Cultivating Commons MArch Design Thesis

CULTIVATING COMMONS

Designing Public-Common Partnerships to mobilise the biobased construction industry in the East Midlands through a landscape urbanism approach

Priyanka Awatramani (M.Arch)

Emily Bowerman (M.Arch)

LANDSCAPE URBANISM 2023- 2025

ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to our thesis adviser, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, who made this project possible. This work reached its full potential under her invaluable guidance and unwavering support. Our deepest thanks go to our directors Jose Alfredo Ramirez and Eduardo Rico-Carranza as well as our tutors—Daniel, Elena, and William (Huang)—for their mentorship throughout the process.

We are sincerely grateful to Dr. Andrew Barkwith and the BGS for providing us with an opportunity to develop this project for their campus and for their consistent support throughout the process. We also deeply appreciate the contributions of our external jurors, interviewees, survey participants, and all other professionals who offered their insights and expertise through emails, calls, and other forms of communication. Your contributions have enriched our project immensely.

Special thanks to our friends and families, in London and back home in Canada and India, who supported us throughout the project.

Cultivating Commons was conceptualised in collaboration with Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich in term 2 and 3 of the AALU programme. All work presented in this document was produced by the authors unless otherwise credited.

Thesis Supervisor

Clara Olóriz Sanjuán

Programme Directors

Jose Alfredo Ramirez

Eduardo Rico-Carranza

History & Theory Seminar Tutor

Clara Olóriz Sanjuán

Elena Luciano Suastegui

Technical Tutor

Daniel Kiss

Huang Sheng-Yang (William)

Printed at: F E Burman, 20 Crimscott St, London SE1 5TF

Bound at: Wyvern Bindery, 187 Hoxton St, London N1 6RA

92 Skegness

94 Sustainable Aquaculture principles

Reflections 107 OWNERSHIP

109 Network of Actors

Policy Engagement

Policy Memo

PCP Handbook

Basford 144 Prototype Site Model

Reflections

153 LABOUR

154 East Midlands Industrial History 158 A Just Transition 160 Transition Away from Extractive Industries 168 Transition Towards Biobased Industries 170 UK Just Transition

Reflections

175

CONCLUSION

176 Appendix I: Term 1, 2, & 3 Key Informant Interviews

176 Appendix II: Ethics Application Approval

177 Appendix III: Term 4 Survey

179 Appendix IV: Model Making

180 List of Maps

183 List of Illustrations

183 List of Figures

184 Figure Credits

CULTIVATING COMMONS

Landscape, Ownership and Labour

As we grapple with a climate and economic crises, political interest usually lies with carbon reduction—typically in the energy sector. Major corporations, exploiting natural assets such as land, resources and ecologies, often evade true accountability by simply purchasing carbon credits to offset their emissions. This practice, while promoted as a solution, has led to what is known as ‘greenwashing’—the use of environmental claims to mask ongoing exploitation.1 In the construction industry, sustainable building certifications that prioritise energy efficiency, environmental impact, and occupant wellbeing are similarly prone to this issue.

To what extent are these impacts assessed? Are developers genuinely held accountable for their environmental footprint, or do they simply externalise the costs elsewhere?

In this discourse, biobased materials are often heralded as the ultimate solution. Biobased materials are low impact, self-replenishing and have historically demonstrated excellent performance. And yet, focusing solely on the carbon benefits of biobased materials risks perpetuating greenwashing within the construction and materials industries. This narrow focus often obscures deeper, systemic issues tied to the production, processing, and distribution of these materials. For instance, the reliance on monoculture farming—a practice that depletes biodiversity and degrades soil health. Similarly, the entanglement of public-private enterprises often prioritises profit over sustainability, sidelining community welfare and equitable resource distribution.

Moreover, exploitative labour practices remain a significant blind spot in the sustainability narrative. Workers in the supply chain, particularly those involved in manual labour, frequently face unsafe conditions, unfair wages, and a lack of legal protections. These practices not only undermine the presumed

1 United Nations, “Greenwashing – The Deceptive Tactics Behind Environmental Claims,” UN Climate Change, accessed January 6, 2025, https://www.un.org/ en/climate change/science/climate-issues/greenwashing

environmental and social benefits of biobased materials but also reinforce the same capitalist structures responsible for environmental degradation and social inequity.

