A quick note today to celebrate a new paper out in People and Nature, led by ResNet McGill PhD student Yiyi Zhang. The paper, Servicesheds connect people to the landscapes upon which they depend, uses two landscape case studies to demonstrate a new framework (see below) for delineating servicesheds. In the Bay of Fundy she explored “fisheries benefitting fishers, and flood protection benefitting flood-prone communities”. The Monteregie of Quebec is the other case study, with a focus on agriculture. Her study explicitly explores the impacts of tidal wetlands on coastal protection compared with the dykes that substitute that service. An ambitious study, conceptually and practically. Congratulations Yiyi and her team at McGill, including Brian Robinson and Hugo Thierry.
Tag: New paper
While I was in Australia, a first-authored piece from Brooke McWherter’s postdoc came out in Agriculture and Human Values. This new paper Exploring mental systems within regenerative agriculture: systems thinking and rotational grazing adoption among Canadian livestock producers, uses survey responses to explore not only the strength but also the substance of systems thinking. Our previous work showed that systems thinking capabilities are associated with adaptive or regenerative grazing practices–and in this work again a connection can be seen–but what is equally important is looking at what ‘things’ farmers see as included in their farm system. Brooke used exploratory factor analysis and identified four system focus types: livestock, economics, health and environment, and forage (see below). All but economics (which was p<0.05) were uncorrelated to our system thinking strength metric. Understanding both strength and types of system thinking will improve extension work on regenerative and associated grazing practices.

McWherter and Sherren (2024), Table 7: Exploratory factor analysis of farm components with loadings > 0.5 (N = 102)
A final thanks to Central Queensland University, which seems to have covered our OA costs for this paper, a lovely but puzzling discovery upon publication. Perhaps Springer picked up on our IP addresses during the time of press (in Cairns, for IASNR, or mine in Townsville, Mackay, and Rockhampton during my train trip to Brisbane afterward, all CQU campuses) and triggered this? I won’t quibble, but am appreciative.

Figure 1 in the paper, showing defining characteristics of flagship individuals, presented through the example of an African elephant (Loxodonta africana). A flagship individual (the central composite image with four shades of green) is distinguished by species characteristics, individual traits (here, larger body size and prominent tusks), its level of exposure to humans (tourism), and its individual fate (a victim of poaching).
Another new paper is out today in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment thanks to the leadership of Ivan Jarić at Université Paris-Saclay, systematizing the use of individual animals and plants as so-called ‘flagships’ of conservation campaigning. Titled Flagship individuals in biodiversity conservation (and happily open access), the paper describes the characteristics of a typical flagship individual, drawing on examples from around the world, and their potential utility for drawing attention to conservation needs. As with fundraising for humans, it is the individual story that will often move people to act. The paper also considers some of the challenges or drawbacks of such personalization, both for the individual in question and for the cause.

The Mactaquac houseboat group team in August 2013 (clockwise from top left): Beckley, Sherren, Keilty (researchers), Demerchant (boat pilot), Mittelholtz, Gutierrez Hermelo and Marmura (videographers).
Back in August 2013, we ran three houseboat tours of the Mactaquac headpond, to elicit locals’ perspectives on the landscape and what they would like to see for its future. A paper about that work, Learning (or living) to love the landscapes of hydroelectricity in Canada: Eliciting local perspectives on the Mactaquac Dam via headpond boat tours, is now out in Energy Research and Social Science (free for 50 days at this link). This was a novel research approach that presented undeniable technical challenges, but generated rich stories of the place and their connection to it, some of which were produced into a short documentary, Mactaquac Revisited.
Despite the trauma that accompanied the construction of the dam in the late 1960s, the local population has demonstrably adapted and come to cherish the new landscape: the need to rebuild the dam, with power or not, was almost unanimously expressed in the focus group elements. In the landscape elicitation, however, done alone or in smaller groups, many people expressed a nostalgia for the old river, and even occasionally an openness to seeing it returned to that state. In fact, it was the misinformation and fear we heard on the boats about what the removal option entailed that inspired our storymap, Before the Mactaquac Dam. This paper shows (again) the adaptability of people to drastic landscape change such as caused by hydroelectricity, where some amenity can be found. The implications of this for proponents of hydroelectricity (and other large-scale energy) schemes is more fraught: “You’ll get used to it” is clearly an inadequate response to stakeholder concerns, yet clearly it is sometimes true.