An Interdisciplinary Approach to Mapping Soil Carbon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
An interdisciplinary approach to mapping soil carbon Beth Frances Theresa Brockett BSc (Hons), MSc May 2016 This thesis is submitted to Lancaster University in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The thesis is the work of the author, except where otherwise stated, and has not been submitted for the award of a higher degree at any other institution. Abstract – An interdisciplinary approach to mapping soil carbon Beth Frances Theresa Brockett BSc (Hons), MSc. December 2015. This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. At the global scale, soils are the primary terrestrial reservoir of carbon and therefore have a major influence on the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Soil organic carbon stocks are estimated to have decreased by an average of fifty two percent in temperate regions since 1850. Land use change and management practices are the primary drivers of this decrease. Temperate upland regions have been identified as important for climate regulation, both in terms of current stocks of soil carbon and future sequestration potential. Therefore, appropriate on-farm management of soil carbon stocks in these regions has the potential to contribute to climate change mitigation goals. This thesis is a contribution to ongoing efforts to improve on–farm soil carbon management. It does so through the development of mapping practices that incorporate both ecological and social data. The ecological aspect of the research identified a role for existing farm survey data in accurately predicting soil carbon distribution without the need for time and labour-intensive field work. The engagement with social science methods acknowledges a societal bias towards scientific ways of representing soil carbon and the marginalisation of alternative, often experiential, knowledge. The research demonstrated a way for different knowledges to be incorporated into soil carbon mapping practices and identified a role for under-utilised scientific and non-scientific knowledge of soil carbon for improving spatially-explicit management plans. The mapping methods were developed around three case study farms in the Lake District National Park in Cumbria. This region is an upland landscape which has been identified as an important space for carbon management in the UK. The research offers a distinct and timely approach to assessing the potential of interdisciplinary mapping to improve the management of soil carbon at the farm scale and has wider implications for the management of ecological systems. i Acknowledgements Firstly, a big thank you to my supervisors Richard Bardgett, Alan Blackburn, Alison Browne and Nigel Watson for your support and guidance, and for trusting in my, sometimes unconventional, approach to doctoral research. Special thanks to Ali for your enthusiasm and encouragement. Many thanks to the case study farmers and their families, to all who attended the focus group, and all those I interviewed for the pilot stages. Field work was made much more pleasant by having a friendly, warm and welcoming place to stay, so my heartfelt thanks to Mick and Chris for the motorhome and to Sarah and Dave, and Martin for hosting my assistants and I. Ditto in Lancaster – Sue and Ann, I really appreciate you hosting me and your friendship. Special thanks to Andy Beanland and to everyone who helped me in the field, in the lab and with GIS and statistical support – Aislinn, Alex, Al, Ali, Amy, Andy, Anne, Anni, Catherine, Chris, David, Denise, Ellen, Emily, Emma, Fran, Freyja, Gareth, Gemma, Hannah, Helen Q, Helen R, Iain, Margaret, Mike, Petr, the R Space group, Richard, Sarah, Sue, Teo, Tom and Victor. My time at Lancaster University, particularly in the lab, was made a lot more amusing because of ‘The Soilies’, so thanks for all the silliness (oh, the silliness) – Mrs B, Wonk, Ali, Caley, Dr G aka Freddie, Han, Q, Roger aka Shania Spain, The Dale, Tom, Sward, Phil and Arthur. Blue box trip anyone? I am very grateful for the support of the enthusiastic interdisciplinary community at Lancaster University – they are incredible interdisciplinarians. Especially Anne and Emily – your support made all the difference. Thanks to Vicky, Claire, Rebecca, Chris and Nik for inspiration and taking the time to listen to muddled thoughts. Sarah, Emily and Andy I really appreciate the copy editing and your tips. I also thank members of the LEC Society and Environment group for comments on Chapter Five and soil ecology lab members at Lancaster and Manchester for comments on the work which led to Chapter Three. Thanks to Carly, Bill, Sue and Ian for the opportunities to mentor and assist with