Cultivating Commons critiques these capitalist systems by challenging the processes, methods, and systems underpinning biobased materials. It calls for a reevaluation of how sustainability is defined and measured, advocating for a novel approach that considers the landscapes, labour and ownership within the biobased sector. The study also proposes a reformed policy for designing and planning landscapes of production to enhance regional ecologies and local economies.

We explore the role of agriculture in shaping landscapes and livelihoods, particularly as biobased materials are cultivated and harvested within these environments. We advocate for a shift from monoculture farming to regenerative practices, facilitating soil carbon sequestration and economic diversification. The project advocates for transforming the construction industry by transitioning from extractive materials to biobased alternatives such as straw insulation and kelp acoustic paneling. It explores opportunities for using biobased materials to not only decarbonise the UK construction industry but move beyond net zero targets to address landscape, labour and governance structures, and derive an architecture that is inextricably linked to the lands the materials from which it is derived.

Through Public-Common Partnerships, this project focuses on local community ownership, fair resource distribution, and collaborative decision-making. By engaging institutions, farmers, local businesses, designers, and community members, the project fosters a shared stewardship of productive landscapes. Cultivating Commons is a collective effort to cultivate landscapes of production that not only sustain people and nature but also contribute to building a surplus shared as commons

PROJECT STRUCTURE & METHODOLOGY

Project Structure

The project is structured into three main arguments: Landscapes, Ownership and Labour. Landscapes addresses: How can we produce biobased materials in ways that enhance local ecologies and improve biodiversity within the East Midlands bioregion?  Ownership questions: who is responsible for funding, resources, and education to mobilise the industry?  And who profits from the emergent biobased industry? Labour : For this, we have speculated the transition of workers from the mining industry in two parts; the transition away from extractive industries and the second part focuses on how the labour force can shift to the biobased sector.

These three arguments are organised in this document as six chapters. Chapter 1, Introduction, outlines how the UKRI’s BGS retrofit project challenges traditional decarbonisation approaches and presents an opportunity to mobilise a JUST transition towards biobased materials through PCP frameworks. Chapter 2, Beyond Extraction, discusses the issues with the BGS buildings. Chapter 3, Biobased Materials, explores how biobased materials could address these challenges by improving insulation and interior building conditions. Chapter 4, Landscapes, contextualises a phased approach for developing a strategy to supply biobased materials to the BGS, while also enhancing productive landscapes to benefit local and regional communities and ecologies. Chapter 5, Ownership, advocates for a systematic transformation of the ownership structures entrenched within conventional capitalist supply chains and suggests using PCPs to catalyse change within the industry. Chapter 6, Labour, proposes a just transition away from extractive industries towards biobased material production, ensuring that industrialised communities and the labour force benefit from this shift. Finally, Chapter 7, Conclusion, identifies gaps in the study and explores potential avenues for future research.

Methodology

This project undertakes qualitative research, guided by an understanding that architectural research can follow a rigorous research methodology that enables creativity whilst working within the bounds of contemporary research methods. 2

Approach

The research follows a case study approach to develop an in-depth analysis of the opportunities for retrofitting the British Geologic Survey campus in Keyworth, UK with biobased materials. The research involves a mixed-method approach3 and the research was conducted from February 2024 to January 2025 within the UK – our case being specifically within the bioregional boundaries of the East Midlands region. 4

Methods

Critical Discourse Analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis defined by Fairclough, was conducted to understand the status of knowledge and policies related to decarbonisation initiatives in the UK; biobased material research, development, and use; and existing evidence of Community Wealth Building initiatives in the UK.5 The document analysis contributed to initial literature reviews about decarbonisation, biobased materials, transition to bio-economies and community wealth building through Public-Common partnerships. The literature informed a policy map to document the current pathways for achieving net zero, using biobased materials in

2 Wang, David, and Linda N. Groat. Architectural Research Methods. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2002; Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2013).

