Monthly Archives: June 2021

Immigrants and refugees in Oregon will enjoy expanded protections and benefits from legislation that majority Democrats passed during this years session. And lawmakers are continuing to press for more policies and spending to improve the lives of those new Oregonians in the sessions waning days.

Bills headed to the desk of Gov. Kate Brown will make Oregon a safer sanctuary state, create an Office of Immigrant and Refugee Advancement and expand a tax credit for working non-citizen parents of U.S. citizen children.

But not all proposed legislation intended to uplift immigrants made it through the Legislature. Champions of immigrants felt a particularly stinging loss when a bill to guarantee legal representation to Oregon residents facing deportation proceedings failed to advance out of the House.

Bills that cleared both chambers ranged from policy updates to expenditures aimed at helping refugees get a better start on their American dreams. The most heralded change, which passed both chambers on near-party line votes over Republican opposition, will strengthen Oregons status as a sanctuary state in which state and local government employees and agencies must remain neutral while federal authorities enforce immigration rules.

SANCTUARY PROMISE ACT

The Senate gave final passage Wednesday to House Bill 3265, which will expand Oregons sanctuary state status, first established in 1987. The new provisions prohibit law enforcement agencies from denying services, benefits, privileges or opportunities to an individual in custody, on parole or on probation based on their immigration status, said Rep. Teresa Alonso Len, a Democrat from Woodburn, a chief sponsor of the bill and herself an immigrant.

Immigration authorities also will be prohibited from detaining a person who is entering or leaving a courthouse or traveling to or from a court appointment. That will outlaw what had been a longstanding but controversial practice of making arrests when people show up for unrelated court business.

It also will prohibit Oregon jails from housing immigration detainees. None currently do so, but some have in the past, and the bill means no jails can resume or start doing so.

The bill also means people who experience violations of Oregons sanctuary law will be able to sue to enforce the law, a first. The bill also creates a Department of Justice hotline for reporting suspected violations.

Oregon is safest when all Oregonians can engage with public entities, local government, local law enforcement and the local court system without fearing that their accent or skin color will result in different treatment, Alonso Len said. Oregon is safest when all who live here feel they are free to be part of their community regardless of their race, ethnic background or place of birth.

The 1987 sanctuary law needed updates and clearer guidelines, she said. Oregon voters decided in 2018 to keep the states sanctuary law with a 63% vote.

OFFICE OF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE ADVANCEMENT

Championed by Sen. Kayse Jama, a Portland Democrat and the first former refugee in the Oregon Senate, Senate Bill 778 creates the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Advancement.

Jama said he was motivated to introduce the bill, passed by the Senate on June 16, when he noticed that there was no office specifically focused on economic justice, housing, health care or similar high priority services for one of the most vulnerable communities in Oregon.

This office is really more about strategy than anything else and just creating a pathway of being a voice for immigrant and refugee communities, but also serves as a resource for policy recommendations for the Legislature and other government entities as well, he said. We want to make sure theres long-term strategy planning for the state.

Gov. Kate Brown recently proclaimed June 20 as World Refugee Day in Oregon.

The history of refugees in Oregon is marked by a struggle for equality, justice, and prevailing over the adversity of exclusion, prosecution, discrimination and disparities, said the governors proclamation.

EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT

Under both the federal and Oregon income tax systems, an Earned Income Tax Credit helps subsidize low-income working families to make it feasible for adults with children to both work and care for their family members. But both have required everyone in the household to have a social security number to benefit, even if they worked and paid all taxes owed.

A bill expected to achieve final passage in the sessions final few days would expand the program to non-citizen working Oregonians who pay their taxes using taxpayer identification numbers, so their children can benefit.

Originally a freestanding bill, House Bill 2819 became part of an omnibus tax credit bill that largely accomplishes the same goal, said Rep. Wlnsvey Campos, a chief sponsor.

These Oregonians are investing into the system and are virtually invisible when it comes to a tax credit designed to help children of working-class taxpayers thrive, she said. I see economic (support) for some and the invalidation of others as a social injustice.