teaching. Thanks to Will and Jeff – coaching played a significant role in how I handled the ups and downs of the PhD process. I really enjoyed my Fellowship position at POST and I thank Jonny at POST and Ceri at BES for the experience and the British Ecological Society for funding the Fellowship. The research was made possible through funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (via the Living with Environmental Change programme)and through contributions from The British Ecological Society, the Ecosystem Knowledge Network and Lancaster University Friends' Fund for the knowledge exchange work. Lancaster University Library has been an excellent and helpful resource. Many thanks to Joan and Uncle Patrick for all your support and especially for helping me early-on in my academic career and thank you John for chemistry lessons I could understand. Last but certainly not least, thank you my wonderful family, especially Andy – I couldn’t have done it without you, Mum – you are the best, and in loving memory of Peter Brockett and Peggy and Sid Walker. ii List of Figures and Tables Page Figure 1.1 Map of the study region showing the approximate location of 13 the three case study farms, within the Lake District National Park, Cumbria, England. Legend for Figures 2.1a and 2.1b 18 Figure 2.1a Visual representation of thesis structure. 19 Figure 2.1b Visual representation of thesis structure with chapter 20 references. Figure 2.2 Image of part of a farm vegetation survey map sourced from a 44 case study farm agri-environment scheme folder. Figure 2.3 Screenshot of imagined grid in use within ArcMap (ArcGIS 53 Desktop version 10.2.2 ESRI 2011). Figure 2.4 Screenshot of spatial transcript method in use within ArcMap 54 (ArcGIS Desktop version 10.2.2 ESRI 2011). Table 3.1 Site characteristics of the study farms, including geology, soils 66 and vegetation communities based on FEP vegetation-type maps (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2005). Table 3.2 Selected models which best explain variance in soil carbon and 73 nitrogen on the Main Farm, all soil depths combined (linear mixed model regressions). Table 3.3 Details of selected models (linear regressions) that best explain 74 variance in total soil carbon stocks (kg m-3), for each depth, Main Farm. Figure 3.1 Interpolations of predicted total soil carbon stocks (kg m-3) for 76 each sample depth increment. Figure 3.2 Mean carbon stock (kg m-3) by vegetation type (across all 77 depths). Table 3.4 Total soil carbon stocks by depth for the three study sites. 78 Figure 4.1 Screenshot of spatial transcript method in use within ArcMap 100 (ArcGIS Desktop version 10.2.2 ESRI 2011). Figure 5.1 Sampling a core of soil. 138 Figure 5.2 Sue demonstrates how to use the infra-red gas analyser. 139 iii List of Appendices Appendix I – Glossary of terms Appendix II – PCA results Appendix III – Supplementary Tables S1-S8 Appendix IV – Supplementary maps Appendix V – Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) POSTnote, ‘Emissions from Crops’, B. Brockett and J. Wentworth, 2015. Researched and written during British Ecological Society POST Fellowship (October to December 2014). Appendices VI-VIII are articles relating to the knowledge-exchange focus group event: Appendix VI – Planet Earth Online article ‘The Science Behind the Schemes’ Appendix VII – Landbridge blog article Appendix VIII – Ecosystems Knowledge Network article Appendix IX Participant consent form Letter of introduction to potential participants Appendix X – List of presentations given related to the thesis iv List of Acronyms AES – agri-environment schemes BAP – Biodiversity Action Plan C – carbon CAP – Common Agricultural Policy COP21 – Conference of Parties (21) CWF – community weighted functional (traits) ES – ecosystem services GIS – geographical information systems GV – grounded visualisation IDR – inter-disciplined researcher INDC – Intended Nationally Determined Contributions LDNP – Lake District National Park MMM – mixed methods mapping N – nitrogen NRM – natural resource management NVC – National Vegetation Classification (system) PGIS – participatory geographical information systems QualGIS – qualitative geographical information systems SOC – soil organic carbon STS – Science and Technology Studies v Contents page An interdisciplinary approach to mapping soil carbon ...................................................... i Abstract – An interdisciplinary approach to mapping soil carbon ............................ i Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures and Tables ....................................................................................................... iii List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................