| dc.description.abstract | Nature-based Solutions have been a popular research topic within the sustainability literature for last decade. Conceived of as a more sustainable alternative to engineered solutions, solutions founded in nature are promised to resolve many issues resulting from global change, including reducing flood risk and air pollution, building social cohesion and enhancing resilience. However, what a Nature-based Solution means in practice remains vague, specifically, what is meant by Nature-based is not well defined. In response, I propose to measure Nature-based as the degree to which ecosystem services contribute to a solution. By estimating the relative contribution of ecosystem services to a solution, compared to technology and labour, it is now possible to define more rigorously what is, and what is not, a Nature-based Solution.
Analytical tools have recently become available that allow ecological networks to be studied biogeographically. That is, it is now possible to explore how spatial distance and anthropogenic landscapes structure ecological networks. Having sampled plant-pollinator interaction data along two anthropogenic gradients (agriculture intensification and urbanisation), I find, for the first time, that plant-pollinator networks respond more strongly to changes in landcover than to spatial distance. That is, human modification of the environment strongly structures ecological networks, being a primary driver of biogeographic patterns in anthropogenic landscapes.
Pollinators are under threat from multiple aspects of global change, habitat loss being a primary driver. I test what the optimal pollinator conservations strategies are in two landscapes: agricultural and urban. I find that the optimal conservation strategy is landscape dependent, the underling driver being the how clumped the pollinator populations are. In intense agricultural landscapes, priority should be given to conserving many small habitats, whereas there is no preference between large or small habitats in urban landscapes. Additionally, pollinators tend to habitat match, that is, they occur in direct proportions to floral resources available, furnishing a method to monitor pollinator populations by monitoring floral resources.
Finally, there is increasing public interest in urban meadows, areas of parkland comprising grasses and forbs that have been allowed to grow above lawn height. Urban meadows exist along a spectrum of floral abundance and richness, those that have been let grow by reduced mowing tend to have lower floral diversity than those that have been specifically seeded. I investigate whether there are trade-offs or synergies among three benefits of urban meadows, psychological wellbeing, pollination of wild plants and pollinator diversity, when managing for increased floral diversity. I find that synergies exist, meadows that are more florally diverse tend to have more pollinators, increase the pollination of wild plants and are more aesthetically pleasing. However, the evidence that meadow diversity significantly improves psychological wellbeing is limited, meadows of varying floral diversity tend to be equally enjoyed.
This work is varied, exploring the various ways that people and nature interact in an increasingly anthropogenic world. Future research can draw upon the method to measure the degree to which a Solution is Nature-based to further progress our understanding as to the conditions required to create Nature-based Solutions. Further, both conservationists and park managers can refer to this work for insight into how to optimise pollinator conservation in various anthropogenic landscapes while still providing public goods. | en |