Most of the 90,000 citizens living in Oregon households consisting of both citizens and non-citizens are children, Leland Baxter-Neal, advocacy director for the Latino Network, said June 10 in testimony supporting the bill. Nationally, the Earned Income Tax Credit is viewed as perhaps the most effective mechanism for helping lift families with children out of poverty.

Its an unfortunate truth that many jobs pay too little for workers to make ends meet and support their families, Baxter-Neal said.

All workers, regardless of how they file taxes, should earn enough to be able to care for their families, said Karla Cruz, executive director for Fuerza Oregon Advocacy Association, speaking in support of the bill during an immigration-focused town hall on June 16. As an accountant, she said she sees how the Earned Income Tax Credit strengthens workers economic stability.

My values, morals and professional ethics have caused me to see the class struggle and how excluding our hardworking community from life changing credit can make or break a familys financial circumstances, she said.

REFUGEE SUPPORT

Senate Bill 718 would have appropriated money to refugee resettlement agencies, but it did not move past the Ways and Means committee. Refugee agencies are expecting 1,400 refugees to arrive in Oregon between October 2021 and September 2022, said Francis Kham, a community organizer for the Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization.

Refugees arriving to Oregon are often confronted with language barriers, cultural differences and lack of support, said Kham, who came to Oregon as a refugee from Myanmar in 2015.

The state is currently able to fund help for half of its refugees, said Sen. Michael Dembrow, a Portland Democrat. Although the bill didnt pass, $4.3 million will nevertheless go to fund refugee resettlement under Senate Bill 5520, which funds a variety of human services, he said. The refugee money is desigated to be used to extend case management and employment support services, he said.

Its critical that the state help to support this work financially, he said.

HEALTH CARE INTERPRETERS

After more than a year of medical emergencies stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, House Bill 2359 will require health care providers to work with certified interpreters when communicating with patients who prefer languages other than English.

Rep. Andrea Salinas, D-Lake Oswego, who has proposed this bill for several years, said calls for racial equity gave her proposal more of a chance this session than in previous ones. Loopholes in existing law allowed untrained health care interpreters to do the work and didnt have accountability measures for providers who did not work with qualified interpreters.

To fully achieve health equity, we must remove the language barrier between a provider and a patient to get the best health care results, two leaders of the Oregon Health Care Interpreters Association said in their testimony in support of the bill.

IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION THAT DIED

A pilot program in Portland that provides legal representation for refugees and undocumented people facing deportation proceedings would have expanded statewide under House Bill 3230, which died for lack of support this session.

A $2 million allocation in a bill destined for passage this week will allow the Portland program to continue, Salinas said. But she said she is disappointed it will not extend to all immigrants in Oregon.

Its this continuum of care for our undocumented and our refugees who really are building their lives as theyre seeking to become citizens, she said. Having this type of support from the state for people who are actually working and living here as part of our community I feel is important.

House Democrats supported a bill that would have granted overtime pay to Oregon farmworkers a strenuous job completed in often hazardous conditions. Oregon farmers said the bill requiring overtime pay would have threatened their business and the states agricultural economy. A final effort to salvage parts of the bill was considered late in the session, but to ultimately failed.

Farmworkers were excluded from the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act that allows other employees to receive time-and-a-half pay for working more than 40 hours per week. This Jim Crow era decision excluded agricultural workers, most of whom were Black, intentionally.

For me, this is about trying to reckon with that past and making sure we are building a future that is more equitable, Salinas said in March.

This story was updated at 10:45 a.m. on June 24 to reflect the correct number of refugees expected to arrive in Oregon between October 2021 and September 2022.

-- April Rubin; arubin@oregonian.com; @AprilMRubin

Read the original here:

Bills focused on improving lives of immigrants and refugees pass during last days of session - OregonLive

Jegajimouxw and Thichala lead blockade on Stillwater Mainline in solidarity with land defenders

Indigenous youth Jegajimouxw (whose English name is TaKaiya Blaney) and Thichala (whose English name is Ace Harry) set up a blockade at the Western Forest Products (WFP) access road on Stillwater Mainline in the qathet region in solidarity with land defenders resisting old-growth logging in the Fairy Creek area.

Thichala and Jegajimouxw set up the blockade early on Wednesday, June 23, and were joined throughout the day by Tlaamin Nation citizens and elders, as well as non-Indigenous qathet residents.

