An investigation of the links between quality food production and biodiversity protection

1
An investigation of the links between quality
food production and biodiversity protection
Eating Biodiversity

Henry Buller University of Exeter
A Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) project,
funded by ESRC, NERC and BBSRC,
2
What we would like to do today

• Present the Eating Biodiversity RELU Research
  project
• Discuss the research with practitioners,
  policy-makers and other actors
• Listen to accounts from people involved in
  quality food chains and biodiversity management
• Discuss some of the wider implications of the
  linkages between different aspects of quality
  and potential wins that we are researching

3
A RELU Research project

• The Rural Economy and Land Use Programme aims to
  advance understanding of the challenges caused by
  rural change today and in the future.
  Interdisciplinary research is being funded
  between 2004 and 2009 in order to inform policy
  and practice with choices on how to manage the
  countryside and rural economies.
• The Programme will encourage social and economic
  vitality of rural areas and promote the
  protection and conservation of the rural
  environment.
• The Programme is an unprecedented collaboration
  between the Economic and Social Research Council
  (ESRC), the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences
  Research Council (BBSRC) and the Natural
  Environment Research Council (NERC). It has a
  budget of 24 million

4
Eating Biodiversity

• By examining selected examples of specific food
  production chains that fully integrate
  biodiversity as an explicit means of generating
  distinctiveness and adding value, this research
  project offers an inter-disciplinary perspective
  by positioning biodiversity and environmental
  quality as an integral 'input' to, and component
  of, food quality.

5
Eating Biodiversity

This research seeks to develop opportunities for
win-win-win situations where farm enterprises
can gain added value from producing high-quality
products in terms of taste and nutrition from
significant biodiverse pasture types, such as
moorland, heathland and salt-marshes, in
ecologically sustainable ways. Our
interdisciplinary research is providing evidence
and analysis of the relationship between food
quality (defined according to both scientific
criteria and consumer perception), animal diet
(analyzed in terms of grazing composition) and
natural biodiversity (considered in terms of
species and community diversity), and is relating
this to implications for land use management,
farm practice and processes of rural
socio-economic development.
6
Eating Biodiversity
Three products Lamb, Beef, Cheese

Pasture quality
Farm business
Farm management
Biodiversity
Meat quality
Rural Economy
Public health
Consumer perceptions
7
Eating Biodiversity

Phase 1 Research (Jan 05-Jan 06) Quality Lamb
Production on Biodiverse Pasture In order to
trace the relationship between biodiverse pasture
maintenance, agricultural practice and food
quality, the lamb-meat food chain has been
examined from pasture to plate. Sample farms,
where stock are grazed on significant natural
grasslands have been investigated. Botanical
surveys were undertaken, farm management
practices and farm businesses were studied (and
their relationship to nature conservation
prerogatives) and meat samples analysed (against
a control).
8
Eating Biodiversity

Social Science Professor Henry Buller
Department of Geography, University of Exeter Dr
Carol Morris CRR, University of
Exeter Dr Owain Jones Department of
Geography, University of Exeter Dr James Kirwan,
CCRU, University of Gloucestershire An
imal Science Professor Jeff Wood, Division
of Farm Animal Science, School of Fran
Whittington Veterinary Science at the
University of Bristol. Plant Science Alan
Hopkins, IGER, North Wyke,
Devon Dr Rob Dunn, IGER, North
Wyke, Devon
9
Botanical assessment of grazed pastures
Robert M. Dunn and Alan Hopkins
10
Research Objectives
Examination of management practices on farms that
identify distinctive pastures as an inherent part
of the food production system. Quantification of
the nature and extent of semi-natural unimproved
pastures.
11
Pastures

• Three pasture types chosen
• Salt-marsh
• Heathland
• Moorland
• Four farms for each pasture type.
• One control farm of improved grassland.

