This article was downloaded by: [York University Libraries]On: 13 August 2014, At: 01:12Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Scottish Geographical JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsgj20

Making Space for Nature in a ChangingClimate: The Role of Geodiversity inBiodiversity ConservationVanessa Brazier a , Patricia M.C. Bruneau b , John E. Gordon b c &Alistair F. Rennie da Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby, Redgorton , Perth , PH13EW , Scotland , UKb Scottish Natural Heritage , Silvan House, 231 Corstorphine Road,Edinburgh , EH12 7AT , Scotland , UKc School of Geography and Geosciences, University of St.Andrews , St. Andrews, Fife , KY16 9AL , Scotland , UKd Scottish Natural Heritage , Great Glen House, Leachkin Road,Inverness , IV3 8NW , Scotland , UKPublished online: 19 Nov 2012.

To cite this article: Vanessa Brazier , Patricia M.C. Bruneau , John E. Gordon & Alistair F.Rennie (2012) Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate: The Role of Geodiversityin Biodiversity Conservation, Scottish Geographical Journal, 128:3-4, 211-233, DOI:10.1080/14702541.2012.737015

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14702541.2012.737015

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Making Space for Nature in a ChangingClimate: The Role of Geodiversity inBiodiversity Conservation

VANESSA BRAZIER*, PATRICIA M.C. BRUNEAU**,

JOHN E. GORDON**,{ & ALISTAIR F. RENNIE{

*Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby, Redgorton, Perth PH1 3EW, Scotland, UK; **Scottish Natural

Heritage, Silvan House, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, Scotland, UK; {School of

Geography and Geosciences, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9AL, Scotland, UK;{Scottish Natural Heritage, Great Glen House, Leachkin Road, Inverness IV3 8NW, Scotland, UK

ABSTRACT Building ecosystem resilience requires consideration of the role and response ofphysical processes to climate change. Understanding geodiversity will enable more effectiveconservation strategies for managing ecosystem responses, as well as helping to mitigate futureimpacts, inform appropriate policies, guide adaptive management, and contribute to therestoration of ecosystems already damaged by human activities. This will require applyingunderstanding of the spatial and temporal connectivity and dynamism of geomorphological andsoil processes, and working in harmony with them. Scenarios for the likely effects of climatechange on coastal, river, slope and soil processes in Scotland include: reductions in recovery timefor habitats and species between extreme events; changes in the distributions of landforms inresponse to altered patterns and rates of both erosion and deposition; and longer landformreadjustment times to extreme events due to reactivation by subsequent events. In extreme cases,the frequency and speed of geomorphological change may mean that habitat recovery is neverestablished, potentially leading to process regime change. Managing biodiversity adaptations toclimate change through making space for natural processes must be informed by widerunderstanding of the links between geodiversity and biodiversity as part of an ecosystem approachclimate-proof future nature conservation management.

KEY WORDS: biodiversity, geodiversity, conservation management, climate change scenarios,geomorphological processes, ecosystem approach

1. Introduction

It is timely, in view of the current interest in the ecosystem approach (MillenniumEcosystem Assessment 2005; UK National Ecosystem Assessment 2011), to reviewhow an understanding of geodiversity can assist biodiversity conservation in achanging climate. Contemporary dynamic processes (such as geomorphological

Correspondence Address: Vanessa Brazier, Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby, Redgorton, Perth PH1

3EW, Scotland, UK. Email: vanessa.kirkbride@snh.gov.uk

Scottish Geographical JournalVol. 128, Nos. 3–4, 211–233, September–December 2012

ISSN 1470-2541 Print/1751-665X Online � 2012 Royal Scottish Geographical Society

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14702541.2012.737015

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

processes that erode and deposit weathering products and sediments, andbiogeochemical processes in soils and bedrock) are likely to respond rapidly tochanges in climate. In particular, changes in the nature, rate and duration ofgeomorphological and soil processes will have consequences for habitats andspecialised species that have developed in dynamic physical environments. Under-standing the links between geodiversity and biodiversity is therefore central todeveloping appropriate conservation management approaches for dynamic environ-ments in a changing climate (English Nature 2005; Hopkins et al. 2007; Prosser et al.2010; Gordon et al. 2012). Changes in the nature and rate of geomorphological andsoil processes condition ecosystem resilience, sensitivity and responses to climatechange (Gordon et al. 1998, 2001; Jonasson et al. 2005; Gilvear & Willby 2006;Morrocco 2006). The aim of this article is to present a conservation perspective oncurrent understanding of how geomorphological and soil systems respond toweather and climate, and what the evidence of past changes reveals about thedynamic responses of such systems. In doing so, we seek to open up a moreinterdisciplinary dialogue among conservation practitioners. This is critical in thecontext of developing an ecosystem approach (Gray 2011; Gray et al. in press).

Awareness of past natural and anthropogenic changes is also essential tounderstand future ecosystem trajectories and their capacity to absorb or readjust toclimate changes (Thomas 2001; Dearing et al. 2006, 2010). Ecosystems areconditioned by changes in the past that are still causing a response today, and willcontinue to have an influence into the future. For example, many of the presentcoastal ecosystems of Scotland have been conditioned by isostatic uplift, and wherethis has occurred this uplift has been progressively overtaken by sea-level rise(Rennie & Hansom 2011). The legacy of past human interventions and resultingmodification of natural processes (e.g. large-scale reclamation of estuaries affectingsediment processes) may also obstruct natural process responses and limit optionsfor ecosystem management through working with natural processes. Hopkins et al.(2007) identified the need to ‘accommodate change’ as one of five adaptationprinciples for conserving biodiversity in a changing climate. They further defined thisprinciple to include the need to ‘make space for the natural development of riversand coasts’.

We review how active geomorphological systems and soil processes are likely torespond to changing climate in Scotland, and identify what additional threats orconstraints these responses may present for nature conservation. First, we identifythe environmental conditions that control when and how geomorphological and soilprocesses respond. Then we use evidence from the literature for past climate-drivengeomorphological and soil process responses to derive simple scenarios of likelyfuture changes for coasts, rivers, soils, slopes and uplands in Scotland, identifyingimplications for biodiversity adaptation.

2. Climate and Weather Controls on Geomorphological Responses

Understanding the relationships between geomorphological processes and climate,and more specifically weather, requires some explanation of how and whygeomorphological processes occur (Thomas 2001; Burt et al. 2002). Thecircumstances in which change is initiated vary in different landscapes and according

212 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

to a number of conditions and factors (Table 1). In the Scottish humid temperateenvironment, most terrestrial geomorphological processes are episodic, occurringonly when internal system thresholds are crossed (Gordon et al. 2001). For examplein gravel-bed river systems, coarse-grained sediment is only moved during sufficientlylarge flood events. The magnitude and nature of episodic geomorphologicalresponses to discrete weather events can also be enhanced or ameliorated byantecedent weather conditions. In contrast, some processes may be described ascontinuous, but these still rely on the overwhelming of forces resisting change.Longshore drift is an example of a continuous process, resulting in the progressivemovement of sediment along the coast by wave action. Weather conditions, bothlocally and offshore, shape wave direction and height, which influences sedimenttransport in the littoral zone. Coastal topographic setting (e.g. the funnelling shapeof an estuary), tidal conditions and coincidence of weather-generated storm surges

Table 1. Summary of conditions that affect the incidence of geomorphological processes.

Conditions promoting change Local physicalproperties influencing

the type ofgeomorphological

response

Weather conditionsaffecting

geomorphologicalprocesses

Temporal changesinfluencing

geomorphologicalprocesses

Soft sedimentcoast andestuaries

. Wind direction and speed(affecting both waveenergy and sandmovement)

. Long-term changes inrelative sea level

. Tidal range

. Tidal state (e.g. spring orneap tides)

. Sediment type andavailability

. Wave energy

. Beach profile. Storm or prolongedfrontal rain or snowmeltgenerated flooding frominland (estuaries only)

Rivers . Precipitation durationand intensity

. Antecedent conditions

. Drought

. Land uses impactingchannel processes (e.g.abstraction,channelisation, sedimentabstraction)

. Sediment type andavailability

. Changes in catchmenthydrology

. Changes in channelslope. Land uses within the

catchment (e.g. urbandrainage, farming andforestry practices)

. Type and quality ofvegetation cover

Regolith: soils,slopes andsummits

. Precipitation durationand intensity

. Antecedent conditions

. Drought

. Wind speed

. Snow cover

. Temperature regime

. Land use and landpractices affectingregolith structure,hydrology, biochemistryand slope stability (e.g.farming, forestry, mineralextraction, infrastructure,recreation)

. Sediment type –friction and cohesion

. Slope profile

. Soil aggregatestability

. Soil moisture andhydrology

. Soil organic matter

. Soil contamination. Type and quality ofvegetation cover

. Grazing/compactionpressures

. Soil biodiversity

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 213

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

also control the severity and spatial impact of coastal processes, such as coastalerosion and flooding. Storm-generated conditions are therefore episodic.

