Ben Siggery
Academic and research departments
Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences.About
My research project
Developing the integration of palaeoecology into UK conservationPalaeoecology is a method by which we can better understand the natural state and natural range of variability of ecosystems and how they respond when pushed towards thresholds. Whilst there is significant potential for the application of palaeoecology to conservation and ecosystem management, this continues to be inhibited by the long-standing disconnect between palaeoecological research and its application within conservation practice (Birks, 2012; Rull, 2014; Clarke and Lynch, 2016; Davidson et al., 2018; Gillson, 2021). This means there are missed opportunities for the utility of palaeoecological research to support conservation management and restoration efforts, which could provide vital information in reversing ecosystem degradation and creating more adaptive and resilient systems. Many approaches have been proposed to address this challenge, but palaeoecology remains distinctly separated from the vernacular and toolkits of the majority of conservation practitioners.
The overall goal of my research, therefore, is to develop the integration of palaeoecology into UK conservation. My research seeks to explore the perceptions held by UK conservation practitioners and to establish the ways in which palaeoecological research can be framed and applied to best align with their drivers and priorities. It will focus on the development of case studies based on novel applications of palaeoecology, as well as exploratory work into addressing accessibility challenges. By using palaeoecology to inform conservation restoration targets, alongside the Space4Nature technology to track our progress towards them, we will combine the past and the future to help us protect the present.
Supervisors
Palaeoecology is a method by which we can better understand the natural state and natural range of variability of ecosystems and how they respond when pushed towards thresholds. Whilst there is significant potential for the application of palaeoecology to conservation and ecosystem management, this continues to be inhibited by the long-standing disconnect between palaeoecological research and its application within conservation practice (Birks, 2012; Rull, 2014; Clarke and Lynch, 2016; Davidson et al., 2018; Gillson, 2021). This means there are missed opportunities for the utility of palaeoecological research to support conservation management and restoration efforts, which could provide vital information in reversing ecosystem degradation and creating more adaptive and resilient systems. Many approaches have been proposed to address this challenge, but palaeoecology remains distinctly separated from the vernacular and toolkits of the majority of conservation practitioners.
The overall goal of my research, therefore, is to develop the integration of palaeoecology into UK conservation. My research seeks to explore the perceptions held by UK conservation practitioners and to establish the ways in which palaeoecological research can be framed and applied to best align with their drivers and priorities. It will focus on the development of case studies based on novel applications of palaeoecology, as well as exploratory work into addressing accessibility challenges. By using palaeoecology to inform conservation restoration targets, alongside the Space4Nature technology to track our progress towards them, we will combine the past and the future to help us protect the present.
My qualifications
Affiliations and memberships
News
In the media
Teaching
I teach in variety of modules within the BSc Environment and Sustainability (ENG1093, ENG1096, ENG1095, ENG1097) and BSc Biological Sciences (BMS2070, BMS3105).
Publications
It is widely recognised that palaeoecology holds great potential to inform and support nature conservation, but that there are difficulties in knowledge exchange between academia and practitioners that inhibit the operationalisation of research. To facilitate the integration of palaeoecology into the conservation toolkit, it is essential to understand perspectives of the practitioners themselves and the contexts in which they work. This paper reports the results of a survey of 153 UK-based conservation practitioners, concerning their perceptions of palaeoecology, the barriers to its use and potential solutions for making palaeoecological insights more accessible in conservation practice. The survey was conducted online over a period of 3 months; closed question responses were analysed for statistical trends and thematic analysis was done on open question responses. The majority of respondents were strongly positive about the role palaeoecological research could play, though they also exhibited a limited understanding of how and why one might implement it. They identified time constraints as the biggest barrier to using palaeoecology within their work, and also flagged concerns around financial resources and the accessibility of the research. Access to applied case studies and a centralised database were the most favoured solutions among respondents. Respondents with prior experience of working with palaeoecology were generally more optimistic about its incorporation. This paper makes several key recommendations to progress the integration of palaeoecology into conservation, including improving data accessibility, aligning research design with conservation and policy drivers, and increasing both respective groups’ understanding of the other.
•Biodiversity Net Gain policy will be a mandatory requirement for urban development.•Its benefits for biodiversity can be maximized by considering functional connectivity.•The potential of electric circuit theory to fill this policy gap is explored.•The challenges that practitioners may face are addressed.•Omniscape was found to be a promising tool in the policy context.
Additional publications
Siggery, B. et al. (2023). Can Palaeoecology Help to Bridge the Evidence Gap in UK Conservation? InPractice, 122, pp.19-23.