Defra Contract WC1031: Public Awareness of Biodiversity Indicator Options Paper May 2013

Developing UK indicators for the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020: Biodiversity Awareness Indicator Options Paper

1. Rationale and Approach

Biodiversity worldwide is under great pressure (Butchart et al. 2010) and the UK Government is committed to reporting against global, regional and national frameworks which aim to address biodiversity loss. Targets set within these frameworks include those on raising people’s awareness of biodiversity values and actions they can take to help conserve it. The Natural Environment White Paper (HM Government, 2011) set out a commitment to the Convention for Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 to meet these targets, yet the UK Government currently has no means to monitor progress against Aichi Target 1:

By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably.

Each of the four UK constituent countries has committed to action on raising public awareness of biodiversity, along with encouraging increased public participation in pro-environmental activities (Defra, 2011; Department of the Environment Northern Ireland, 2002; Scottish Executive, 2004; Welsh Assembly Government, 2006). These objectives are brought together at a UK-level by the UK Biodiversity Framework for priorities for the CBD (JNCC & Defra, 2012).

The aim of this paper is to present a number of indicator options that could be used by the UK Government to monitor progress against Aichi Target 1 as well as other regional and national biodiversity targets. The process of indicator option identification/development started by compiling a preliminary list of potential datasets and indicators for biodiversity awareness from the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA, 2011a), and suggestions from an online survey of UK specialistsin raising awareness of biodiversity values and identifying actions to enhance biodiversity conservation. UK experts in these fields then met at a workshop convened by the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), during which the preliminary list of indicators was refined and further indicators were either suggested or considered for development.

The quality of each potential indicator was evaluated against specified criteria. Based on the assessment process, three indicator options were shortlisted for development and are presented below for consideration by the UK Biodiversity Indicators Steering Group (BISG). A detailed overview of the project structure and methodology is provided in Annex 1 and Annex 2.

2. Summary of Data Sources

Sources of datathat could be used to generate the three suggested indicators of public awareness of biodiversity are detailed below. A list of additional data sources identified but not considered useful for any of the three indicator options selected is presented in Annex 2.

Targeted Survey questions

A prospective data source for all three indicator options is the use of questions in household surveys that are currently conducted within each of the UK’s constituent countries. Details of surveys which have been identified as containing either directly relevant questions or proxy questions are summarised in Table 1, including estimated costs of using existing questions or introducing bespoke questions. A more detailed description of each surveyis presented in Annex 3[1],with each survey containing one or more relevant or proxy questions which could be used in each of the indicator options presented. These questions and their relevance are presented in Annex 4.

Defra Contract WC1031: Public Awareness of Biodiversity Indicator Options Paper May 2013

Table 1.Details of existing surveys that could be used to collect data for all three indicator options.

Country / Region / Survey name / Sample size (Approx) / Frequency of survey cycle / Frequency of reporting cycle / Survey start date and data security / Cost per additional question (£)† / Number of relevant questions for an indicator on biodiversity awareness‡
Global – can be disaggregated for UK / Biodiversity Barometer / 1,000 / Annual / Annual / 2009 - ongoing / N/A (relevant questions included) / 2
European –
can be disaggregated for the UK / Euro-barometer / 1,000 / Every six months / Annual / 1973 – no plans for continuation / N/A (survey no longer available) / 2
Northern Ireland (NI) / Continuous Household Survey / One percent of all NI households / Annual / Annual / 1983 - ongoing / 750 (although a reduction in cost may be negotiable depending on question type) / 4
Scotland / Scottish Nature Omnibus (SNO) / 1,125 / Every six months / Every six months / June 2009 - ongoing / N/A (relevant questions included) / 3
Scotland / Scotland’s People and Nature Survey (SPANs) / 1,000 per month in total
(2,000 annually for existing relevant questions) / Monthly
(Every six months for existing relevant questions) / Every three years / 2013 - 2016 / 500-1,000 / 8

Table 1. Continued.

Defra Contract WC1031: Public Awareness of Biodiversity Indicator Options Paper May 2013

Wildlife Gardening

Wildlife gardening does not only serve to protect and enhance biodiversity, but also provides the public with an education of, and connection to, the natural environment (Goddard, Dougill and Benton, 2010). Therefore number of people who undertake wildlife gardening could be used as a proxy measure of public actions for biodiversity conservation.

Data on membership numbers of wildlife gardening organisations, or participation in national campaigns can be sourced from organisations associated with wildlife gardening (Table 2).However a more useful and robust source of data could simply be through analysing the responses from relevant household survey questions, such as those identified in Table 1. Specific questions relating to participation in wildlife gardening that are currently included in existing surveys can be found in Annex 4.