This is first and foremost a solidarity action, Jegajimouxw told the Peak. We stand with Nuu-chah-nulth land defenders whose territories are being encroached upon by Western Forest Products, and their old-growth ancestral forests are being removed without the free, prior and informed consent of the collective nation.

The BC government recently announced a two-year deferral on old-growth logging in the Fairy Creek watershed and Central Walbran, but advocates say old-growth trees around those areas and elsewhere remain unprotected. WFP holds tree farm licence 44, which includes areas adjacent to the Fairy Creek area.

Jegajimouxw said WFP also has a history of operations in Tlaamin territory.

As Tlaamin youth, we are unable to access the forest that our elders talk about, and were able to harvest from and have a relationship with when they were our age, and that is the direct result of the legacy of corporations like WFP and forestry based economies that have been such a driving force of colonization in Tlaamin territories, added Jegajimouxw. Not only are we standing in solidarity with other Indigenous nations, which WFP is not abiding by their consent, but were also calling into question the practices of WFP on our own lands, because our people have never been able to engage with its economy in a way that hasnt been coercive.

Jegajimouxw said the plan was to maintain the blockade for all of Wednesday, and hopes the action will foster a sense of empowerment among Indigenous youth.

This applies beyond forestry, said Jegajimouxw. Any industry that is operating on Indigenous territories needs to be obtaining free, prior and informed consent of the nation whose land theyre operating on.

Band council approval of resource extraction projects, said Jegajimouxw, does not amount to consent if there are community members who feel silenced by the elected leadership or excluded from the negotiation process.

We would like to remind Canadians that the colonially imposed systems of government that Canada brings to the negotiation table, theyre imposed by Canada, so they dont always work in the favour of the best interests of our people and of our land, said Jegajimouxw.

Thichala said legislation such as the Indian Act serves as a tool to divide Indigenous peoples and undermine traditional systems of accountability.

It was only possible first of all after biological warfare was used to reduce the numbers, said Thichala. After that point [settlers] were then able to move onto separate reserves and begin separating us from our relatives, and separating us from our family units, which are integral to Indigenous culture, because our cultures were based on systems of accountability that were very effective, but those systems dont work if you dont have the relationships that are the foundation of those.

The blockade, said Jegajimouxw, has been met with mixed responses by forestry workers, with some expressing respect and curiosity, and others acting more aggressively. RCMP members briefly stopped by to ask how long they planned on maintaining the blockade, but did not seem concerned, she added.

The blockade has received support from community members, with some bringing food and chairs.

Weve had quite a good response overall, because we really just want to focus on lifting our people up at the end of the day, and as for those who are frustrated, we never intend to attack workers, explained Jegajimouxw. We take measures like this because weve never been listened to historically, and its important for it to be said that this is our land, and we have jurisdiction and we have power here.

Jegajimouxw said resource companies must change how they operate regardless of whether settlers support the cause.

Its not just about our continued existence, culturally or even physically on these territories; its about the land itself, she added.

In a statement sent to the Peak, WFP stated: Western is working to understand the concerns of the protesters and have been in contact with the leadership of the Tlaamin Nation. We will be in a position to provide more information once we understand the nature of the issue and the interests of the Tlaamin Nation more specifically.

In the interim, we are working to ensure the safety and security of the protesters and our contractors and crews.

See the rest here:

Blockade blocks WFP road south of Powell River - Powell River Peak

The Word, in the towns Market Place, has been selected as one of six new outposts of the British Librarys Business and IP Centres (BIPCs) scheme.

And the brains behind the initiative hope it will help the boroughs aspiring entrepreneurs turn an idea into a successful business.

Joan Atkinson, deputy leader of South Tyneside Council, said: This is going to be an invaluable resource for our business community, particularly residents looking to start-up their own company and entrepreneurs wanting to develop their business idea.

Experts in residence will be on hand to offer specialist advice in areas including intellectual property, legal, financial, innovation and digital guidance.

Businesses will also be able to access databases providing information about company statistics, market trends and consumer behaviours as well as finding funding opportunities to help develop or explore new markets.