3 John W. Creswell and J. David Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2018).

4 Robert E. Stake, The Art of Case Study Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995); Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2013).

5 Fairclough, Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language (London: Longman, 1995).

practice, and opportunities for alternative economic models through community wealth building approach.

ENGAGEMENT

Key-Informant Interviews

To understand the status of A. the viability of using biobased construction materials and the availability in the UK, and B. understand the status of agricultural and aquaculture industry in the East Midlands, we needed to speak with experts in the field. We engaged 9 key informants in open-ended interviews. Through preliminary case building, we selected straw, seaweed and shellfish to focus our study. Key-informants were selected based on their expertise and their prior engagement in research projects or initiatives. Interviews were conducted intermittently throughout the project development phase (February 2024-June 2024), based on participant availability. We sought iterative feedback from key information, and additionally, benefited from multiple crit sessions from industry professionals throughout Term 4.

Site Visits

The study involved a preliminary site visit to the BGS and Norfolk Coast near Holkham at Wells-next-the-Sea in February 2024. Understanding the East Midlands landscapes was essential to make informed policy and design recommendations. We had a return visit to the BGS on October 3 rd, 2024, to assess site conditions, ground-truth our observations and speak with additional BGS employees.

Survey

Once the initial Public-Common Partnership policy was developed and illustrated, we devised a Survey using Google Forms, accompanied by a four-minute video explaining the policy proposal. We invited 13 industry professionals to participate via email. Of the 13 invitations, we received 8 responses. Responses were organised by question and coded according to theme.

VISUALISATION

Cartography /Mapping Cartography was a foundational visual representation technique and analysis tool for inventorying existing conditions to understand current contexts and cross-analysing datasets to devise a policy proposal based on existing social, cultural, economic, and environmental conditions. The creation of the maps was not a neutral process, however, a series of critical decisions that represent a particular worldview.6 Throughout the document we have disclosed the methodology and process for deriving the results represented within the maps. However, we acknowledge that our individual biases are present within the decision-making process and the maps could be interpreted differently depending on the audience. The accompanying text and methodological disclosures are essential to understand the intent behind the maps.

Data Analysis

Following the Critical Discourse Analysis, Key-Informant interviews, and Site Visits we triangulated the information to develop a policy proposal for procuring biobased materials for the BGS and mobilising the

biobased sector within the East Midlands.7 The preliminary proposal was then revised upon receiving feedback from the Survey. The policy proposal was also iteratively evaluated through conversations with the design tutors and revised accordingly.

Sampling

The Key-Informants were selected through purposive sample according to their expertise in the following topics: decarbonisation of the construction industry in the UK; biobased material use or research and development; biomass production and farming; and knowledge of Community Wealth Building and Public-Common Partnerships (PCP). KeyInformants were approached via email and were asked for their willingness to engage in a brief conversation regarding their expertise in a particular topic. Participation was entirely voluntary with no incentive or deception. Consent to participate in the open and semi-structured interviews, and survey, was acquired prior to participation in accordance with the Architectural Association’s Ethics Agreement.

Data Dissemination

The information is disseminated in two AA Landscape Urbanism Thesis documents. Firstly, the MSc in Landscape Urbanism by Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich in September 2024, and by Priyanka Awatramani and Emily Bowerman, January 2025. If the information within the thesis were to be used for publication or for a conference, we would ask permission from the British Geologic Survey and the Key-Informants to ensure all information is represented as per their intent.

7 Michael Q. Patton, “Enhancing the Quality and Credibility of Qualitative Analysis,” Health Services Research 34 (1999): 1189-1208.

6 Denis Cosgrove, Mapping Meaning: A Cultural Critique of Cartography (1999), 3.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cosgrove, Denis. Mapping Meaning: A Cultural Critique of Cartography. 1999.

Creswell, John W., and J. David Creswell. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2018.

Fairclough, Norman. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman, 1995.