Data on wildlife gardening could be relevant for indicator Option C1. Information on temporal and spatial coverage, plus accessibility of the data source(s), other than surveys, is summarised in Table 3.

Table 2.Wildlife gardening organisations in the UK.

Country / Organisation
England / Garden Organic
England / Royal Horticultural Society
Scotland / Scottish Natural Heritage
Scotland / Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh
Wales / National Botanic Garden of Wales

Eco-Schools

Eco-Schools is an international award programme that guides schools in how to be more sustainable through enhancing the curriculum, providing links to the wider community and making improvements to the buildings and facilities. Once registered, schools follow a simple seven-step process which helps them to address a variety of environmental themes, ranging from litter and waste to healthy living and biodiversity. Any school can join the Eco-Schools programme and registration is free.

Information on the number of schools signed up to the programme, along with additional statistics on level of award, can be obtained from the Eco Schools programme as shown in Table 3. This option may be used as a proxy measure of young people’s awareness of biodiversity and engagement with the natural environment.

This data could be relevant for indicator Option C2. Information on temporal and spatial coverage, plus accessibility of the data source(s), other than surveys, is summarised in Table 3.

Citizen Science (biological recording)

The National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Gateway acts as a ‘data warehouse’ for biodiversity information in the UK and Ireland. Most of the data has been collected by volunteers organised by national and local societies and recording schemes (NBN, 2011). Access to information on total numbers of biological records collected over a user-selected time period can be requested through the NBN Gateway. The number of records entered into the NBN Gateway could be used as a proxy measure of public participation in biodiversity conservation.

This data could be relevant for indicator Option C3. Information on temporal and spatial coverage, plus accessibility of the data source(s) is summarised in Table 3.

Membership of conservation organisations

Conservation organisation membership numbers can be obtained from the annual reports of relevant conservation organisations. It is suggested that membership numbers from the following organisations be used as a proxy measure of public awareness of, and participation in, biodiversity conservation:The National Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and The Wildlife Trusts. These three organisations are the largest conservation organisations in the UK and therefore likely to provide a reasonable representation of the public’sawareness and participation in biodiversity across the UK, however including data on membership numbers from smaller organisations could also be considered.

This data could be relevant for indicator Sub-option C4. Information on temporal and spatial coverage, plus accessibility of the data source(s), other than surveys, is summarised in Table 3. Consideration would also need to be given to the statistical implications of ‘double counting’ individuals who are members of more than one of the organisations included in the indicator calculation.

Table 3. Alternative data sources for Sub-options C1-C4.

Sub-Option / Data source / Start date and data security / Sampling frequency / UK-wide / Able to be disaggregated by country? / Data accessibility
C1 / Membership of wildlife gardening organisations (Table 2) / 1960s-ongoing / Annual / Yes / Yes / Freely available from organisations upon request
C2 / Eco-schools data / 1990s-ongoing / Annual / Yes / Yes† / Publically accessible and upon request
C3 / NBN Gateway / 1960s - ongoing / Monthly / UK / Yes / Publically accessible
C4 / Conservation organisations / Variable: Most recent 1960s - ongoing / Annual / UK / Yes / Publically accessible
†England; Northern Ireland; Scotland; Wales

Defra Contract WC1031: Public Awareness of Biodiversity Indicator Options Paper May 2013

3. Indicator Options

Three indicators are presented as options for indicators of biodiversity awareness:

Option A:Awareness – the proportion of people who are aware of the term biodiversity and its meaning.
Option B:Connection - the proportion of people who feel connected to the biodiversity within their environment.
Option C:Behaviour / Response – the proportion of people that are taking action to support and protect nature. This option could be presented as one or a series of sub-options:

C1 - Participation in wildlife gardening

C2 - Uptake of the Eco-schools programme

C3 - Citizen science (biological recording)

C4 - Conservation organisation membership numbers

C5 – Behaviour/response bundle - i.e. composite indicator of sub-options C1-C4 plus other potential measures (see more details under Option C below).

Each indicator is described in terms of how it would be presented and interpreted, together with a description of the data that would be required to generate the indicator, its strengths and weaknesses, and potential costs of producing the indicator. An example graphic (using dummy data) is also presented to illustrate how the indicator may be represented.

Option A: Awareness

The indicator (description and interpretation):This option aims to measure the proportion of people in the UK who are aware of the term biodiversity and its meaning (Figure 1). It will act as a proxy measure of trends in people’s awareness of biodiversity and its value, where an upward trending line indicates an improvement in awareness and understanding.

Data sources:Data for this indicator could be sourced from surveys, collected in five different ways, as summarised in Table 4.