12
Saltmarsh
Heather
Improved
Moorland
13
Ecological objectives
Identification of richness and importance of
biological communities present on each farm on a
regional, national or international
scale. Identification of plant species thought
to have a beneficial effect on animals health or
quality of meat produced.
14
Methodology
Relevé used enumeration of the species and
environmental factors in a small stand of
vegetation as a representative sample of a wider
area Each plant species within a sample recorded
with its percentage cover (vertically projected
onto the ground) Series of samples from
homogenous stands recorded and frequency of
occurrence and range of cover calculated Comparis
on to published plant assemblages made where
possible
15
Methodology
Cover on DOMIN scale 91 - 100 recorded as
Domin 10 76 - 90 9 51 - 75 8 34 -
50 7 26 - 33 6 11 - 25 5 4 -
10 4 lt4 with many individuals 3 lt4 with
several individuals 2 lt4 with few individuals
1
Frequency 81 100 V - constant 61 80 IV -
constant 41 60 III - frequent 21 40 II -
occasional 1 20 I - scarce
16
Salt-marsh farms
Lower salt-marsh e.g. Spartina anglica salt-marsh
17
Salt-marsh farms
Middle salt-marsh e.g. Festuca rubra salt-marsh
18
Salt-marsh farms
Upper salt-marsh e.g. Juncus maritimus salt-marsh
19
Salt-marsh farms
Farm 1 Farm 2 Farm 3 Farm 4 Area
(ha) 1 618 231 25 50 Plant species
(no.) 31 34 25 41 Communities
(no.) 11 7 7 6 Summary (mean 1 S.E.M)
Average number of plant species per farm 32.8
3.3 Total number of species 70 Average
number of communities per farm 7.8 1.1 Total
number of communities 22
20
Heathland farms
Heath e.g. Ulex gallii-Agrostis curtisii heath
21
Heathland farms
Acidic grassland e.g. Nardus stricta-Galium
saxatile grassland
22
Heathland farms
Farm 1 Farm 2 Farm 3 Farm 4 Area
(ha) 1 030 2 630 1 011 303 Plant
species (no.) 51 73 72 70 Communities
(no.) 10 14 11 7 Summary (mean 1 S.E.M)
Average number of plant species per farm 66.5
5.2 Total number of species 121 Average
number of communities per farm 10.5 1.4 Total
number of communities 23
23
Moorland farms
Tussock grassland e.g. Molinia caerulea-Potentilla
erecta mire
24
Moorland farms
Blanket bog e.g. Scirpus cespitosus-Eriophorum
vaginatum blanket mire
25
Moorland farms
Farm 1 Farm 2 Farm 3 Farm 4 Area
(ha) 484 323 400 1 100 Plant species
(no.) 60 38 45 60 Communities
(no.) 10 5 5 10 Summary (mean 1 S.E.M)
Average number of plant species per farm 50.8
5.5 Total number of species 100 Average
number of communities per farm 7.5 1.4 Total
number of communities 21
26
Control farm
Improved grassland e.g. Lolium perenne ley
27
Control farm
Farm 1 Area (ha) 49 Plant species
(no.) 13 Communities (no.) 1
28
Biodiversity priorities
Four identified Biodiversity Action Plan habitats
within the surveyed farms.
Atlantic salt- Upland Purple
moor Blanket marsh heathland grass bog Presen
t U.K. area 45 500 2 3 000 000 56 000 1 500
000 (ha) Rate of loss 8 since 1970 27 in
England 92 in South 21 in Scotland Wales,
18 in West since 1900 since 1940 Scotland
since 1947 Percentage 80 0.09 7 36 protec
ted
Source http//www.ukbap.org.uk/
29
Threats to species and habitats

• Agricultural intensification,
• Over grazing,
• Inappropriate management, e.g. too frequent and
  too large burns,
• Change to hydrological regime,
• Climate change,
• Nutrient deposition, e.g. atmospheric deposition
  and agricultural run-off.