Identifying geomorphological changes in terrestrial and coastal environments thatdepart significantly from ‘normal’ also requires consideration of whether the landforming system is able to readjust and return to its former state; or whether itfundamentally changes its nature, impacting the habitats it supports (Werritty &Brazier 1994; Werritty & Leys 2001). In rivers, thresholds may be crossed because ofa change in sediment calibre or rate of supply, or by a change in runoff regime, bothof which may be caused by climate or land use change (Schumm 1979; Church 2002).The alluvial fan at the confluence of the River Feshie with the River Spey (Figure 1)is an example of a river taking nearly 200 years to re-establish a braided distributarychannel pattern, following channel confinement and straightening during theNapoleonic wars (Brazier & Werritty 1994). Geomorphological process changecan lead to rapid and fundamental changes in habitat. For example at Culbin on theMoray coast (Figure 2), there has been 30 m of dune edge retreat over the last 7years, including breaching of the dune cordon. Over-wash sediments have beencarried 40 m inland during successive storm events coincident with high tides,inundating the former freshwater habitats. Scrub habitats have died-back adjacent tothe area of inundation, in response to increased sand burial and salinity.

Developing an evidence base for assessing climate – physical process interactions isalso complicated by the patchy nature of both survival of dateable evidence in thesedimentary and landform record (e.g. Kirkbride & Brazier 1998), and coverage oflandscape evolution studies. While cause and effect can be attributed for landforming episodic events (e.g. Winter et al. 2006), the relationships between climatechange and geomorphological and soil process responses are more opaque, becausethe process of climate change itself is variable.

Climate change trends can be masked in the short term by other factors, such asvolcanic activity or the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Strongly positive NAOindexes are typically associated with wet westerly conditions in Northern Europe, andhave been associated with increased flood risk in Britain, such as the flood-pronedecade of the late-1980s–1990s (Black & Burns 2002; Macklin & Rumsby 2007).Strongly negative NAO indexes are associated with cooler, drier conditions innorthern Europe, resulting in colder and sometimes snowier winters in Scotland(UKCP09). Following rapid global warming at the end of the last glaciation ca 11,500calendar years ago, the world’s climate has continued to change, with up to sixperiods of identifiable rapid climate change during the Holocene (Mayewski et al.2004). The effects of these postglacial climate changes are being revealed by researchon landform, sedimentary and peat archives, showing that the Holocene has been afar from quiescent period of landscape evolution (Ballantyne 2008; Foster et al. 2008;Macklin et al. 2010).

Scotland has experienced climate warming since the Little Ice Age (between thefifteenth and nineteenth centuries), a period characterised by severe cold conditionsbut also included milder, more settled years (Dawson 2009). Recent climateobservations (Barnett et al. 2006) show seasonal and regional changes inprecipitation, temperature, snow lie and drought across Scotland. Global circulationmodels of climate change can provide indications of the directions of likely changes inclimate (UKCP09) and suggest that these observed trends are likely to continue.Modelled seasonal temperature and precipitation changes for parts of Scotland

214 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

(UKCP09; SCCIP 2010) predict some regional differences, but overall show a generalincrease in precipitation values for winter and autumn across all emissions scenarios,and a decrease in precipitation for spring and summer (Table 2). Seasonal changes in

Figure 1. For nearly two centuries the main outflow of the River Feshie (Cairngorms National

Park) was concentrated along the central segment of its alluvial fan, constrained by bunds andchannel straightening implemented during the Napoleonic Wars. The aggrading channel bedeventually rose above neighbouring land, resulting in repeated channel avulsions during floods

from the 1990s onwards. (Data licensed to SNH under the PGA, through Next Perspectives,Aerial photograph date: 21 March 2006).

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 215

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

temperature also indicate that both minimum and mean values are expected to rise inwinter, which would affect both snow lie and frost processes. Global circulationmodels are less capable of predicting the probability of changes in magnitude orfrequency of winds and storms (both of which are important for coastal andterrestrial geomorphological processes). Despite this, such stormy conditions havebeen predicted by some to become more frequent and to impact both on biodiversityand society (Hegerl et al. 2011).

Figure 2. Recent coastal and habitat changes at the Buckie Loch, Culbin Sands, Moray Firth,

Scotland. (Data licensed to SNH under the PGA, through Next Perspectives, photographydate: 13 May 2009).

Table 2. Summary of projections of climate change by the 2050s for regions in Scotland(UKCP09).

RegionNorthernScotland

WesternScotland

EasternScotland

Emissions scenario(90% probability level)

2050s 2050s 2050s

Low High Low High Low High

Daily minimumtemperature8C

Winter 3.38C 3.78C 3.58C 4.38C 3.38C 3.88C

% Mean precipitationincreaseþ Winter 20þ 26þ 23þ 31þ 15þ 20þdecrease7 Spring 8þ 12þ 9þ 14þ 8þ 10þ25% or above in bold Summer 6þ 3þ 6þ 2þ 6þ 2þ

Autumn 25þ 35þ 27þ 38þ 18þ 26þ

216 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Global climate circulation models work at a scale which is not yet able to accountfor regional and topographic differences in climate across Scotland from the driermore continental montane environments in the Cairngorms in the east, to themaritime-dominated very wet western mountains. Climate change projections formountain ranges in upland Britain, like that of Coll et al. (2010), are therefore rare.These authors explored how altitude may influence changing climate in theCairngorms, revealing that the greatest uphill shifts may be expected to be inminimum temperature values in autumn and spring (Coll et al. 2010), which hasimplications for both ecology and geomorphological and soil processes in the uplands.

3. Geomorphological and Soil Process Responses to Changes in Climate

3.1. Climate Change and Geomorphological Process Responses at the Coast

There is a view that in Scotland glacio-isostatic rebound will safeguard much of theScottish coast from the impact of global sea-level rise. Although the landforms ofmuch of Scotland’s coast reflect land uplift over the last few thousand years, recentinvestigations indicate that uplift rates are modest and are now less than rates of risingsea levels. This is suggested by tidal records which show increases in sea level overrecent decades (Rennie & Hansom 2011), and by evidence of increased sedimentationin mature coastal salt marshes in western Scotland (Teasdale et al. 2011). Whenconsidered alongside the UKCP09 climate impact projections, these tidal observa-tions are of value in narrowing or calibrating the wide choice of sea-level projectionsunder various climate change scenarios. It appears that Scotland’s recent observedtidal record now lies close to the 95% projection of the UKCP09 High EmissionScenario, and isostatic uplift now contributes little towards mitigating the effect ofrelative sea-level rise on the Scottish coast. If the observed recent patterns aremaintained, this has significant implications for nature conservation (Hansom &Angus 2001), strategic planning, flood risk management and sustainable developmenton Scotland’s coast, and particularly on low-lying coastal zones around the majorcities.

Most of Scotland is presently experiencing relative sea-level rise, which ifmaintained at present rates could result in rates not seen in the last 7000 years(Rennie & Hansom 2011). Relative sea-level rise is only one of a number of keyvariables which are changing. For example, coastal sediment supply generally is lowerthan expected due to coast and riverbank protection and modern land use practices(Hansom 2001). This reduces the natural capacity of the soft coastline to adapt.Intertidal gradients are also steepening, particularly on defended coasts (Taylor et al.2004). Consequently, coastal erosion is likely to quicken and become morewidespread, whilst coastal flood risk increases (Ball et al. 2008; Rennie & Hansom2011). Development continues to expand into areas that will become increasinglyunsustainable in the coming decades, with likely further demand for coast defencesand consequent ‘knock-on’ effects on coastal processes and the habitats that theysupport.

Given the wide range and scale of the projected process changes, various landscaperesponses are anticipated (Table 3). Future soft- and low-gradient coastlines areunlikely to be located within the recognised limits of the present coastline. This

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 217

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

presents natural heritage managers with challenges over the management ofdesignated sites within the coastal zone, including the lower reaches of rivers. Onsoft coasts, considerable conflict is anticipated in the medium term, whilst the coastalzone is in flux as it is bounded by static land-uses being managed through traditionalapproaches. This raises significant questions about sustainability and land-use andthe practicalities of applying concepts like ‘working with nature’. We may well chooseto mitigate but, at the coast, we will be forced to adapt.

3.2. Climate Change and Geomorphological Process Responses in Rivers and Streams

Climate change is expected to result in a range of changes in fluvial geomorphologicalprocesses. Responses to individual meteorological events and longer-term climatetrends may be more apparent in upland environments where there is closergeomorphological connectivity between hillslope systems and river channels (Higgittet al. 2001; Chiverrell et al. 2007). In lowland river systems, sediment storage hasinterrupted the geomorphological response of some parts of the catchment where themain river channel is distant from hill slopes (Foulds & Macklin 2006; Macklin &Lewin 2008). Added to this is the role of land use, which may enhance thegeomorphological sensitivity of the river system at reach, local or catchment scales(Foster et al. 2008).