Its fantastic news that we will have this free service with trained staff within the borough.

It will make a key contribution in supporting businesses to emerge from the challenging coronavirus pandemic.

The British Library (BL) set up its first BIPC outside London in Newcastle in 2011 and since then has supported more than 14,000 new or expanding firms, offering resources such as up-to-date market research and business databases, as well as workshops and one-to-one mentoring.

During the coronavirus pandemic its services have helped protect about 600 North East jobs.

A 13million government grant has helped the scheme expand even further, with 690,000 of this to back six new centres in the North East.

One of the firms to have benefited already from the scheme is South Shields-based Sincero, which specialises in finding funding solutions and opportunities for other companies.

Director Julie Skevington said: I recently received help from BIPC Newcastle via the Citylife Business Support Programme.

This was fully funded and gave me access to Ann English, who created a fantastic Visual Doodle as a marketing tool.

This will help me with my online promotion and is an effective and engaging way of explaining what we offer to our customers and assisting them to secure the very best finance available.

Its wonderful to see the BIPC extending to local areas its a great resources for local businesses.

As well as the Word, officially known as the National Centre for the Written Word, the BIPC is adding five further outposts, in addition to its main base at Newcastle City Library.

Sunderlands historic Elephant Tea Rooms is also set to host one of the centres, with more planned for North Shields, Berwick, Morpeth and Hexham.

The expansion is due to take the schemes tally from 14 across the country, to more than 100.

Liz Jolly, the BLs chief librarian, said: At their heart, libraries are trusted spaces with professional staff who have a mission to connect people with information.

BIPC Network harnesses the power of libraries, bringing in expertise from the local community to help people from all walks of life turn an idea into a successful business.

Read this article:

New business centre in South Shields The Word will 'help boost borough's economy' - Shields Gazette

New Delhi: On June 23, a group of researchers and experts penned a letter and analysis of the changes proposed in the Indian governments draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation 2021, addressed to the President of India. It is reproduced in full below.

To,

Honble Shri Ram Nath KovindThe President of the Republic of IndiaJune 23, 2021

Subject: Request to intervene to withdraw the Draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation (LDAR) 2021

Honble President,

The proposed Lakshadweep Town and Country Planning Regulation, also being referred to as the draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation of 2021 (henceforth LDAR), is highly problematic and, should it become law, will work against existing legal provisions that safeguard the resilience of Lakshadweeps ecology, livelihood and culture. It is at odds with the inherent ecological fragility and cultural uniqueness of Lakshadweep, and has been put together with scant regard for its implications for Lakshadweeps environment and people. As Indias smallest Union Territory and our only atoll system, Lakshadweep holds a special place in the Indian union. Yet, its unique geography, underlying ecology and long human history place natural limits on the kinds of development the archipelago can support.

As a collective of concerned scientists who have conducted research in Lakshadweep for many years, and citizens who care deeply for the survival and well-being of Lakshadweeps people and ecosystems, we respectfully request you to intervene to withdraw this draft and request a serious re-evaluation of the developmental paradigms currently being promoted for the archipelago, under your constitutional powers and duties to ensure peace, progress and good governance for Lakshadweep.

Our principal concerns, which we detail in this letter and appendices that follow, include the following:

i. The LDAR ignores a scientific understanding of Lakshadweeps unique geography, ecology and culture, which place clear limits on the developmental possibilities on island, lagoon and reef, already constrained by climate change.

ii. Local livelihoods and wellbeing are embedded in current land use and ocean practices and environmental stewardship which the provisions of LDAR will endanger. The draft has been formulated without consulting local communities of these consequences.

iii. The LDAR violates several existing regulations as well as international commitments that protect the ecological integrity of the islands and ensure sustainable development across this fragile archipelago.

iv. In its spirit, the LDAR embraces a questionable vision of development that is neither sustainable in design nor likely to improve local wellbeing, or safeguard the future habitability of the archipelago.

A coral reef in Lakshadweep. Photo: M. Rajshekhar

i.Lakshadweeps inherent environmental vulnerability:

Lakshadweep is home to 70,000+ people, who have lived here for around 1500 years. Population densities are among the highest in the country, and basic land and water resources are extremely limiting. Between these pressures and the rising threat of climate change, the archipelago and its people face serious existential threats (see Annexures 1 and 2). As mid-oceanic coral atolls, Lakshadweep depends completely on the health of its surrounding reefs; the living coral framework and the lagoon it encloses, together buffer the islands from waves, storms, land loss and saline ingress into groundwater. However, over the last two decades, Lakshadweep has experienced catastrophic climate change-related coral mass mortality events, straining the accretion and buffer capacity of the reefs. Some reefs, including the capital, Kavaratti, are already eroding more than they are growing. Added to this, the increasing trend of commercial reef fishing is undermining the natural ability of reefs to recover from disturbance events. Of particular concern are lagoons, which are impacted by land-based pollution, boat traffic, dredging, and seagrass meadow decline. Lagoons are vital to both populated and unpopulated atolls as critical resource areas and as reef insurance sites for climate resilience. Unless urgent action is taken now to reverse these trajectories, scientific studies conclude that between reef decline, sea level rise, land loss, cyclones, and declining freshwater, the majority of low-lying atolls like Lakshadweep will become unlivable by mid-century. The plans for development the LDAR proposes are strangely unheeding of these self-evident realities. Any further large-scale infrastructural development will have an ecological and social footprint much too large for these islands, lagoons and reefs to sustain and potentially accelerate the rates of decline.

Also read: As Praful Patel Visits Lakshadweep, Island Leaders Call for Black Day, Boycott Events

ii.Undermining of local livelihoods:

The proposed legislation is in direct conflict with the rights of local people to land, livelihood and healthy ecosystems. Lakshadweep society is organised around its limited land and freshwater resources on the one hand, and its vast ocean resources on the other. Coconut products and pelagic tuna are the mainstays of Lakshadweeps economy. Importantly, these activities work within sustainable limits of land use, water use and fisheries production. To be successful, these activities need access to land for coconuts, beach area to process tuna and copra, and freshwater. The lagoon forms a natural extension of the land, and supports several critical ecological goods and services. This is true for uninhabited atolls as well; they are places of active tenure, used for cultivation, fishing and fish processing. The lagoon and beach are vital social spaces for all sections of Lakshadweep society, including women, children and the elderly. By granting authorities unqualified rights to appropriate land, beach and lagoon resources, the LDAR acts directly against the livelihood interests of local communities and jeopardises a way of life, and an entire economy.

iii. Overriding of existing legislations and commitments:

The proposed regulation imperils Indias international commitments in meeting SDG goals, the CBD convention, CMS convention, UN Framework convention on Climate Change, among others. It also works against Indias own laws like the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the Biological Diversity Act 2002, The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the Ecotourism Guidelines 2019 among others. Of greater concern, the proposed LDAR ignores existing regulations from Lakshadweep itself. These regulations explicitly acknowledge the unique vulnerability of Lakshadweep and her communities, and take special pains to ensure that the boundary conditions established by Lakshadweeps ecology are not breached by unsustainable development. We acknowledge in particular the recommendations of the Justice Raveendran Committee Report of 2014 which were incorporated in the subsequent IIMPs as approved and notified by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, in its NotificationNo.19011/16/91-IA.III dated 23 October 2015, and the Lakshadweep Panchayats Regulation 1994 in this regard. Together they provide a comprehensive existing framework for holistic development whose benefits accrue to local communitieswhile securing ecological integrity, and ensure decentralised development decision-making. We believe that the legal authority and vision of these regulations should prevail over the socially disruptive and ecologically dangerous provisions of the proposed LDAR.