30
Biodiversity as an input
Provision of grazing animal with more varied diet
in species-rich pasture than found in
species-poor semi-improved pastures.
31
Producers knowledges and practices

• Owain Jones
• Dept of Geography
• University of Exeter

32
Range of producers visited

• A whole range of farm types from small tenant
  farms on Dartmoor who also graze the commons, to
  large owned Scottish estates where the lamb
  production has to fit in with grouse shooting
• Some producers now running established, thriving,
  businesses selling their entire flock output
  through alternative networks, some of which have
  on-farm meat cutting and packaging facilities
• Others are small start up businesses selling a
  small percent of their flock directly (getting
  the processing done locally) (farm gate or local
  deliveries)
• Some are organic and see this as important part
  of their product profile, others are not, feeling
  that their products come across as natural and
  as good as organic

33
Start up

• All within the last 5-7 years (often informal
  starts)
• prompted by
• Falling farm incomes in the late 1990s
• An awareness of the alternative local food
  movement (e.g. Edinburgh Farmers Market)
• An awareness that this type of production will
  fit more easily with argi-environmental schemes
• An interest in farm conservation issues
• Often built upon the experience of killing a few
  lambs for family and friends and the feedback
  about the meat quality

34
(Changing) production practices

• Some farms have not changed their practices that
  much. They were previously selling stock at
  market but came to realise their production
  system had latent added value
• Others have
• switched breed type (e.g. to Scottish Black Face
  flocks on Dartmoor)
• gone organic to coincide with direct selling
• stopped previous attempts to improve land
• switched from developing output quantity to
  improve farm income to developing output quality
• In some cases these changes have been made in
  relation to stocking agreements under
  agri-environmental schemes

35
Benefits

• The farmers are getting a better price for lambs
  sold directly, (one tenant farm at Holker Hall
  told the manager that the better price had kept
  his farm going)
• Some remarked that their quality of life in terms
  of job satisfaction and even mental health was
  improved by the challenge and reward of running a
  new business which had potential
• Also in some cases they claimed to be happier to
  be producing food in more environmentally and
  animal welfare friendly terms
• All pleased to get contact and positive feedback
  from their customers

36
Challenges

• Setting up the business
• Time
• Capital
• Expertise
• Subsidy uncertainties/transitions
• Setting up processing, packaging and delivery
  systems (trust)
• Marketing/Selling
• Selling enough volume (a lot of stock still goes
  to market)
• What system to use?
• Branding
• Being a sales person
• The seasonal nature (some accept this, others
  take measures to have all year round supply of
  lamb)

37
Selling methods

• Farm gate
• Local deliveries
• Box schemes
• Farmers Markets
• Farm shops
• Local butchers
• Specialist meat wholesalers
• Direct to catering trade
• Websites (some examples later)
• Leaflets (some examples later)
• Food shows
• Media coverage
• Producers groups (umbrella)
• (Where you are makes a difference)

38
Selling biodiversity

• All the farms we have looked at make claims about
  the linkages between the quality of the meat
  products and the grazing thus in effect
  selling the landscape and biodiversity, e.g.
• saltmarsh grasses, samphire, sea lavender and
  thrift , give the meat a distinctive and very
  special flavour
• (They also feel stock and meat handling processes
  are very important)

39
Biodiversity as a unique selling point and ground
for premium quality claims

• These claims are an obvious means of giving
  products an USP, and for supporting claims of
  premium products and thus added value
• LFAs with natural grazing can find themselves
  with an advantage over improved lowland farms
• Historically, much UK biodiversity has been a
  happy accident stemming from traditional
  farming practices. This undone by post-war
  intensification. Now a new reflexive relationship
  is being/needs to be developed
• We are also interviewing relevant personnel in
  nature/landscape conservation/management
  organisations

40
Towards recommendations

• Not a magic bullet
• but an increasingly important component of
  sustainable rural land use management which has
  the capacity to grow further
• Help with start up is important (e.g. RES
  grants, advice, producer group set up)
• Supporting the market by
• Public information (media coverage)
• Oiling the wheels (small scale public
  procurement??)
• Protecting through PDOs and the like
• Supporting/enhancing local food chain
  infrastructure
• Ensuring agri-environmental schemes and
  management have an eye for this kind of
  production and try to gear with it as much as
  possible. Linking with GAP schemes

41
Effect of pasture type on lamb product quality

F.M. Whittington and J.D. Wood
42
Are mountain lambs really
sweeter?
43
Measurements made at Bristol

• Shelf-life appearance and keeping quality
• Healthiness fatty acids
• Taste flavour and tenderness

44
Shelf life Appearance
Chroma (Saturation)
Acceptable limit
Days displayed
45
Shelf life keeping quality
b
a
a
a
Incipient rancidity
b
b
ab
a
46
Healthiness Fatty acids (1)
47
Health Fatty acids (2)
48
Nutritionally important fatty acid ratios
PS (ideally gt0.4)
n-6n-3 (ideally lt4.0)
b
b
b

a
a
a
a
a
49
Health Fatty acids (3)
CLA
trans-C181
50
Taste assessed by a trained panel
51
Shelf life

• Lambs from all pasture types had good colour
  shelf life
• Levels of lipid oxidation products in meat from
  all lambs were below those which lead to
  rancidity
• Vitamin E levels were high in all lambs,
  particularly in those grazed on heather

52
Health

• All groups of lambs had similar muscle fat
  contents (3)
• Heather and moorland were higher in all n-6 fatty
  acids and also C226n-3
• Moorland lambs had higher CLA levels in relation
  to trans-C181

53
Taste

• Flavour scores for all lambs were high, with meat
  from moorland and saltmarsh lamb scoring highest
• Fat from lambs grazing semi-improved control
  pasture scored highest for abnormal odour and
  lowest in lamb flavour

54
And finally

• This study shows that lambs grazing
  unimproved pasture produce meat that is of high
  quality and tastes good.

55
Consumer Perspectives

James Kirwan and Carol Morris Universities of
Exeter and Gloucestershire
56
Consumer perspectives

• Consumer perspectives on the linkages between
  food quality, biodiversity and farmland
  management
• How information about products may/ does
  influence purchasing decisions
• Scheduled for year 3 of the project
• 4 focus groups - 3 meat quality 1 cheese quality

57
Focus group pilot

• Pilot focus group of 10 women held in February
  2006
• Themes discussed
• Shopping for meat (at home and on holiday)
• Production processes, and the perceptions of
  the impact of these processes on the food
  consumed
• Labels and labeling
• Reflections on food quality

58
Images discussed during the focus group

• Leaflets salt marsh lamb and Northumbrian
  Quality Meats
• Images from websites. e.g. Holker and Heritage
  Meats.

59
(No Transcript)
60
(No Transcript)
61
(No Transcript)
62
(No Transcript)
63
Focus group pilot some results

• Place of production was seen as important but not
  as significant as price
• Quality of meat was more significant in
  purchasing decisions than price, with taste and
  appearance also significant
• Limited knowledge / concern about food production
  issues (especially environmental issues)

64
Response to information about salt marsh lamb

• the salt marsh bit puts me off somehow.
• Yes, and me.
• Because of the salt.
• You'd think it might be salty.
• You'd taste salt.
• And marsh land, is just a boggy mess.
• But, factor in the place of production
• The Gower salt marsh lamb, I know the Gower and
  it is a
• lovely place, so that could influence me

65
Response to pictorial information

• I think Northumbrian Quality Meats doesn't
  really mean much.
• The taste of Northumberland, what is the taste of
  Northumberland?
• The salt marsh one says where it comes from.
• The Northumberland one is a bit vague.

66
To end

• Consumer responses to communication /messages
  cannot be taken for granted, and are not
  straightforward!