Discharge has been described as the key variable that controls many riverecological processes (Doyle et al. 2005), and flood conditions are important for

Table 3. Scenarios of geomorphological and human response to climate change at the coast, ina temperate climate environment.

Enhanced rates ofprocesses

. Enhanced coastal retreat and steepening on soft coasts through enhancederosion due to a combination of rising sea level, storms, and long-termsediment deficit;

. Increased flood risk on hard coasts, partly dependent on coastal gradient;

. Enhanced landslide activity on susceptible coasts as a consequence ofundercutting of the toe of cliffs by the sea or changes in the groundwaterhydrology of the cliff slopes.

Changes in thenature ofdominant coastalprocesses

. Effects on most coastal habitats as they are intimately linked to changingprocesses; more common coastal habitats may replace rarer ones (e.g.saltmarsh may replace machair); erosion of coastal peatland resources, withdirect carbon loss, increased greenhouse gas emissions and loss of carbonsequestration potential.

Spatial changes . Coastal squeeze, where landward migration of landforms and habitats isimpeded by hard structures (such as coast defences) or natural features (such ascliffs);

. Changed distributions of coastal landforms and sediments as patterns oferosion and deposition adjust to changes in wave and wind energy andsediment transfer and cycling; this is already happening on many east coastbeaches (e.g. Aberdeen Bay and Montrose Bay).

Potential humanresponses

. Changes in the pattern, magnitude and frequency of erosion and depositionwill make dynamic environments more challenging to live near; for example,there may be more frequent disruption of transport routes through erosion andflooding;

. Increased conflict between dynamic coastal landforms and the static land useswhich occupy them and ‘knock-on’ effects of human responses (e.g. demandsfor new or extended coast defences that reduce sediment supply, leading tobeach loss, coastal steepening and enhanced erosion down-drift).

218 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

initiating geomorphological processes like channel planform change, (McEwen 1986).Winter rainfall over the last 40 years has shown large changes, with rainfall totalshaving increased by as much as 60–100% since 1960 for parts of western Scotland(Barnett et al. 2006). Recent climate projections (UKCP09) suggest that we shouldprepare for great variability in the future. An attractive proxy measure of potentialfor climate-driven geomorphological and ecological change in rivers might thereforeappear to be the frequency and magnitude of flooding. But individual flood events oreven clusters of floods are difficult to interpret as evidence of changing climate (Black& Burns 2002; Holden & Adamson 2002; Werritty et al. 2002), or compare withclimate change scenarios (Wilby et al. 2008).

Analysis of the sedimentary record of flooding from sites across the Britishuplands has revealed a consistent link between the occurrence of extreme uplandfloods during the last 200–300 years, and negative NAO index values (Macklin &Rumsby 2007). The NAO has also been shown to have a near decadal pattern and toinfluence the position and track of the Polar Jet stream, affecting both thetemperature and pattern of precipitation across Europe (Hurrell 1995). However,Orr et al. (2008a) suggest that the strength of the relationship between climatechange and the pattern of river flooding is confused by the NAO signal. One of themost promising developments is offered by the growing number of studies of LateHolocene fluvial sediments in the UK that analyse flood records over millennia. Forexample, Macklin et al. (2010) identified 17 multi-centennial length periods offlooding and river instability during the Holocene (the last 11,500 calendar years),that can be correlated with other climate proxy records. However, even thisrelationship is complicated in the last 1000 years, with widespread human activityenhancing susceptibility to flooding (Macklin et al. 2010).

If runoff regimes and land uses change (e.g. because of wetter or drier conditions,or changed growing seasons), then the response of river systems themselves is likelyto change too. Fowler & Wilby (2010) detected global-scale changes in precipitationand runoff consistent with modelled predictions for climate change, but warned thatdifficulties in discerning changes in flooding at a regional scale could lead to anunderestimate of future flood risk in places like eastern Scotland.

Despite this apparent complexity, it is possible to identify potential scenarios offuture river responses to changing climate. If the trends in weather observed over thelast 40 years continue into the future (Barnett et al. 2006), particularly with increasedwinter and autumn precipitation in western Scotland, then changes in the pattern,magnitude and frequency of river erosion and deposition are highly likely, creatingmore dynamic environments and habitats (Table 4). Consequently, increasedfrequency of high flows and flooding are anticipated, resulting in enhanced channelprocesses (higher rates of bed and bank erosion), increased connectivity betweenslopes and rivers, increased sediment transport, and greater channel mobility.

3.3. Climate Change and Geomorphological Process Responses in the Uplands

Mountain and upland habitats are considered by conservationists as one of the mostfragile in the UK and most at risk from climate change as the bioclimatic envelopesof most species shrink and species are unable to migrate to more suitable locations(Van der Wal et al. 2011). Contemporary upland geomorphological processes and

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 219

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

environments range from the micro-scale (such as frost heave), to the large scalewhere whole hillsides may be continuously but imperceptibly in motion (for examplelarge-scale rock slope failures). Episodic geomorphological processes are more likelyto show a quicker response to changes in climate, with consequences for the habitatsand species that they support (e.g. debris flows).

Some processes are temperature dependent, while others occur as a result ofchanges in soil and regolith cohesion, which may occur in response to changes inpedogenic processes, moisture and loading. The changes in climate and weather thatcould influence geomorphological responses in the uplands are therefore also varied.For example, a combination of shorter snow lie and greater exposure of montanevegetation and soils to moisture deficit could contribute to increased risk of soilerosion by wind on exposed mountain slopes. This is likely to be exacerbated bytrampling of desiccated wind-stressed vegetation (Figure 3).

The Environment Agency (2008) of England and Wales states that ‘slopefailures, landslides and other forms of erosion are likely to be more frequent infuture’. While this may yet prove to be generally true, the geomorphologicalliterature is more circumspect about the nature of the relationship between pastclimate change and known periods of enhanced erosion and slope instability. Thetype and availability of sediment limits what processes can occur on otherwisesimilar slopes (Church & Ryder 1972; Ballantyne 2008). In addition there is anongoing debate about the importance of land use (especially forest clearance andgrazing) in conditioning landscape susceptibility to debris flow and erosion in theuplands (Innes 1983; Brazier & Ballantyne 1989; Ballantyne 1991; Grieve et al.

Table 4. Scenarios of geomorphological and human response to climate change in rivers andstreams, in a temperate climate environment.

Enhanced rates ofprocesses

. Increased frequency of flood events resulting in geomorphological changesin rivers and streams;

. Increased frequency of poor water quality conditions following floods andlandslides that bring higher suspended sediment loads, with implications forspecies such as freshwater pearl mussels;

. Increased occurrence and duration of droughts and low flows (particularlyin eastern Scotland) exacerbated by demand for increased abstraction(irrigation and utility); drought followed by storm runoff will also enhancethe risk of flooding;

Changes in the nature ofdominant riverprocesses

. Insufficient time between floods for rivers to readjust, leading to increasedrates of channel instability and susceptibility to erosion by the next floodevent.

Spatial changes . Enhanced channel mobility and readjustments in channel positions as aresult of increased frequency of high flows and floods (e.g. gravel bed riverspotentially widening to accommodate higher runoff rates);

. Where sediment availability is limited (e.g. through bank protection), ratesof channel scour may locally become more dominant;

. Low-lying land around river mouths may see an increase in flooding as sealevels rise (Ball et al. 2008).

Potential humanresponses

. Increased likelihood of conflict between dynamic rivers and static land uses,existing development, and heritage and cultural interests (Howard et al.2008); and ‘knock-on’ effects of human responses (e.g. demands for new orextended flood defences and bank protection that reduces sediment supplyand enhance erosion downstream);

. Changes in land use and catchment management (e.g. urban runoffenhancing flash-flood peaks).

220 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

1995; Curry 2000a, 2000b; Chiverrell et al. 2007; Holden et al. 2007; Morroccoet al. 2007; Foster et al. 2008; Hinchliffe & Ballantyne 2009). While at individualsites, it may be possible to rule out anthropogenic enhancement of geomorphicactivity (Brazier & Ballantyne 1989), grazing pressure, forest clearance and evenmuirburn may make geomorphological response to extreme meteorological eventsmore likely in other locations. Foster et al. (2008) link late Holocene and historicalgeomorphological activity in the uplands (where there is close slope-valley floorcoupling) to the NAO record, but also identify the role of land use pressure inpriming the landscape to change.