Strengths and weaknesses: Regardless of the data source/method used, the strengths of this option is that it could be updated annually, it would be easy to communicate, and if new questions are inserted into existing surveys (or a new survey designed), there is the opportunity to make these directly relevant to policy. Data from existing surveys will already be disaggregated by constituent country (except Method 1) with national surveys being repeated on an annual basis for the foreseeable future. Reports from these national surveys are publically available from the relevant government departments.

However, if new survey questions are used, they will need to be carefully designed. This is because, although there has been a positive change in public attitude to the environment, the terms of biodiversity, ecosystems and their services are not meaningful to the vast majority of people at present (UK NEA, 2011a). A pilot survey in eight European countries has found that, despite not being familiar with the scientific terminology,participants were able to articulate rich concepts of biodiversity (Bednar-Friedl et al, 2009). Therefore survey questions would need to be worded so to allow people to connect terminology to the natural environment accurately, and framed in such a way that information captured reveals the positive views or values people place on biodiversity, as opposed to perceived threats or concern around biodiversity loss.

In addition, potential value/action gaps would need to be addressed in this option, as achieving Aichi Target 1 requires making a distinction between being aware of both the positive values of biodiversity, and how life onEarth may be affected by biodiversity loss. Option A only addresses biodiversity awareness. It may also bechallenging to find suitable existing questions that are consistent across surveys in each of the UK's constituent countries, and that different cross-sections of society will relate to.

Statistical advice would also need to be sought to determine if limitations concerning comparisons between different types of survey question, or variable sample sizes/survey frequency can be resolved.

Table 4.Proposed data sources and datacollection methods for Options A, B and C.

Data Source/Method / Cost of producing indicator† / Strength / Weakness
1 / Biodiversity Barometer survey data‡ / Minor -Retrieval of data /

Relevant questions already exist in survey

May be an associated cost for the provision of this data
Data cannot be disaggregated for UK countries

2 / Find similar question(s) from an existing survey to use as proxy (examples identified in Annex 4) / Minor- Researching relevant questions and collating data from survey providers. /

Comparatively inexpensive to initiate

There are no direct comparisons between survey questions from each of the UK countries

Variable sample sizes
Variable frequency of surveys

3 / Replicate one or more relevant questions from one survey across other surveys (Annex 4: Table 1) / Minor - Research the most appropriate survey question(s) to be replicated
Minor - Insert the questions into surveys across the UK. /

Ensures consistency of questions across all UK country surveys

Variable sample sizes
Variable frequency of surveys

4 / Formulate one or more new survey question(s) to be integrated into an existing survey (Table 1). / Significant - Expert consultation to produce appropriate questions and to insert these to the relevant surveys across the UK. /

Allow the question(s) to be tailored to the indicator
Ensures consistency of questions across all UK country surveys

Cost implications
Variable sample sizes
Variable frequency of surveys

5 / Create bespoke survey / Significant - Formulate, set up and distribute a potentially large scale bespoke survey. /

Could target cross-sectorally

Resource intensive – substantial time and money needed to be invested to develop survey; resources also required to undertake survey of sufficient size, and to analyse results

† Costs are described as major (>£100,000); substantial (£50,000-£100,000); significant (£10,000-£50,000); or minor (>£10,000).
‡Method 1 is relevant to Option A only

Cost of producing indicator[2]:

a)Initial development. Variable according to data source, ranging from minor costs for researching existing relevant survey questions and inserting them into national surveys to significant costs for seeking expert opinion for formulation of new survey questions and creating a bespoke survey.

b)Ongoing data collection. Variable according to data source, ranging from minor costs to access publically available data to significant costs of inserting new questions into existing surveys on a consistent basis.

c)Ongoing analyses. Minor costs to compile and update data.

Figure 1. Illustrative graphic - Proportion of UK population aware of the term 'biodiversity' and its meaning.

Option B – ‘Connection’

The indicator (description and interpretation):The linkages between biodiversity and the benefits that people take from nature in the form of ecosystem services has become a widely discussed subject area and there is a need for these links to be described to the wider community if biodiversity issues are to be taken into account in decision making (Haines-Young & Potschin, 2010).Measuring progress towards this, could be achieved though a proxy measure such as Option B, which aims to measure the proportion of people who feel connected to the biodiversity within their environment (Figure 2), wherean upward trending line indicates an improvement in people’s feeling of connectedness with the environment.

Data sources: There are four proposed methods of collecting survey data for this option, as described in Table 4(Methods 2-5).

The value/action gap is also an issue here, with levels of public concern not necessarily translating into positive action for biodiversity. It may also be challenging to find suitable existing questions that are consistent across surveys in each of the UK's constituent countries, and that different cross-sections of society will relate to.

Cost of producing indicator: