Zoe Margaret Harris

Just energy transitions require diverse voices to be considered, but appropriate tools are still lacking. This study aimed to identify a tool by which diverse views could be considered in decision-making for climate change and energy transitions. Specifically, a literature review was conducted to understand the current status and gaps in the use and the application of Serious Games (SGs) in the field of sustainability. This was further used to construct a framework of criteria for selecting SGs that can enable diversity in decision-making. A specific Serious Game was selected using the framework criteria and applied in qualitative analysis that investigated a gameplay and method of data collection and analysis to assess the impact group diversity has on collective decision-making for sustainability and the quality of outcomes produced. The New Shores game was used within the context of sustainability and resilience to climate disasters. A more diverse and a less diverse group (age, ethnicity, gender, and professional role) were recruited in winter 2021, to play the game in online workshops and make decisions to sustainably develop an island while balancing personal and community wellbeing. The way each group engaged with each other and addressed the challenges of the gameplay were qualitatively evaluated to scrutinise levels of collaboration; collective decision-making and the final status of the island was quantitatively analysed to assess quality of outcomes produced by each group. Positive findings indicate that heterogenous groups demonstrated stronger collaboration, prioritised collective goals, and achieved more socially equitable and resilient outcomes compared to homogenous groups. While small scale and exploratory, the positive findings of this study indicate the need for further sustained research into use of Serious Games for sustainability decision-making, to better understand how diverse groups make decisions in game playing contexts and the extent and conditions needed for these patterns’ transfer to real-world contexts.

Climate change has accelerated the degradation of agricultural land, prompting innovation to develop and adapt current global production systems to accommodate more people with increased demand for resources. Novel technologies such as vertical farming offer an opportunity to secure climate-resilient food production. This study used Life Cycle Assessment to examine how the environmental impact of lettuce production in a commercial vertical farm compares with traditional field farming based on two contrasting UK farms and a Spanish farm. The vertical farm was found to have higher emissions in all impact categories except for water use; however, when using renewable energy sources, vertical farming was found to have higher, yet more comparable greenhouse gas emissions to field farming (0.93 kg CO2eq kg-1 lettuce (VF), 0.58 kg CO2eq kg-1 lettuce (UK 1 + 2)). Energy use (electricity or diesel), the choice of substrate, and soil emissions were the biggest hotspots for lettuce production in this study. Yields per area in vertical farming systems, however, were much higher than the field farming scenarios (97.3 kg m-2 (VF), 3.3 kg m-2 (average of field farms)), and the land sparing potential of vertical farming systems offers an opportunity to use spared land to potentially reap other environmental benefits while securing food production.

Global population rise, increased rural to urban migration, climate change and conflict have placed strain on global trade and food supply chains. Vertical farming (VF) is a relatively novel method for cultivating many fresh fruits and vegetables, and often is claimed to have lower environmental impacts than field cultivation. However, to date there are few studies utilising primary data which have evaluated the environmental impact VF may have. This study utilised Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impact of lettuce production in a commercial vertical farm in the UK. This was compared with data from the literature on the impacts of lettuce in field cultivation. Scenarios were also examined to evaluate the impact of VF systems with varying electricity sources, and waste, water and nutrient management options. The VF was found to have a similar or lower Climate Change impact than field cultivation, depending on energy source used. VF had a slightly higher environmental impact than field cultivation in some other environmental impact categories such as freshwater eutrophication potential and acidification potential. Electricity demand and the medium used for ‘plugs’ in the VF were found to be the main hotspots of the system. The results of this study provide insights on the environmental impact and resource efficiency of VF, feasibility for larger scale deployment, and provide further empirical evidence to support the claims made previously in the literature. [Display omitted] •An LCA of a commercial vertical farm in the UK using primary production data.•System hotspots were electricity requirements and cultivation substrate used.•Climate Change impacts reduced 6-fold by using renewable energy electricity.•Overall emissions profile is comparable to field-based lettuce cultivation.•Vertical farming systems offer substantial land sparing potential.

To combat climate change, bioenergy is expected to play a more substantial role in the global energy mix, necessitating the expansion of energy crop plantations during the 21st century. Low-quality or abandoned agricultural land is commonly proposed for growing energy crops. However, restoring such agricultural land back to natural vegetation is also key for global biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration. Thus, understanding the ecological implications of land-use changes involving both energy crop plantations and restoration is required. Here, we use biodiversity data to calculate the Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) in different land uses, including energy crop plantations. We combine our BII models with maps of land use, crop yields and priority areas for restoration to estimate the effects on BII of changes in land use, from the current day, due to bioenergy expansion. We then compare the effects on BII of replacing either any land with energy crops, or only existing agricultural land that is a priority for restoration. Finally, we contrast the effects on BII of planting energy crops versus restoring natural vegetation in priority areas for restoration. Planting energy crops in places with relatively high amounts of natural vegetation and high BII would substantially reduce BII. Planting energy crops only on existing agricultural land that is a priority for restoration would result in less negative effects on BII than planting such crops in high BII areas, and small increases in BII in places with less remaining natural vegetation. However, restoring natural vegetation in priority areas, rather than expanding energy crops, would result in better outcomes for BII. Contrasting the spatial effects on BII of planting energy crops compared with restoring natural vegetation highlights places where energy crops could be the least detrimental to BII, such as Central Europe and the east coasts of the USA and China. Synthesis and applications. While restoration is the best strategy for biodiversity, planting energy crops on agricultural land rather than replacing natural vegetation could minimise losses in biodiversity intactness. However, achieving targets for bioenergy, climate change and restoration will require strategic land-use planning to minimise ecological compromises. While restoration is the best strategy for biodiversity, planting energy crops on agricultural land rather than replacing natural vegetation could minimise losses in biodiversity intactness index. However, achieving targets for bioenergy, climate change and restoration will require strategic land-use planning to minimise ecological compromises.image

Within a circular bioeconomy, biodegradable bioplastics (BBPs) have been promoted in fast-moving consumer goods to contribute towards closed-loop material flows. Consumers play a key role as enablers of these flows, provided they accept, understand and dispose of BBPs appropriately. Informed by focus groups, a framework combining multiple behavioural and design theories was developed to identify and structure systemic factors influencing the flow of BBPs through the consumption phase, with a focus on disposal. An exploratory network analysis based on a survey of 457 and 284 participants from two universities in the United Kingdom and the United States was then conducted to explore the interplay between factors and intentions to dispose of BBPs in different waste streams. Access to adequate organic waste infrastructure and pre-existing knowledge of BBP terminology and disposal routes were most strongly associated with intentions to dispose of BBPs alongside food waste. Mapping and facilitating consumer behaviour in tackling BBP waste is pivotal in designing sustainable systems for these materials.

Tree plantations are expanding globally to satisfy demands for wood, food, energy, oil and other ecosystem services, often replacing primary vegetation. Plantations are generally less biodiverse than primary vegetation, yet the effects of plantation age on biodiversity are not well understood. More accurate estimations of biodiversity within plantations over time could improve predictions of the ecological effects of tree planting, guiding more sustainable land use and management decisions. Here, we assess the effects of plantation age on the abundance and number of species of invertebrates, birds, plants, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and lichens, and on compositional similarity to minimally-used primary vegetation. We find that plantations usually support fewer species than both minimally-used primary vegetation and mature secondary vegetation, fewer individuals, and some novel species (i.e. species not also found in primary vegetation). We also find that, on a global scale, plantation age has positive effects on species richness, the abundance of individuals, and compositional similarity to primary vegetation. However, geographic realm, biome, management intensity and plantation type influence the biodiversity trends. We also include a case study for oil palm, showing that species richness increases with oil palm plantation age. Nevertheless, plantations typically remain less biodiverse than natural vegetation even thirty years after planting, especially in the tropics, where compositional similarity between plantations and minimally-used primary vegetation remains approximately 20% lower than the non-tropics. Our results highlight the negative ecological consequences of establishing new plantations in place of primary vegetation or restoration, yet we also reveal spatio-temporal differences in plantation biodiversity.

Controlled environment agriculture (CEA) has some clear advantages over traditional farming, such as: reliable and consistent production capability; efficiency in water and space use; reducing the use and runoff of fertiliser and pesticides; etc. As such CEA can greatly benefit from the CAPE (computer-aided process engineering) approach – cross-fertilization of these two apparently distinct areas may result in new methods and applications to improve CEA and process engineering, with potentially significant contribution to circular economy. In this paper, we discuss several important aspects of CEA drawing from our own experiences in aquaculture and aeroponics, including product development, process design and process operation, and the potential contribution of CAPE. Finally, we postulate a systems platform for CEA, aiming to foster a long-lasting partnership between the two scientific communities.

Climate change-related impacts have hampered the productivity of agricultural lands in recent times, affecting food security globally. Novel technology-based agricultural production systems such as controlled-environment agriculture (CEA) are a way to reduce the impact of climatic variation and pests that harm current global crop production and ensure consistent crop development. These systems often use artificial lighting and soilless mediums to produce crops. This meta-analysis has investigated the key influencing factors on crop production within these systems, using previous studies on lettuce (the most cultivated crop in these systems) to understand what affects yield within CEA. This analysis has found that on average, CEA systems yield twice that of field-based agriculture (3.68 kg m −2 vs. 1.88 kg m −2), with the most influencing factors being the variety of cultivars grown, the season, the nutrient delivery method, and the lighting type. The cultivation time for this study was 40 days, with 94% of papers having trial periods of 70 days or less, much lower than field-based agriculture (60–120 days). Vertical farming (stacked vertical CEA cultivation) studies were found to especially drive up yield per area (6.88 kg m −2). The results of this meta-analysis are useful for starting to understand the key influencing factors on CEA growth and highlight the breadth of research ongoing in the CEA industry.