In recent years, snowmelt, prolonged rainfall and heavy rainstorms have resultedin debris flow events, which have disrupted transport routes in Scotland (Winteret al. 2006, 2008). Antecedent weather conditions are a key factor in determiningslope failure and slope erosion events, and include both periods of droughtfollowed by intense rainfall, and also prolonged saturation during wet weather.Once initiated, landslides in gully systems can herald a prolonged period of slopedisturbance and erosion. While the opening up of exposed ground may benefitpioneer plant species, there may be costs to rare species downstream (such asfreshwater pearl mussels vulnerable to suffocation) from sudden influx of finesediment. If the trends in weather observed over the last 40 years (Barnett et al.2006) continue into the future, then further process changes are likely to occur inthe uplands (Table 5).

Figure 3. The exposed summit area on Einich Cairn (1237 m OD), Cairngorm Mountains,Scotland, supports scattered Juncus triffidus tussocks. It is vulnerable to desiccation, wind

stress and trampling. (Photo: V.M. Haynes/SNH).

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 221

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

3.4. Climate Change and Soil Process Responses

In the absence of anthropogenic interactions, soil cover evolves towards a stableequilibrium with its surrounding environment (Milne 1936; Jenny 1941; Fitzpatrick1980). Soil formation is a continuous process and its speed and nature are affected byseveral soil-forming factors, including the parent material, climate, topography,biota (including plants, animals and microorganisms) and land management. Theinteractions between soil forming factors and soil processes (e.g. humus formation,leaching, weathering, clay migration and alteration) control the formation ofdifferent types of soil (Curtis et al. 1976). Climate change is an overarching pressurewhich, in combination with changes in land use and land management practices,impacts on soil quality. Changes in soil organic matter, erosion and landslide risk,soil biodiversity and compaction lead to degradation or loss of soil functions andintegrity (Towers et al. 2006; Aitkenhead et al. in press). However, soil managementcan play an important role in mitigating the impact of climate change and may helpprotect ecosystem services provided by soils.

Climatic factors impact on soils either directly on their physical, biological andchemical properties or indirectly from interactions between soil and climate on thedynamics of soil functions and processes (Table 6) (Schils et al. 2008; Bardgett et al.2011). Direct impacts are primarily controlled by changes in temperature and soil

Table 5. Scenarios of geomorphological and human response to climate change in the uplands,in a temperate climate environment.

Enhanced ratesof processes

. Changes in the magnitude and/or frequency of slope failures and potentialconsequent increased rates of sediment transport and deposition in river systems;

. Accelerated rates of soil erosion due to more frequent gullying and land slidingduring wet conditions; this would be exacerbated by long readjustment time ofgullied slopes following mass movements, thereby increasing the risk of furtherslope instability;

. Changes in the rates and patterns of soil erosion due to both wind stress and/orstorm runoff.

Changes in thenature ofdominantuplandprocesses

. Shorter snow-lie may lead to:� changes in the pattern, depth and duration of snow-lie, and consequent

snowmelt floods and water recharge of high summits and slopes;� a combination of reduced magnitude of snowmelt season and pronounced

spring drought may increase subsequent wind and water erosion of vulnerableupland soils; and� loss of semi-permanent snow beds and niche environments associated with late-

lying snow beds.Spatial changes . Potentially localised enhanced frost processes on the highest mountains due to

increased frequency of temperature fluctuations around freezing point, butdecreased frost disturbance of bare ground on lower slopes;

. Reduction in nival processes as area of long snow lie is reduced;

. More common and extensive areas of erosion and bare ground.Potential human

responses. Physical implications of new infrastructure projects for renewable energy in theuplands, especially location and construction of access track and pipe laying; keyissues are runoff and sediment management and changes to slope hydrology;

. Changes in land use, bringing uncultivated land into agricultural production; ofparticular concern will be disturbance of carbon-rich soils, with the potential lossof carbon stores, and changes in soil stability.

222 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

moisture content, which regulate microbial growth and chemical reactions. Soilorganic matter is most at risk from changes to warmer and drier conditions, whichare less favourable for peat forming vegetation. This is likely to increase the rate ofsoil carbon oxidation and loss of carbon as greenhouse gas emissions or as DissolvedOxygen Content (DOC) in river systems (Billett et al. 2010). Indirect impacts aremore complex, often depending on the intrinsic soil resilience and resistance tochange. Structural damage to the fabric of soil can be exacerbated by landmanagement practices on increasingly wetter soil or at inappropriate times of year,reducing the time available for soil to recover naturally between growing seasons(Gregory et al. 2009).

Recognition that soils perform various roles and services in the natural, culturaland built environments has changed the focus of soil protection away from the viewof soil as a primarily growth medium for biomass and food production towards anew approach (European Commission 2006). This recognises the wider multiplebenefits of soil functions and the management of soil as a carbon sink, environmentalbuffer and economic asset in its own right. The rate of soil formation and delivery ofsoil functions are thus fundamental to ecosystem services. Soil organisms activelymodify soil structure and composition, and hence they largely determine soilfunction and affect plant growth and crop yields (Bardgett 2005). Protecting soilbiodiversity is as important for preserving healthy natural habitats as formaintaining productive farmland (Brown et al. 2011). Soil functions will be affectedby any changes in climatic factors and ecosystem and societal responses to suchchanges. Most soils in Scotland are relatively undisturbed, acidic and highly organicand are considered to be in overall good condition (Dobbie et al. 2011). Theyconstitute a rich repository of carbon (Chapman et al. 2009), amounting to morethan 65 times the total carbon held in all Scotland’s vegetation (including trees). Ifallowed to become degraded, this carbon sink could become a significant source ofgreenhouse gases and carbon loss.

Table 6. Scenarios of pedological process and human response to climate change in soils, in atemperate climate environment.

Enhanced ratesof processes

. Increased likelihood of soils remaining saturated for longer periods of time(due to higher rainfall), with increased risk of erosion, pollution and flooding;

. Risk of enhanced erosion from intense rainfall events and following periods ofdrought;

. Desiccation and enhanced risk of wind erosion during periods of drought.Changes in the

nature ofdominant soilprocesses

. Soil organic matter and nutrient turnover;

. Soil organic carbon levels, and emission of greenhouse gases; destabilisation ofcarbon-rich soils by changes in soil biochemical processes, leading to increasedrelease of greenhouse gases and loss of carbon – this is of particular concernsince Scotland’s soils contain the majority of the UK soil carbon stock;

. Changes in the nature and rate of pedogenic processes in response to wetterand warmer conditions and seasonal drought;

. Soil biochemical processes (e.g. degradation of pollutants and carbonsequestration).

Spatial changes . Soil type changes in response to wetter/dryer or warmer conditions may lead tolocal changes in soil character.

Potential humanresponses

. Inappropriate land management at crucial times of the year, leading tostructural soil damage (compaction) and reduced productivity, and potentiallyalso exacerbating soil erosion.

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 223

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

4. Discussion: Making Space for Nature

The range and character of geomorphological and soil process responses to changingclimate are likely to have significant implications for the resilience and adaptabilityof most ecosystems (Angus et al. 2011; Bruneau et al. 2011). The key message fromthe above four scenarios of adjustment to the impact of a changing climate (Tables3–6) is the potential increased rate of change in the landscape. This will becompounded by human responses to the hazards of channel changes and flooding,loss of soil fertility through wind and water erosion, coastal erosion and landslides.The combined impact of both changes in the rates of landform and soil processesand human responses will compromise effective adaptive management of ecosystems.The scenarios of geomorphological and soil process responses to changes in climateand the implications for ecosystems are also likely to mean:

. greater variety and uncertainty of geomorphological and soil processes andchanges in habitat mosaics and landscape character (e.g. more bare slopes as aresult of accelerated erosion);

. changed distributions of habitats in response to altered patterns of erosion anddeposition, with implications for some protected areas site boundaries;

. changes in land use affecting sediment and water discharges impacting in streamand riparian habitats and species; and

. increased hazard mitigation, such as river flood protection, may pose one of thegreatest threats to the habitats and species that these dynamic environmentssupport.

Table 7 summarises the relationships between the properties that help controlprocess regimes, weather variables that drive geomorphic events, the humanresponses that can exacerbate geomorphic and soil processes outcomes, and howthese may impact ecosystems. There are differing physical properties of eachgeomorphological and soil process environment that influence the likely response toclimate change. For example, reduction in the availability of sediment for longshoredrift will exacerbate coastal erosion, which would be further compounded by risingsea level, and any increased frequency or intensity in storms and surges. The effectsof human responses are also significant since engineering solutions to geomorpho-logical hazards may transfer problems elsewhere, with consequent impacts onecosystem functions and geodiversity interests (Prosser et al. 2010). Ecologists areright to be concerned by the direct impact of climate change on habitats and species(Dawson et al. 2011). Table 7 gives some examples of how human responses tophysical process readjustments to weather events may further stress ecosystemsalready responding to climate change. Such secondary impacts of climate changecould be avoided if there is a wholesale adoption of the principal of making space fornatural processes.

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (2011) has provided an extensiveoverview of ecosystem processes in the UK, but has only partially addressedbiodiversity and geodiversity interactions and their responses to climate change(Gordon & Leys 2001; Dobbie et al. 2011; Gordon & Barron 2011). However, theimportance of these functional links is becoming more widely recognised in

224 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Table

7.Summary

ofscenariosofdynamic

landform

ingprocess

responsesto

clim

ate

change,

andsubsequentecologicalcosts,forScotland.

Location

Changes

inkey

properties

Changes

inweather

Key

humanresponses

Potentialphysical

process

outcomes

Examplesofecosystem

impacts

Soft

sedim

ent

coast

and

estuaries

.Reductionin

sedim

ent

supply,changes

insedi-

menttypeandavail-

ability

.Waveenergy

.Coastalreadjustmentto

storm

s,changes

inrates

ofshorelineerosion,

beach

profiles

.Winddirectionand

speed:affectingboth

waveenergyandsand

movem

ent

.Interruptionofsedi-

mentmovem

ent

.Increasedcoastalre-

treat

.Loss

ofhabitatin

intertidalandlagoon

environments

.Sea

walls–‘coastal

squeeze’

.Increasedflooding

.Loss

ofhabitatconnectivityalongthe

coast

.Developmentin

flood-

proneanderosion-

proneareas

.Changes

tosalinityof

brackishwaters

.Increasedconflictbe-

tweencoastalland-uses

.Changes

inspeciescompositiondueto

contaminationbycoastalflooding

.Sea-level

rise

Rivers

.Changes

insedim

ent

type,

availabilityand

transfer

through

changes

inhillslope–

channel

connectivity

.Runoffregim

echanges

(flashier?)

.Precipitationduration

andintensity

.Seasonalchanges

inantecedentconditions

.Droughtim

pactingin-

filtrationandrunoff

.Interruptionofsedi-

mentmovem

ent

.Re-profilingofchannels

.Developmentin

flood-

proneareas

.Increasedratesofbed

andbankerosion

.Increasedflooding

.Channel

morphological

adjustments

following

floods,such

as:

�channelsmaybe-

comewider

and

shallower

�more

exposedgravel

�more

suspended

fines

.Loss

ofjuvenilespeciesthroughburialby

excessivesedim

entdeposition

.Disruptionandstress

toriparianandin-

stream

speciesdueto

post-floodorerosion

eventreadjustmenttimes

(increasedgeo-

morphologicalactivity)

.Loss

ofstream

bed,bankandriparian

habitat,throughflooding,erosionevents,

andanysubsequentengineeringworks

.Changein

in-stream

habitatquality

(e.g.

raised

watertemperatureswherechannel

wideningoccurs)

.Loss

ofreach

andriparianhabitatcon-

nectivity,dueto

floodorerosionprotec-

tionworks

Regolith:

soils,slopes

andsummits

.Sedim

enttype–friction

andcohesionwithin

susceptible

slopes

.Slope

.Soilmoisture

.Soilorganic

matter

.Pedogenic

process

changes

affectingsoil

cohesion

.Soilfertility

.Vegetationcover

.Precipitationduration

andintensity

.Antecedentconditions

.Drought

.Windspeed

.Snow

cover

.Tem

perature

regim

e

.Landuse

changealter-

ingvegetationcover,

drainage,

overuse

of

soils

.Over-steepeningof

slopes/cuttings

.Tramplingduringdry

conditions

.Increasederosionby

wateranddeflation

.Loss

ofsoilfertility

.Loss

ofsoilorganic

carbon

.Degradationandstress

toplantcommu-

nitieswheredrought,erosionandchanges

instabilityreduce

soilfertility

.Additionalstresses

tospeciesdependent

onsubstrate

stability,especiallyonex-

posedsummitsandslopes

.Loss

ofsoilhabitatandsoilbiogeochem

-icalfunctionthrougherosionbywindor

water,in

arable

andmountain

areas

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 225

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

conservation management (Hopkins et al. 2007; Corenblit et al. 2007; Vaughan et al.2009; Bruneau et al. 2011). Making space for natural processes to work requires bothawareness and land management policy and practice that accommodate the climatechange responses of active geomorphological and soils systems. There areencouraging new developments in nature conservation assessment and managementin Scotland, which are currently focussed on developing an ecosystem approach, asset out under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (Millennium EcosystemAssessment 2005; Scottish Government 2012). This allows recognition of the criticalrole of geodiversity in underpinning biodiversity, an important step in developing amore integrated response to the challenges that climate change will bring. At thesame time, there is a growing call for an ecosystem approach to understanding theinter-relationships between geomorphological processes and biodiversity (e.g.Church 2002; Doyle et al. 2005; Corenblit et al. 2007; Fisher et al. 2007; Orr et al.2008a; Gordon & Barron 2011), while others are more cautious about the limitedscope of some methods of ecosystem service assessment that focus mostly on thebiological elements of ecosystems (Haines-Young & Potschin 2009). An ecosystemapproach is also becoming part of policies and practices of land and watermanagement, for example in implementing the European Water FrameworkDirective and the EU Floods Directive (e.g. Newson 2002; Newson & Large 2006;Orr et al. 2008a; Scottish Government 2009; Vaughan et al. 2009). Recent floodingevents in England and Wales have also triggered a review of land and watermanagement practice and the promotion of more sustainable approaches throughworking with natural processes (Environment Agency and Defra 2011; WelshGovernment 2011). There are, therefore, some encouraging signs of progress inintegrating biodiversity and geodiversity within environmental policy, which shouldeventually benefit conservation objectives.

Making space for biodiversity and geodiversity to adapt to climate change haspotential benefits for society. However, the biggest barrier to making space foradaptations in dynamic physical process environments is human society itself andhow we interpret ‘working with natural processes’ (Cooper &McKenna 2008). Thereare considerable societal and legal barriers that need to be addressed to shift ourthinking, and embrace sustainability rather than fixed property rights. The prospectof sea-level rise illustrates the nature of this problem, whilst highlighting the need forsociety to start to manage these risks differently. Until this happens, landownerswhose property is at risk will continue to demand defences funded by the tax-payer.This degrades coastal ecosystems, causes coastal squeeze that impact on the ability ofecosystems to adapt to climate change, and does not adequately address theunderlying long-term problem of human adaptation to changing sea level, coastalflooding and erosion risk. As experience in The Netherlands shows (DeltaCommission 2008), building ever higher sea walls does not work. There, large-scalemanipulation of whole ecosystems (through beach feeding) provides a temporarystay of execution.

Providing alternatives to reliance on engineering solutions to natural hazards likecoastal flooding and land sliding requires a shift in focus, from a ‘fix it’ to a ‘forecastit and adapt’ approach (e.g. Winter et al. 2008). In New Zealand, Governmentadvice to local authorities regarding planning development on the coast promotes arisk assessment approach that explains and fully recognises the role of natural

226 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

processes in natural coastal protection (New Zealand Ministry for the Environment2009). Crucially, it includes as one the key principles in sustainable coastalmanagement, the recognition and acceptance of the dual role of natural coastalmargins in natural coastal defence, and as an environmental, social and culturalresource that needs to be fully incorporated in local decision making. Even in thelow-lying reclaimed lands of The Netherlands, the Dutch Government has evolved aradical rethink by promoting an approach that more closely mimics a ‘working withnatural processes’ policy, which recognises the crucial role of coastal sedimenttransfer, and the protective role of dune systems like those of the Wadden Islands ofthe north coast (Delta Commission 2008).

All forms of engineering (hard or soft) interfere with natural systems. Seawalls donot support the same range of species as rocky shores; nourished beaches do notsupport the same range of species as natural beaches (Cooper & McKenna 2008). Atbest, soft engineering approaches resist and manipulate natural processes with lessundesirable consequences than other traditional approaches. Although full-life costsare routinely undertaken in planning applications for new properties, commentatorsare increasingly expecting full-life costing to support adaptation, once the longer-term implications of climate change are considered.

5. Conclusion

Conservation management for the benefit of specific habitats or species iscompromised where it does not refer to their physical setting and an understandingof the role of geomorphological processes (e.g. Leys 2001; Hansom et al. 2001;McEwen & Lewis 2001). Scotland’s biodiversity depends on the continuedoperation of active geomorphological and soil processes that maintain dynamiccoastal, river and mountain habitats and ecosystems (e.g. Gilvear et al. 2000;Hansom & Angus 2001; Soulsby & Boon 2001; Thompson et al. 2001). There arevaluable lessons to be learned from Quaternary research, which can put currentenvironmental changes into a longer-term perspective and enable reasonedjudgement on likely geomorphological and ecological responses to changes inclimate (e.g. Higgitt & Lee 2001; Froyd & Willis 2008; McCarroll 2010; Willis et al.2010; Gray et al. in press).