Women and children from Lakshadweep pose during the protest called by Save Lakshadweep Forum, on June 07, 2021. Photo: By arrangement.

iv. Questionable developmental paradigm:

Rashtrapati ji, Lakshadweep stands today as a beacon of social cohesion, wellbeing and national integration. By nearly every reliable metric of societal wellbeing literacy, health, crime rate, income inequality, gender ratio, population growth rate, sanitation, etc Lakshadweep either betters the national average or leads it. For every measure that matters for a fulfilled life, Lakshadweep is a fully developed state and a paragon to be emulated by the rest of the country. This enviable status is the result of careful planning, institution building, skill development and wise investment by various governmental and non-governmental institutions and the people of Lakshadweep over several decades. In addition, it is due to local enterprise, social reform and judicious resource use by Lakshadweep society over centuries. Against this reality, the guiding development doctrine implicit in the LDAR and its provisions is deeply problematic. It is based on the conception that, despite seven decades of independence, Lakshadweep is woefully underdeveloped and needs to be fast-tracked on a path of rapid growth. This embraces a narrow interpretation of development that favours investment in physical infrastructure, high-end tourism, market mechanisms and resource exploitation over local rights, societal wellbeing and existing ecological infrastructure.

Local communities of Lakshadweep demonstrate a strong sense of stewardship, strong social cohesion, the ability to self-govern, ability to forfeit short-term personal gains in the larger long-term interests of the community and to resolve conflicts internally. These are considered ideal and critical prerequisites within a community to facilitate not just equitable social development, but more importantly, to facilitate economic development. The LDAR in its current form fails to build on and leverage the inherent strengths of the local community to sustainably manage and use the resources on these islands. Instead, it will deprive them of their rights over land and ocean and undermine the social fabric that binds the community together.

Based on all that we have listed above, Lakshadweep requires a more prudent, less invasive approach to development based on securing and enhancing critical ecological infrastructure of island, lagoon and reef, preparing local institutions adequately for the vicissitudes of climate change. And it should celebrate Lakshadweep as a vital and vibrant contributor to Indias diverse culture and history.

In the light of these concerns, we the undersigned humbly request you to:

I. Intervene to withdraw the incautious draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation of 2021.

II. Restore and reinvigorate the Justice Raveendran Committee recommendations set up by the Honble Supreme Court and ensure that they are robustly implemented and monitored. III. Establish a committee of scientists, policy makers and local representatives to re-evaluate the broader development plans and directions of which the LDAR is a part, in the context of Lakshadweeps unique culture, ecological fragility and climate vulnerability.

Lakshadweep needs careful development, but this development needs to be calibrated against the realities of climate change, existing population pressures, cultural sensitivities and basic human rights. Anydevelopment in Lakshadweep should aim to strengthen, not weaken existing ecological and social infrastructure that currently work to protect the island and its people.

Theaccompanying annexuresoutline our detailed concerns about this proposed legislation against a scientific understanding of Lakshadweeps social and ecological realities and suggest alternative models of development for this part of the country.

Sincerely,

The Lakshadweep Research Collective(Naveen Namboothri, Rohan Arthur, Dipani Sutaria,Aarthi Sridhar, Rucha Karkarey, Ishaan Khot, Divya Panicker,Stella James, Vineetha Venugopal & Neha Sinha)

Read the original post:

Experts Write to President to Withdraw 'Incautious' Draft Lakshadweep Regulation 2021 - The Wire

Introduction

The Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra) has, as its name suggests, a broad range of responsibilities. It runs programmes to deliver much of the research and monitoring needed for policy development, both nationally and internationally.

[Credit: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew]

Working with a wide range of centres of scientific expertise, including Public Sector Research Establishments, universities, industry, and national and international organisations, Defra sets policies to ensure a healthy and sustainable environment and to achieve production of food at high standard for consumption at home and for trade.

Defras policies are evidence-based and rely on research to ensure they are effective and take account of up-to-date understanding. This document describes the broad areas where Defra needs further research and innovation to inform its programmes and policies.

This research will help Defra realise the goals set out in important government strategies, respond to the climate crisis and make progress following the exit from the EU. It will also inform legislative commitments of the devolved administrations, such as those of the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

These research and innovation interests are presented in this document at a high-level, giving an overview of the breadth of Defras enquiry. They are expected to be areas of interest for at least some years. In many cases they represent long-running fields of research endeavour and span more than one discipline. These research needs have been influenced by the substantial perturbation of the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. This document includes early consideration of the new and altered research needs that will arise.

Identifying the departmental research and innovation needs will ensure Defras evidence activities inform, and are driven by, policy and operational needs. Enabling greater strategic oversight of the evidence activities.

Research to address these areas of interest is delivered by a range of organisations and people. Some of the research is undertaken in the Public Sector Research Establishments (PSREs) in the Defra group which have extensive specialist research expertise. But Defra also works with a broad range of universities, research institutes, industries and industry bodies, charities and volunteer organisations, and with other government departments. Defra benefits from the global excellence of UK environmental science and research.

Research that contributes to Defras policy making and programmes is funded through a variety of routes. Some is funded and commissioned by Defra directly and targets specific short-term evidence needs in the department. Some is more extensive research funding by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). This includes novel and innovative research to inform Defras strategic research interests. Relevant UKRI research is delivered in a variety of programmes, including those in the Strategic Priorities Fund.

This document does not present a view of the structure or processes by which research is commissioned and used in Defra, nor of the breadth of research undertaken in the PSREs in the Defra Group. But the document structure includes a section which discusses research interests in each of the five Outcome Systems that Defra uses internally. This section is preceded by sections that consider research needs in areas that cut across Defras portfolio, such as climate and land-use, and a section about important research tools and approaches.

Defra Group System is structured around five outcome systems listed below:

The department actively seeks connections with relevant external research. Defra experts attend conferences and take part in research programmes; Defra runs more than 20 specialist advisory bodies to consult leading external experts; Defra runs a number of intern, studentship and secondment programmes; and Defra commissions research teams to address particular problems. We are always seeking new approaches to learn about research in the areas outlined in this document. That research is fundamental to the evidence-based policy making that the department prides itself on.

The eight Public Sector Research Establishments in the Defra Group. Seven of these are Defra arms length bodies. Fera is a Joint Venture between Defra and Capita PLC.

Other scientific arms length bodies in the Defra group are:

Several key themes cut across Defras domain. These often involve consideration of the complex and multifaceted interaction between the environment and human activity, and the application of multiple disciplines.

Adaptation and resilience: Defra is the lead government department for climate adaptation, responsible for the assessment of appropriate action to protect and enhance natural and human systems in a changing climate. Also, for increasing resilience and mitigating against risk. Such assessment is used in many areas, including for the statutory requirement of the Climate Change Act to produce a 5-yearly, Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) and National Adaptation Programme (NAP).

Although Defra has overarching responsibility for producing the CCRA and is responsible for managing several climate risks (such as impact on the natural environment), a number of climate risks (such as the impact on transport, health, business) are the responsibility of other government departments (for example Department for Transport (DfT), Department for Health (DfH), Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG).

Areas of interest in adaptation:

Achieving Net Zero: To limit future warming requires rapid reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and achieving net zero by 2050, as required by UK legislation. Climate mitigation is led in government by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). But Defra is responsible for efforts to reduce GHG emissions from four sectors: agriculture, waste and wastewater, land-use, and fluorinated gases (F-gases). Defra also has responsibility to promote forestry, which acts as a carbon sink. Together, the four Defra sectors represent 15% of the total net UK GHGs, with agriculture being the biggest contributor (about 10% of UK emissions).

Defra has research interests in reduction of emissions, the removal of GHG from the atmosphere, and in understanding the impacts of mitigation activities on other environmental outcomes:

In the densely populated UK, competition for land between urban, rural, food, energy, recreation, environmental outcomes, industry and other uses is a fundamental issue. Our interaction with the natural environmental is often through our use of land.

We need to assess, in a changing society and climate, how best to sustainably use available land area as well as the full suite of natural environment considerations in that use:

How can we effectively protect, manage and restore natural and modified ecosystems to help address societal challenges? Whilst also providing biodiversity benefits and human wellbeing from abundant wildlife to green jobs to clean water?

Societal challenges include mitigating and adapting to climate change. These could be addressed by supporting ecosystem functions that deliver services such as carbon sequestration, coastal resilience, and natural flood management:

The wide range of products harvested from nature and produced by agri-food and forestry industries represent a significant proportion of UK GDP. Ensuring that these products are produced and traded sustainably to the financial and broader benefit of the UK, without damage to the environment, involves a range of critical research questions:

Human and animal health are closely entwined, often via the environment in which they interact. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a forceful demonstration of this interaction. Human and animal health is also strongly influenced by the health of the environment. These interactions, considered as a system, define the research field, One Health:

The research areas identified in this document rely on a wide range of research tools and approaches, spanning disciplines across the sciences and social sciences. This section is not an exhaustive list of the tools and approaches of interest to Defra. It identifies some areas of particular relevance and change, which will be important in addressing the challenges faced by Defra and represented throughout this document.