Patton, Michael Q. “Enhancing the Quality and Credibility of Qualitative Analysis.” Health Services Research 34

(1999): 1189–1208.

Stake, Robert E. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995.

United Nations, “Greenwashing – The Deceptive Tactics Behind Environmental Claims,” UN Climate Change, accessed January 6, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/ climatechange/science/climate-issues/greenwashing

Wang, David, and Linda N. Groat. Architectural Research Methods. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2013.

BEYOND EXTRACTION

In 2018, the UK emitted 1511 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) Green House Gas (GHG), encompassing territorial, production, and footprint emissions as per the Office for National Statistics.1 With the Climate Change Act 2008 the UK government in 2019 set a target for achieving a 100% reduction in Greenhouse Gas emissions by 2050 known as the Net Zero Target. 2

The construction industry plays a significant role in these emissions, accounting for approximately 42% of the UK’s total carbon footprint, as estimated by the UK Green Building Council.3 However, most decarbonisation efforts within this sector have primarily focused on reducing operational carbon, which pertains to emissions from a building’s energy consumption for heating, cooling, and lighting. However, the clean energy transition is questionable. As cited by Dark Matter Labs in their New European Bauhaus lighthouse project, “solar and wind facilities require up to 15 times more concrete, 90 times more aluminum, and 50 times more iron, copper, and glass than fossil fuels or nuclear energy”.4 It is also estimated by the

1 “Emissions,” accessed April 16, 2024, https:// climate-change.data.gov.uk/dashboards/emissions

2 UK Green Building Council, Net Zero Whole Life Carbon Roadmap: A Pathway to Net Zer o, November 2021, https:// ukgbc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/UKGBC-WholeLife-Carbon-Roadmap-A-Pathway-to-Net-Zero.pdf

3 UK Green Building Council, Net Zero Whole Life Carbon Roadmap 4 “New-European-Bauhaus-Economy_Digital-version_ DML.Pdf,” accessed February 18, 2024, https://www.irresistiblecircularsociety.eu/assets/ uploads/20230707-New-European-Bauhaus-Economy_ Digital-version_DML.pdf

Mining Watch Canada that approximately three billion tons of metals and minerals will have to be mined to facilitate the energy transition. Additionally, inefficiencies in insulation and design contribute to high energy consumption for heating and cooling in buildings, particularly in the UK.5

This emphasises the crucial need for reducing our energy consumption and adopting practices that make our buildings more resilient to the climate. This would entail critically addressing the contribution of the “embodied” carbon emissions in the construction industry. As stated by ACAN in the Briefing Note of Carbon Footprint Construction, embodied carbon emissions account for up to 75% of a building’s total emissions over its lifespan.6 These emissions are associated with materials and processes throughout the entire lifecycle of a building, including extraction, processing, and manufacture of materials; transportation; assembly and installation on-site; as well as replacement, refurbishment, maintenance, demolition, and disposal.

5 MiningWatch Canada and Environmental Justice Atlas, Mapping the Mining Impacts of the Energy Transition November 23, 2021, https://miningwatch.ca/ news/2021/11/23/new-report-maps-mining-impactsenergy-transition

6 On the other hand, in ACAN’s full report on The Carbon Footprint of the Construction, it estimates the embodied carbon emissions in the construction industry at around 10% of the UK’s total emission and 40% as the total emissions of the construction sector.

LANDSCAPES OF EXTRACTION

Mapping Conventional Building Material Sites and Industries

Most conventional building materials like cement and stone are non-recyclable materials, meaning that at the end of their life cycle they just go into the landfills, creating pressures on waste management. These extractive and disposal processes not only contribute to carbon emissions but have a detrimental impact on the environment including natural resource depletion and waste generation, harming ecosystems. The global resource extraction and processing currently accounts for more than 35% of global biodiversity loss and water stress.8 Despite their substantial contribution to overall emissions, strategies aimed at reducing embodied carbon have often been overlooked.

This stems from traditional linear approaches to building design and operation which overlook the interconnectedness of various systems within a building. Building materials and structures, often perceived as durable, are actually “designed for obsolescence”.9 Rapid urban development exacerbates these

8 United Nations Environment Programme, Global Resources Outlook 2019: Natural Resources for the Future We Want (UN, 2020), 5, https://doi.org/10.18356/689a1a17en

9 United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosystems +Architecture, “Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future” (United Nations Environment Programme, September 2023), https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/ handle/20.500.11822/43293

challenges, involving significant land use changes and extraction of natural resources, leading to habitat destruction and increased carbon emissions.

Through the lens of Jane Hutton’s Reciprocal Landscapes, we examined the material supply chains within the UK’s construction sector. In this framework, the construction sector’s reliance on material extraction sites as sites and the built environment as non-sites becomes apparent. UK’s construction sector is a critical component of the nation’s economy; the industry contributes significantly to carbon emissions and landscape degradation due to heavy reliance on fossil fuels and machinery.

We mapped these extraction sites into two categories: geological reserves reflecting resources and stone quarries along with superficial deposits representing available aggregate resources. According to the Mineral Planning factsheet by BGS, there are 439 active building stone and slate quarries, with concentrations particularly evident in regions such as the Midlands, South-West, and Northern Ireland.10 The East Midlands hosts an abundance of limestone resources, with

10 Graham Lot, David Highley, Don Cameron, John Cowley, “Mineral planning factsheet : building and roofing stone. British Geological Survey” (2007) : 3. (Unpublished), accessed April 17, 2024, https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/ eprint/534424/1/mpf_buildingstone.pdf

“The sites and non-sites were linked by material displacement from one to the other, but also through their differences. Sites were peripheral, overlooked spaces that supplied materials for urban development, while non-sites were central concentrations of cultural capital”.7

7 Hutton, Jane. Reciprocal Landscapes: Stories of Material Movements. (Routledge, 2019): 1.

numerous cement factories spread around these resources.

Sand and gravel, essential components for construction, are sourced through various means, including crushing sandstone and extraction from superficial deposits. These aggregates, comprising approximately 85% of non-energy minerals extracted in the UK, are procured from over 1300 quarries across the UK, as well as through marine aggregate dredging.11 The heatmap reveals the highest concentration of quarries in regions like the South-East, Midlands, and East Scotland highlighting an abundance of reserves in these areas. Due to the scale of this industry, the production totaling approximately 260 million tonnes annually, remains labor-intensive, providing employment for an estimated 88,000 individuals, both directly and indirectly. 12

This insight into the scale and spatial dynamics of material extraction and production in the UK, within the framework of reciprocal landscapes, becomes crucial for informed decision-making regarding resource management and environmental sustainability.

11 “Aggregates | Mines & Quarries | MineralsUK,” accessed April 17, 2024, https://www2.bgs.ac.uk/ mineralsuk/mines/aggregates.html

12 “Aggregates | Mines & Quarries | MineralsUK.”

fig 2.2 1953 The site for the new McKechnie Brothers Ltd Engineering Works. Source: Historic England

fig 2.3 2005 Buddon Wood Quarry, Mountsorrel, Leicester.

Source: Historic England

BGS

OVERSEAS SUPPLY CHAINS

Construction Material Imports in the UK

Despite the significant extraction of construction materials within the UK, a substantial portion of the carbon footprint associated with the construction industry stems from the imports of materials. The UK is a net importer of crucial construction materials such as cement, iron, and stone from various regions worldwide.13 This reliance on imports introduces complexities into the carbon accounting of the construction sector, particularly as these materials traverse vast distances, often from disparate continents.

Iron ore, for instance, is sourced from five different continents, highlighting the global nature of material supply chains and the interconnectedness of the construction industry with international markets. This dependence on imported materials is visually represented through the depiction of emission rings surrounding the globe, illustrating the total emissions linked to the imports of these materials into the UK, map.05.

While the UK’s extraction sites contribute to domestic supply, the industry’s increased demands and globalisation have normalised the use of materials produced from across the world. This is driven by factors such as cost considerations, availability, quality standards and aesthetics in the design and construction industry. This trend has led to the establishment of complex networks of extraction, transportation, and distribution, amplifying the carbon footprint associated with the construction industry.