Managing biodiversity adaptations to climate change can benefit from widerunderstanding of the links between geodiversity and biodiversity as part of anecosystem approach. In particular, knowledge of geomorphological and soil systems,including their sensitivities and likely responses to climate change, is an importantpart of developing policy responses to support effective management of biodiversityadaptation. Geomorphological and soil processes influence the health of manyhabitats and the species they support, and partly condition how biodiversity is ableto adapt to the effects of climate change. Anthropogenic pressures and land-usechanges also condition geomorphological and soil process responses, potentiallycompounding adverse effects of climate change on sensitive and vulnerable habitatsand species. Hopkins et al. (2007) set the challenge for conservation to make spacefor biodiversity to adapt to climate change, and this includes making space for thenatural development of rivers and coasts (and slopes, soils and upland processes).Promoting and implementing real understanding of this approach will be a

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 227

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

significant part of the challenge facing biodiversity conservation in a changingclimate.

References

Aitkenhead, M. J., Brown, I., Towers, W., Black, H. I. J., Bruneau, P. M. C., Holloway, J. & Procter, D.

(in press) A review of the implications of climate change on the functioning of soils in UK habitats, with

particular reference to the interests of nature conservation agencies, JNCC Report, No. 454.

Angus, S., Hansom, J. D. & Rennie, A. (2011) Oir-thırean na h-Alba ag Atharrachadh: Habitat change on

Scotland’s coasts, in: S. J. Marrs, S. Foster, C. Hendrie, E. C. Mackey & D. B. A Thompson (Eds) The

Changing Nature of Scotland (Edinburgh: TSO Scotland) pp. 183–198.

Ball, T., Werritty, A., Duck, R. W., Edwards, A., Booth, L. & Black, A. R. (2008) Coastal Flooding in

Scotland: A Scoping Study, SNIFFER Project FRM10 (Edinburgh: Scotland and Northern Ireland

Forum for Environmental Research).

Ballantyne, C. K. (1991) Late Holocene erosion in upland Britain: climatic deterioration or human

influence? The Holocene, vol. 1, pp. 81–85.

Ballantyne, C. K. (2008) After the ice: holocene geomorphic activity in the Scottish Highlands, Scottish

Geographical Journal, vol. 124, pp. 8–52.

Bardgett R. D. (2005) The Biology of Soil. A Community and Ecosystem Approach (Oxford: Oxford

University Press).

Bardgett, R. D., Campbell, C. D., Emmett, B. A., Jenkins, A. & Whitmore, A. P. (2011) Supporting

services, in: The UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report (Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC) pp.

499–533.

Barnett, C., Hossell, J., Perry, M., Procter, C. & Hughes, G. (2006) A Handbook of Climate Trends Across

Scotland, SNIFFER Project CC03 (Edinburgh: Scotland and Northern Ireland Forum for

Environmental Research).

Billett, M. F., Charman, D. J., Clark, J. M., Evans, C. D., Evans, M. G., Ostle, N. J., Worrall, F., Burden,

A., Dinsmore, K. J., Jones, T., McNamara, N. P., Parry, L., Rowson, J. G. & Rose, R. (2010) Carbon

balance of UK peatlands: current state of knowledge and future research challenges, Climate Research,

vol. 45, pp. 13–29.

Black, A. R. & Burns, J. C. (2002) Re-assessing flood risk in Scotland, The Science of the Total

Environment, vol. 294, pp. 169–184.

Brazier, V. & Ballantyne, C. K. (1989) Late Holocene debris cone evolution in Glen Feshie, western

CairngormMountains Scotland, Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, vol. 80,

pp. 17–24.

Brazier, V. & Werritty, A. (1994) The conservation management of dynamic rivers: the case of the River

Feshie, Scotland, in: D. O’Halloran, C. Green, M. Harley, M. Stanley & J. Knill (Eds) Geology and

Landscape Conservation (London: The Geological Society), pp. 147–152.

Brown, I., Poggio, L., Gimona, A. & Castellazzi, M. (2011) Climate change, drought risk and land

capability for agriculture: implications for land use in Scotland, Regional Environmental Change, vol. 11,

pp. 503–518.

Bruneau, P. M. C., Gordon, J. E. & Rees, S. (2011) Ecosystem sensitivity and responses to climate change:

understanding the links between geodiversity and biodiversity at the landscape scale, JNCC Report, No.

450.

Burt, T. P., Warburton, J. & Allison, R. J. (2002) Eroding upland landscapes? Past, present and future

perspectives, in: T. P. Burt, D. B. A. Thompson & J. Warburton (Eds) The British Uplands: Dynamics of

Change, JNCC Report, No. 319, pp. 60–66.

Chapman, S. J., Bell, J., Donnelly, D. & Lilly, A. (2009) Carbon stocks in Scottish peatlands, Soil Use and

Management, vol. 25, pp. 105–112.

Chiverrell, R. C. Harvey, A. M. & Foster, G. C. (2007) Hillslope gullying in the Solway Firth –

Morecambe Bay region, Great Britain: responses to human impact and/or climatic deterioration?

Geomorphology, vol. 84, pp. 317–343.

Church, M. (2002) Geomorphic thresholds in riverine landscapes, Freshwater Biology, vol. 47, pp. 541–

557.

228 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Church, M. & Ryder, J. M. (1972) Paraglacial sedimentation: a consideration of fluvial processes

conditioned by glaciation, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, vol. 83, pp. 3059–3072.

Coll, J., Gibb, S. W., Price, M. F., McClatchey, J. & Harrison, J. (2010) Developing site scale projections

of climate change in the Scottish Highlands, Climate Research, vol. 45, pp. 71–85.

Cooper, J. A. G. & McKenna, J. (2008) Working with natural processes: the challenge for coastal

protection strategies, Geographical Journal, vol. 174, 315–331.

Corenblit, D., Tabacchi, E., Steiger, J. & Gurnell, A. M. (2007) Reciprocal interactions and adjustments

between fluvial landforms and vegetation dynamics in river corridors: a review of complementary

approaches, Earth Science Reviews, vol. 84, pp. 56–86.

Curry, A. M. (2000a) Holocene reworking of drift-mantled hillslopes in the Scottish Highlands, Journal of

Quaternary Science, vol. 15, pp. 529–541.

Curry, A. M. (2000b) Holocene reworking of drift-mantled hillslopes in Glen Docherty, Northwest

Highlands, Scotland, The Holocene, vol. 10, pp. 509–518.

Curtis, L. F., Courtney, F. M. & Trudgill, S. (1976) Soils in the British Isles (London: Longman Group

Limited).

Dawson, A. G. (2009) So Fair and Foul a Day. A History of Scotland’s Weather and Climate (Edinburgh:

Birlinn).

Dawson, T. P., Jackson, S. T., House, J. I., Prentice, I. C. & Mace, G. M. (2011) Beyond predictions:

biodiversity conservation in a changing climate, Science, vol. 332, pp. 53–58.

Dearing, J. A., Battarbee, R. W., Dikau, R., Larocque, I. & Oldfield, F. (2006) Human-environment

interactions: learning from the past, Regional Environmental Change, vol. 6, pp. 1–16.

Dearing, J. A., Braimoh, A. K., Reenberg, A., Turner, B. L., van der Leeuw, S. (2010) Complex land

systems: the need for long time perspectives to assess their future, Ecology and Society, vol. 15, pp. 21

[online]. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art21/ [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Delta Commission (2008) Working Together with Water. A Living Land Builds for its Future [Online].

Available at: http://www.deltacommissie.com/doc/deltareport_full.pdf [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Dobbie, K., Bruneau, P. M. C. & Towers, W. (Eds) (2011) The State of Scotland’s Soil, Natural Scotland.

[Online]. Available at: http://www.sepa.org.uk/land/land_publications.aspx [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Doyle, M. W., Stanley, E. H., Strayer, D. L., Jacobson, R. B. & Schmidt, J. C. (2005) Effective discharge

analysis of ecological processes in streams. Water Resources Research, vol. 41, W11411, doi:10.1029/

2005WR004222.

English Nature (2005) Our Coasts and Seas – Making Space for People, Industry and Wildlife

(Peterborough: English Nature).

Environment Agency (2008) Climate Change in the Uplands: Safeguarding Vital Services (Bristol:

Environment Agency) [online]. Available at: http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/pdf/GE

HO0508BOBV-e-e.pdf [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Environment Agency and Defra (2011) Understanding the Risks, Empowering Communities, Building

Resilience. The National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy for England (London:

The Stationery Office).

European Commission (2006) Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. Communication from the Commission

to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economics and Social Committee and the

Committee of the Regions. COM(2006)231 final. [Online]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environ

ment/soil/three_en.htm [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Fisher, S. G., Heffernan, J. B., Sponseller, R. A. & Welter, J. R. (2007) Functional ecomorphology:

Feedbacks between form and function in fluvial landscape ecosystems, Geomorphology, vol. 89, pp. 84–

96.

Fitzpatrick, E. A. (1980) Soils. Their Formation, Classification and Distribution (London: Longman

Publishing Group).

Foster, G. C., Chiverrell, R. C., Harvey, A. M., Dearing, J. A. & Dunsford, H. (2008) Catchment hydro-

geomorphological responses to environmental change in the Southern Uplands of Scotland, The

Holocene, vol. 18, pp. 935–950.

Foulds, S. A. & Macklin, M. G. (2006) Holocene land-use change and its impact on river basin dynamics

in Great Britain and Ireland, Progress in Physical Geography, vol. 30, pp. 589–604.

Fowler, H. J. & Wilby, R. L. (2010) Detecting changes in seasonal precipitation extremes using regional

climate model projections: Implications for managing fluvial flood risk, Water Resources Research, vol.

46, W03525, doi:10.1029/2008WR007636, 2010.

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 229

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Froyd, C. A. & Willis, K. J. (2008) Emerging issues in biodiversity & conservation management: the need

for a palaeoecological perspective, Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 27, pp. 1723–1732.

Gilvear, D. & Willby, N. (2006) Channel dynamics and geomorphic variability as controls on gravel bar

vegetation; River Tummel, Scotland, River Research and Applications, vol. 22, pp. 457–474.

Gilvear, D. J., Cecil, J. & Parsons, H. (2000) Channel change and vegetation diversity on a low angle

alluvial fan, River Feshie, Scotland, Aquatic Conservation: Marine & Freshwater Ecosystems, vol. 10, pp.

53–71.

Gordon, J. E. & Barron, H. F. (2011) Scotland’s geodiversity: development of the basis for a national

framework. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report, No. 417.

Gordon, J. E., Barron, H. F., Hansom, J. D. & Thomas, M. F. (2012) Engaging with geodiversity – Why it

matters, Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, vol. 123, pp. 1–6.

Gordon, J. E., Brazier, V., Thompson, D. B. A. & Horsfield, D. (2001) Geo-ecology and the conservation

management of sensitive upland landscapes in Scotland, Catena, vol. 42, pp. 323–332.

Gordon, J. E. & Leys, K. F. (Eds) (2001) Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: Interactions and

Integrated Management (Edinburgh: The Stationery Office).

Gordon, J. E., Thompson, D. B. A.., Haynes, V. M., MacDonald, R. & Brazier, V. (1998) Environmental

sensitivity and conservation management in the Cairngorm Mountains, Scotland, Ambio, vol. 27, pp.

335–344.

Gray, M. (2011) Other nature: geodiversity and geosystem services, Environmental Conservation, vol. 38,

pp. 271–274.

Gray, M., Gordon, J. E. & Brown, E. J. (in press) Geodiversity and the ecosystem approach: the

contribution of geoscience in delivering integrated environmental management, Proceedings of the

Geologists’ Association,

Gregory, A. S., Watts, C. W., Griffiths, B. S., Hallett, P. D., Kuan, H. L. & Whitmore, A. P. (2009) The

effect of long-term soil management on the physical and biological resilience of a range of arable and

grassland soils in England, Geoderma, vol. 153, pp. 172–185.

Grieve, I. C., Davidson, D. A. & Gordon, J. E. (1995) Nature, extent and severity of soil erosion in upland

Scotland, Land Degradation & Development, vol. 6, pp. 41–55.

Haines-Young, R. H. & Potschin, M. B. (2009)Methodologies for defining and assessing ecosystem services.

Final Report, Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Project Code C08-0170-0062 (Peterborough: Joint

Nature Conservation Committee), 69 pp.

Hansom, J. D. (2001) Coastal sensitivity to environmental change: a view from the beach, Catena, vol. 42,

pp. 291–305.

Hansom, J. D. & Angus, S. (2001) Tir a’Mhachair (Land of the Machair): sediment supply and climate

change scenarios for the future of the Outer Hebrides machair, in: J. E. Gordon & K. F. Leys (Eds)

Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: Interactions and Integrated Management (Edinburgh: The

Stationery Office) pp. 68–81.

Hansom, J. D., Lees, R. G., Maslen, J. & McManus, J. (2001) Coastal dynamics and sustainable

management: the potential for managed realignment in the Forth Estuary, in: J. E. Gordon & K. F.

Leys (Eds) Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: Interactions and Integrated Management (Edinburgh:

The Stationery Office) pp. 148–160.

Hegerl, G. C., Hanlon, H. & Beierkuhnlein, C. (2011) Elusive extremes, Nature Geoscience, vol. 4, pp. 142–

143.

Higgitt, D. & Lee, E. M. (Eds) (2001) Geomorphological Processes and Landscape Change: Britain in the

Last 1,000 Years (Chichester: John Wiley).

Higgitt, D. L., Warburton, J. & Evans, M. G. (2001) Sediment transfer in upland environments, in: D. L.

Higgitt & E. M. Lee (Eds) Geomorphological Processes and Landscape Change: Britain in the Last 1000

years (Chichester: John Wiley) pp.190–214.

Hinchliffe, S. & Ballantyne, C. K. (2009) Talus structure and evolution on sandstone mountains in NW

Scotland, The Holocene, vol. 19, pp. 477–486.

Holden, J. & Adamson, J. K. (2002) The Moor House long-term upland temperature record: new evidence

of recent warming, Weather, vol. 57, pp. 119–127.

Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T. P., Chapman, P. J., Dougill, A. J., Fraser, E. D. G., Hubacek,

K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M. J., Reed, M. S., Prell, C., Stagl, S., Stringer, L. C., Turner, A. & Worrall, F.

(2007) Environmental change in moorland landscapes, Earth-Science Reviews, vol. 82, pp. 75–

100.

230 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Hopkins, J. J., Allison, H. M., Walmsley, C. A., Gaywood, M. & Thurgate, G. (2007) Conserving

Biodiversity in a Changing Climate: Guidance on Building Capacity to Adapt (London: Defra).

Howard, A., Challis, K., Holden, J., Kincey, M. & Passmore, D. G. (2008) The impact of climate change

on archaeological resources in Britain: a catchment scale assessment, Climatic Change, vol. 91, pp. 405–

422.

Hurrell, J. W. (1995) Decadal trends in the North Atlantic Oscillation: regional temperatures and

precipitation, Science, vol. 269, pp. 676–679.

Innes, J. L. (1983) Lichenometric dating of debris-flow deposits in the Scottish Highlands, Earth Surface

Processes and Landforms, vol. 8, pp. 579–588.

Jenny, H. (1941) Factors of Soil Formation - A System of Quantitative Pedology (New York: Dover

Publications).

Jonasson, C., Gordon, J. E., Kocianova, M., Josefsson, M., Dvorak, I. J. & Thompson, D. B. A. (2005)

Links between geodiversity and biodiversity in European mountains: case studies from

Sweden, Scotland and the Czech Republic, in: D. B. A. Thompson, C. Galbraith & M. Price (Eds)

The Mountains of Europe: Conservation, Management and Initiatives (Edinburgh: The Stationery Office)

pp. 55–70.

Kirkbride, M. P. & Brazier, V. (1998) A critical evaluation of the use of glacial chronologies in climatic

reconstruction, with reference to New Zealand, Quaternary Proceedings, vol. 6, pp. 55–64.

Leys, K. F. (2001) The sustainable use of freshwater resources: a case study from the River Spey, in: J. E.

Gordon & K. F. Leys (Eds) Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: Interactions and Integrated

Management (Edinburgh: The Stationery Office) pp. 169–179.

Macklin, M. G., Jones, A. F. & Lewin, J. (2010) River response to rapid Holocene environmental change:

evidence and explanation in British catchments, Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 29, 1555–1576.

Macklin, M. G. & Lewin, J. (2008) Alluvial responses to the changing Earth system, Earth Surface

Processes and Landforms, vol. 33, pp. 1374–1395.

Macklin, M. G. & Rumsby, B. T. (2007) Changing climate and extreme floods in the British uplands,

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 32, pp. 168–186.

Mayewski, P. A., Rohling, E. E., Stager, J. C., Karlen, W., Maasch, K. A., Meeker, L. D., Meyerson, E.

A., Gasse, F., van Kreveld, S., Holmgren, K., Lee-Thorp, J., Rosqvist, G., Rack, F., Staubwasser, M.,

Schneider, R. R. & Steig, E. J. (2004) Holocene climate variability, Quaternary Research, vol. 62, pp.

243–255.

McCarroll, D. (2010) Future climate change and the British Quaternary research community, Quaternary

Science Reviews, vol. 29, pp. 1661–1672.

