-Water Trustworthiness.
Societ y & Natural Resources, 22, 625– 636.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R. & Torres,
F. (1998) Fishing down marine food webs. Science, 279, 860–863.
Peel, D. & Lloyd, M.G. (2008) Governance and planning
policy in the marine environment: regulating aquaculture in
Scotland. Geographical Journal, 174, 361–373.
Phillipson, J., Bennett, K., Lowe, P. & Raley, M. (2004)
Adaptive responses and asset strategies: the experience of
rural micro-firms and Foot and Mouth Disease. Journal of Rural
Studies, 20, 227–243.
Pimm, S.L., Russell, G.J., Gittleman, J.L. & Brooks, T.M.
(1995) The future of biodiversity. Science, 269, 347–350.
Plassmann, K. & Edwards-Jones, G. (2009) Where does
the carbon footprint fall? Developing a carbon map of food
production. IIED London, pp34.
Potts, G.R. (1986) The Partridge: Pesticides, Predation and
Conservation. Collins, London.
Potts, G.R., Ewald, J.A. & Aebischer, N.J. (2010a) Long-
term changes in the flora of the cereal ecosystem on the Sussex
Downs, England, focusing on the years 1968–2005. Journal of
Applied Ecology, 47, 215–226.
Potts, S.G., Roberts, S.P.M., Dean, R., Marris, G., Brown,
M.A., Jones, R., Neumann, P. & Settele, J. (2010b) Declines of
managed honey bees and beekeepers in Europe. Jour nal of
Apicultural Research, 49, 15 –22.
RBST (Rare Breeds Survival Trust) (2010) Welcome to
the Rare Breeds Survival Tr ust. [online] Available at: <www.
rbst.co.uk> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Richardson, E.A., Possingham, H.P., Kaiser, M.J. &
Edwards-Jones, G. (2006) Sensitivity of marine reserve design
to the spatial resolution of socioeconomic data. Conser vation
Biology, 20, 1191–1202.
Saher, M., Lindeman, M. & Hursti, U.K.K. (2006) Attitudes
towards genetically modified and organic foods. Appetite, 46,
324–331.
Sanchez-Martin, L., Arce, A., Benito, A., Garcia-Torres,
L. & Vallejo, A. (2008) Influence of drip and furrow irrigation
systems on nitrogen oxide emissions from a horticultural crop.
Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 40, 1698–1706.
Scottish Government (2009 ) Key Scottish Environment
Statistics. [online] Available at: <http://www.scotland.gov.uk/
Publications/2009/08/26112651/52> [Accessed 2.11.10].
Scottish Government (2010) Key Scottish Environment
Statistics. [online] Available at: <http://www.scotland.gov.uk/
Publications/2010/09/08094058/0> [Accessed 07.03.11].
Showler, K. (1996) The development of national beekeeping
associations in England. Study two: 1940–1990. Bee World, 77,
16–25.
Siry, J.P., Robison, D.J. & Cubbage, F.W. (2004) Economic
returns model for silvicultural investments in young hardwood
stands. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 28, 179–184.
Smith, B., Holland, J., Jones, N., Moreby, S., Morris, A.J. &
Southway, S. (2009) Enhancing invertebrate food resources for
skylark s in cereal ecosystems: how useful are in-crop agri-
environment scheme management options? Journal of Applied
Ecology, 46, 692–702.
Smith, P., Bhogal, A., Edgington, P., Black, H., Lilly, A.,
Barraclough, D., Worrall, F., Hillier, J. & Merrington, G. (2010)
Consequences of feasible future agr icultural land-use change
on soil organic carbon stocks and greenhouse gas emissions in
Great Britain. Soil Use and Management, 26, 381–398.
Smith, R .L. (2006) The Australian grocery industr y: a
competition perspective. Australian Journal of Agricultural and
Resource Economics, 50, 33–50.
Smith, R .S., Charman, D., Rushton, S.P., Sanderson,
R.A., Simkin, J.M. & Shiel, R.S. (2003) Vegetation change in an
ombrotrophic mire in northern England after excluding sheep.
Applied Vegetation Science, 6, 261–270.
Sotherton, N., Tapper, S. & Smith, A. (2009) Hen harriers
and red grouse: economic aspects of red grouse shooting and
the implications for moorland conservation. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 46, 955–960.
Spedding, A. (2010) Horticultural Production in England.
Briefing Note 1040. [online] Available at: <http://www.
nationalrural.org/upload/rusource/1040.pdf> [Accessed 07.03.11].