Societies demand resource from the environment and shape that environment. The social science of human-nature interactions is of fundamental importance to Defra:

Defras areas of responsibility cover a wide range of interacting natural and human systems. Changes that affect one outcome are often likely to have knock-on implications for others. Policy in areas such as land management, biodiversity conservation, pollution prevention, food security, fisheries, and waste management, need to be designed in the absence of perfect knowledge of how human and natural processes interact. It can be particularly difficult to attribute cause and effect in such complex systems where evidence is often partial and fragmented.

Consideration of the issues that Defra deals with as parts of systems, i.e. in terms of relationships between the parts can help us to unpick complex or seemingly chaotic situations, and better deliver robust positive outcomes for society. To facilitate more effective decision making, a range of approaches and specialties need to be applied to the above challenges. Research is required in the following areas:

Geospatial data: Effective use of modern data architecture and analysis to make full use of data collected in the Defra Group and other relevant sources (for example from satellites, climate observations/models, and from other government departments).

Measuring change enables us better target action to secure a healthy environment and support our rural communities and economies. It also helps us to evaluate the effectiveness of those actions. As well as meeting legislative and policy commitments to report on the state of our environment, both domestically and internationally:

To achieve resilience to climate change, halt biodiversity loss, sustainably manage land and support rural communities and economies, we need informed and targeted policy development, interventions, and enforcement. These must engage appropriate actors (individuals, communities, businesses, and government) and be at the right scale and place. We also need to evaluate the impacts of our interventions:

Adopting a natural capital approach improves understanding of economic, social, cultural, and environmental values. Helping to encourage behaviours and practices that support stewardship and sustainability:

Climate change is increasing the threat of flooding. We have already committed to reducing the risk of harm from flooding through improving resilience, expanding the use of natural flood management, and putting in place more sustainable drainage systems. To achieve this outcome we need a strong evidence base which can help us optimise our approaches to achieve resilience and maximise the use of natural methods where they work:

Clean and plentiful water underpins human activity and supports natural ecosystems. A robust evidence base is required to develop policy to ensure there is a plentiful supply of water in the long term and to significantly enhance the quality of water available to all forms of life:

Defra is responsible for providing advice, guidance and access to capability to remediate areas from chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CBRN) and major hazmat incidents. The evidence we gather ensures that we can do this using the latest, most efficient technique:

We want UK science in the areas of animal and plant health, food, and farming to be internationally respected, impactful, and of a collaborative interdisciplinary nature.

We need research to develop a world-leading resilient food and farming system which enables the sector to grow and be more productive sustainably. Research and innovation will help champion trade of British food, produced to the highest environmental and animal welfare standards, in global markets. It will also maintain food safety, providing consumers with healthy, sustainable and affordable food choices:

We want to protect the nation from the effects of animal and plant diseases and pests, to enable sustainable production, trade, and a vibrant natural environment. Our focus is on building resilience to prevent, detect, adapt, and enable risk-based control:

We need to protect the marine environment from pollution and improve measures to reduce impacts by better process, methods, novel technology, and communication to support marine policy. Research is required to:

Our knowledge of the function and resilience of marine ecosystem services needs strengthening. Research questions include:

The UKs ambition is for sustainable growth and to manage the impact of COVID-19 on the wider marine economy. Research is required to:

Effective measures for adaptation and mitigation to climate change risks are needed to be developed by research to:

We need research to articulate the health and environmental costs and benefits of complex policy interventions that influence air and soundscape quality. This includes the environmental impacts and human health related ones. Research is required to:

Defra seeks to increase the circularity of our economy through greater resource efficiency, waste prevention, and maximising recycling. Research is required on:

We need to understand the risks associated with the chemicals we use as well as their impacts on the environment, and the role of government and others to prevent harm, in line with the goals of the 25 Year Environment Plan:

Read the original here:

Defra group research and innovation interests - GOV.UK