McEwen, L. J. (1986) River Channel Planform Changes in Upland Scotland with Specific Reference to

Climatic Fluctuations and Landuse Changes over the last 250 Years, Unpublished PhD thesis, University

of St Andrews.

McEwen, L. J. & Lewis, S. G. (2001) A sediment budget approach to inform sustainable habitat

management for lampreys: the Endrick water catchment, Scotland, in: J. E. Gordon & K. F. Leys (Eds)

Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: Interactions and Integrated Management (Edinburgh: The

Stationery Office) pp. 185–189.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis (Washington,

DC: Island Press).

Milne, G. (1936) Normal erosion as a factor in soil profile development, Nature, vol. 138, pp. 548–549.

Morrocco, S. (2006) Terrain Sensitivity on High Plateaux in the Scottish Highlands, Unpublished PhD

thesis, University of St Andrews.

Morrocco, S. M., Ballantyne, C. K., Spencer, J. Q. G. & Robinson, R. A. J. (2007) Age and significance of

aeolian sediment reworking on high plateaux in the Scottish Highlands, The Holocene, vol. 17, 349–360.

Newson M. D. (2002) Geomorphological concepts and tools for sustainable river ecosystem management,

Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, vol. 12, pp. 365–379.

Newson, M. D. & Large, A. R. G. (2006) ‘Natural’ rivers, ‘hydromorphological quality’ and river

restoration: a challenging new agenda for applied fluvial geomorphology, Earth Surface Processes and

Landforms, vol. 31, pp. 1606–1624.

New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (2009) Preparing for Coastal Change: a Guide for Local

Government in New Zealand (Wellington, Ministry for the Environment) [online]. Available at: http://

www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/preparing-for-coastal-change-guide-for-local-govt/preparing-for-

coastal-change.pdf [Accessed 25 August 2012].

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 231

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Orr, H. G., Large, A. R. G., Newson, M. D. & Walsh, C. L. (2008b) A predictive typology for

characterising hydromorphology, Geomorphology, vol. 100, pp. 32–40.

Orr, H. G., Wilby, R. L., McKenzie Hedger, M. & Brown, I. (2008a) Climate change in the uplands: a UK

perspective on safeguarding regulatory ecosystem services, Climate Research, vol. 37, pp. 77–98.

Prosser, C. D., Burek, C. V., Evans, D. H., Gordon, J. E., Kirkbride, V. B., Rennie, A. F. & Walmsley, C.

A. (2010) Conserving geoheritage sites in a changing climate: management challenges and responses,

Geoheritage, vol. 2, pp. 123–136.

Rennie, A. F. & Hansom, J. D. (2011) Sea level trend reversals: land uplift outpaced by sea level rise on

Scotland’s coast, Geomorphology, vol. 125, pp. 193–202.

SCCIP (2010) Scottish Compendium of UKCP09 Climate Change Information [Online] Available at: http://

www.sccip.org.uk/4/70/0/Scottish-Climate-Change-Information–UKCP09-Compendium.aspx [Accessed

25 August 2012].

Schils, R., Kuikman, P., Liski, J., van Oijen, M., Smith, P., Webb, J., Alm, J., Somogyi, Z., van den

Akker, J., Billett, M., Emmett, B., Evans, C., Lindner, M., Palosuo, T., Bellamy, P., Alm, J., Jandl, R. &

Hiederer, R. (2008) Review of Existing Information on the Interrelations Between Soil and Climate

Change. (ClimSoil). Technical Report – 2008 – 048. (Brussels: European Commission), 208 pp [Online].

Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/pdf/climsoil_report_dec_2008.pdf [Accessed 25

August 2012].

Schumm, S. A. (1979) Geomorphological thresholds: the concept and its applications, Transactions of the

Institute of British Geographers, vol. 4, pp. 485–515.

Scottish Government (2009) Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 (Edinburgh: Scottish

Government).

Scottish Government (2012) A Consultation on the 2020 Challenge for Scotland’s Biodiversity (Scottish

Government: Edinburgh) [Online]. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/07/

5241 [Accessed 6 August 2012].

Soulsby, C. & Boon, P. J. (2001) Freshwater environments: an Earth science perspective on the natural

heritage of Scotland’s rivers, in: J. E. Gordon & K. F. Leys, (Eds) Earth Science and the Natural

Heritage: Interactions and Integrated Management (Edinburgh: The Stationery Office) pp. 82–104.

Taylor, J. A., Murdock, A. P. & Pontee, N. I. (2004) A macroscale analysis of coastal steepening around

the coast of England & Wales, The Geographical Journal, vol. 170, pp. 179–188.

Teasdale, P. A., Collins, P. E. F., Firth, C. R. & Cundy, A. B. (2011) Recent estuarine sedimentation rates

from shallow inter-tidal environments in western Scotland: implications for future sea-level trends and

coastal wetland, Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 30, pp. 109–129.

Thomas, M. F. (2001) Landscape sensitivity in time and space – an introduction, Catena, vol. 42, pp. 83–

98.

Thompson, D. B. A., Gordon, J. E. & Horsfield, D. (2001) Montane landscapes in Scotland: are these

natural, artefacts or complex relics? in: J. E. Gordon & K. F. Leys, (Eds) Earth Science and the Natural

Heritage: Interactions and Integrated Management (Edinburgh: The Stationery Office) pp. 105–119.

Towers, W., Grieve, I. C., Hudson, G., Campbell, C. D., Lilly, A., Davidson, D. A., Bacon, J. R., Langan,

S. J. & Hopkins, D. A. (2006) Scotland’s Soil Resources – Current State and Threats, Environmental

Research Report 2006/01. (Edinburgh: Scottish Executive) 208 pp [Online]. Available at: http://www.

scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/09/21115639/0 [Accessed 25 August 2012].

(UKCP09) Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M. H., Jenkins, G. J., Boorman, P. M., Booth, B. B. B., Brown, C.

C., Clark, R. T., Collins, M., Harris, G. R., Kendon, E. J., Betts, R. A., Brown, S. J., Howard, T. P.,

Humphrey, K. A., McCarthy, M. P., McDonald, R. E., Stephens, A., Wallace, C., Warren, R., Wilby,

R., Wood, R. A. (2009) UK Climate Projections Science Report: Climate Change Projections (Exeter:

Meteorological Office Hadley Centre) 192 pp.

UK National Ecosystem Assessment (2011) The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the Key

Findings (Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC).

Van der Wal, R., Bonn, A., Monteith, D., Reed, M., Blackstock, K., Hanley, N., Thompson, D., Evans,

M. & Alonso, I. (2011) Chapter 5: Mountains, moorlands and heaths, in: The UK National Ecosystem

Assessment Technical Report (Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC) pp. 105–159.

Vaughan, I., Diamond, M., Gurnell, A., Hall, K., Jenkins, A., Milner, N., Naylor, L., Sear, D.,

Woodward, G. & Ormerod, S. (2009) Integrating ecology with hydromorphology: a priority for river

science and management, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, vol. 19, pp. 113–

125.

232 V. Brazier et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014

Welsh Government (2011) National Strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management in Wales

(Cardiff: Welsh Government).

Werritty, A., Black, A., Duck, R., Finlinson, W., Thurston, N., Shackley, S. & Crichton, D. (2002)

Climate Change: Flooding Occurrences Review (Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Central Research Unit).

Werritty, A. & Brazier, V. (1994) Geomorphic sensitivity and the conservation of fluvial geomorphology

SSSIs, in: C. Stevens, J. E. Gordon, C. P. Green & M. Macklin (Eds) Conserving our Landscape:

Evolving Landforms and Ice-age Heritage, Proceedings of the Conference on Conserving Our Landscape:

Evolving Landforms and Ice-Age Heritage, Crewe 1992 (Peterborough: English Nature) pp. 100–109.

Werritty, A. & Leys, K. F. (2001) The sensitivity of Scottish rivers and upland valley floors to recent

environmental change, Catena, vol. 42, pp. 251–273.

Wilby, R. L., Beven, K. J. & Reynard, N. S. (2008) Climate change and fluvial flood risk in the UK: more

of the same? Hydrological Processes, vol. 22, pp. 2511–2523.

Willis, K. J., Bailey, R. M., Bhagwat, S. A. & Birks, H. J. B. (2010) Biodiversity baselines, thresholds and

resilience: testing predictions and assumptions using palaeoecological data, Trends in Ecology and

Evolution, vol. 25, pp. 583–591.

Winter, M. G., Heald, A. P., Parsons, J. A., Shackman, L. & Macgregor, F. (2006) Scottish debris flow

events of August 2004, Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 39, pp. 73–78.

Winter, M. G., Macgregor, F. & Shackman, L. (Eds) (2008) Scottish Roads Network Landslides Study:

Implementation (Edinburgh: Transport Scotland).

Making Space for Nature in a Changing Climate 233

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

1:12

13

Aug

ust 2

014