630 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report
Sutton, J.D., Aston, K., Beever, D.E. & Dhanoa, M.S. (1996)
Milk production from grass silage diets: Effects of high-protein
concentrates for lactating heifers and cows on intake, milk
production and milk nitrogen fractions. Animal Science, 62,
207–215.
Swali, A. & Wathes, D.C. (2006) Influence of the dam and
sire on size at birth and subsequent growth, milk production and
fertility in dairy heifers. Theriogenolog y, 66, 1173–1184.
Tait, S., Tamis, J., Edgerton, B. & Batstone, D.J. (2009)
Anaerobic digestion of spent bedding from deep litter piggery
housing. Bioresource Technology, 100, 2210–2218.
Taylor, R.C., Jones, A.K. & Edwards-Jones, G. (2010)
Measuring holistic carbon footprints for lamb and beef farms
in the Cambrian Mountains Initiative. Report for Countryside
Council of Wales. 57 pp.
Thirgood, S.J., Redpath, S.M., Haydon, D.T., Rothery,
P., Newton, I. & Hudson, P.J. (2000) Habitat loss and raptor
predation: disentangling long- and short-term causes of red
grouse declines. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 267, 651–656.
Thurkettle, V. (1997) The marketing of Br itish hardwoods.
Forestr y, 70, 319–325.
Tijink, F.G.J. & van der Linden, J.P. (2000) Engineering
approaches to prevent subsoil compaction in cropping
systems with sugar beet (Eds. Horn, R., VandenAkker, J.J.H &
Arvidsson, J.). Subsoil Compaction: Distribution, processes and
consequences, 32442–452 Inter national Workshop on Subsoil
Compaction, March 1999, Kiel, Germany.
Tomkins, J. (1990) Recreation and the Forestr y Commission
– the case for multiple use resource-management within public
forestry in the UK. Jour nal of Environmental Management, 30,
79–88.
Tranter, R.B., Holt, G.C. & Grey, P.T. (2007) Budgetar y
implications of, and motives for, converting to organic farming:
Case study farm business evidence from Great Britain. Biological
Agriculture & Horticulture, 25, 133–151.
Verbruggen, A. & Al Marchohi, M. (2010) Views on peak
oil and its relation to climate change policy. Energy Policy, 38,
5572–5581.
Vickery, J.A., Tallowin, J.R., Feber, R.E., Asteraki, E.J.,
Atkinson, P.W., Fuller, R.J. & Brown, V.K. (2001) The management
of lowland neutral grasslands in Britain: effects of agricultural
practices on birds and their food resources. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 38, 647–664.
Walker, K.J., Critchley, C.N.R., Sherwood, A.J., Large,
R., Nuttall, P., Hulmes, S., Rose, R. & Mountford, J.O. (2007)
The conservation of arable plants on cereal field margins:
An assessment of new agri-environment scheme options in
England, UK. Biological Conser vation 136, 260–270.
Ward, N. (1999) Foxing the nation: the economic (in)
significance of hunting with hounds in Britain. Journal of Rural
Studies, 15, 389–403.
Weatherhead, E.K. & Knox, J.W. (2000) Predicting and
mapping the future demand for ir rigation water in England and
Wales. Agricultural Water Management, 43, 203–218.
Welch, D. & Scott, D. (1995) Studies in the grazing of
heather moorland in northeast Scotland. 6. 20-year trends in
botanical composition. Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 596–611.
White, P.F. (2000) The effect of covering compost with paper
on yield of the cultivated mushroom Agar icus bisporus ( Lange)
Imbach. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 75,
667–671.
Woods, A. (2004) A Manufactured Plague: The History of
Foot-and-mouth Disease in Britain. Earthscan.
Worthington, T.R. & Danks, P.W. (1992) Nitrate Leaching
and intensive outdoor pig production. Soil Use and Management,
8, 56–60.
Yates, T. (2006) The use of non-food crops in the UK
construction industry. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture, 86, 1790 –1796.
Zenith International (2009) Water’s vital statistics: industry
data. [online] Available at: <http://www.britishbottledwater.org/
vitalstats2.html> [Accessed: 16.10.10].

Ecosystem Services | Chapter 15: Provisioning Services 631
This chapter began with a set of Key Findings. Adopting the approach and terminology used by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Millennium Assessment (MA), these Key Findings also include an indication of the level of
scientific certainty. The ‘uncertainty approach’ of the UK NEA consists of a set of qualitative uncertainty terms derived from a
4-box model and complemented, where possible, with a likelihood scale (see below). Estimates of certainty are derived from
the collective judgement of authors, observational evidence, modelling results and/or theory examined for this assessment.
Throughout the Key Findings presented at the start of this chapter, superscript numbers and letters indicate the estimated
level of certainty for a particular key finding:
1. Well established: high agreement based on significant evidence
2. Established but incomplete evidence: high agreement based on limited evidence
3. Competing explanations: low agreement, albeit with significant evidence
4. Speculative: low agreement based on limited evidence
Well
established
Competing
explanations
Established
but incomplete
Speculative
Evidence
Agreement
SignificantLimited
High Low
a. Virtually certain: >99% probability of occurrence
b. Very likely: >90% probability
c. Likely: >66% probability
d. About as likely as not: >33–66% probability
e. Unlikely: <33% probability
f. Very unlikely: <10% probability
g. Exceptionally unlikely: <1% probability
Certainty terms 1 to 4 constitute the 4-box model, while a to g constitute the likelihood scale.
Appendix 15.1 Approach Used to Assign Certainty Terms
to Chapter Key Findings

632 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report