Moreover, the imports of construction materials affect additional environmental and social considerations beyond carbon emissions. Issues such as habitat destruction, land degradation, and labour exploitation are often linked to the extraction and production of materials in other countries, making it crucial to incorporate holistic assessments in construction material procurement. To demonstrate where these impacts might be most severe, the global cartography displays the domestic extraction of construction materials by each country along with locations of major extractive sites. It is therefore critical that addressing the carbon footprint of imported materials adopts a multifaceted approach that considers not only the direct emissions associated with extraction and transportation but also the broader environmental and social impacts throughout the supply chain.

13 Graham Lot, et al.,“Mineral planning factsheet,” 3.

Based on the Polar Orthographic Projection, with the UK at the center, this global cartography is designed to mimic the view of Earth from a distant vantage point. In this projection, all straight lines radiating from the center represent true directions (azimuths), providing an accurate depiction of relative positions and directions from the UK. The globa map illustrates the distribution of major non-metallic reserves, significant ports, and trade routes across the world, alongside the domestic extraction levels of each country. These elements establish the foundational understanding of the global impacts of construction material industries.

To illustrate the environmental footprint, the cartography uses rings to represent the emissions associated with material imports. These emissions were calculated by multiplying the quantity of imported material by the distance traveled (in nautical miles) and applying a benchmark emissions factor. A benchmark, developed by CarbonChain for global supply chains, provides insight into a ship’s carbon dioxide emissions per unit of nominal transport work known as the Annual EfficiencyW Ratio (AER) of cargo ships based on their deadweight capacity. For ships exceeding 10,000 gross tonnage, the emissions rate is 11.2 gCO₂/dwt.nm (grams of CO₂ per deadweight ton per nautical mile).14

14 Sinay, “How Much Does the Shipping Industry Contribute to Global CO₂ Emissions?” September 22, 2023, https://sinay.ai/en/how-much-does-the-shipping-industrycontribute-to-global-co2-emissions/

map.05 UK IMPORTS OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS IN2020

Emissions associated with import of construction materials by the UK in 2020 [t CO2]

UKRI INSTITUTIONS & BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CAMPUS

Assessing campus retrofit requirements

The British Geological Survey (BGS) is one of the UK’s oldest scientific research institutes, celebrated for preparing the country’s first national survey of the geological landscape. Operating under the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), BGS manages significant geoscientific data and research critical to the UK. 15 UKRI was established in 2018 to bring together nine distinct research councils, including the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), which oversees BGS. As part of its commitment to the UK’s Net Zero 2050 goals, UKRI is encouraging its institutions— more than 80 research organizations and facilities across the UK—to lead by example in reducing carbon emissions. These institutions play a critical role in developing innovative solutions for climate change, energy transition, and sustainability.

Therefore, when BGS decided to retrofit their campus by 2040, and Pick Everard, a consultancy firm, was commissioned to conduct a thorough review of their campus. In response to BGS’s requirements for short and

15 British Geological Survey. “Our History.” British Geological Survey. Accessed March, 2024. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/about-bgs/our-work/our-history/

long-term maintenance, net zero aspirations, energy decarbonisation, and adaptable working methods, Pick Everard proposed five distinct options, ranging from Business as Usual to Partial Refurbishment to an entirely New Build. These options were analysed to address the need for phased strategies, storage solutions, and improvements to workspace design. With most of the existing building fabric requiring replacement within the next decade, Pick Everard’s assessment also considered the structural integrity and longevity of the facilities.16

With support from BGS staff including Dr. Andrew Barkwith, we had the opportunity to visit their campus twice— in March and October 2024. We gained insights into the existing infrastructure and highlighted areas for potential improvement.

The BGS Keyworth campus, situated in the situated in the Rushcliffe borough of Nottinghamshire, hosts more than 500 employees including scientists, technicians,

16 Pick Everard, Feasibility Report, Natural Environmental Research Council, British Geological Survey Laboratories, Keyworth, issued March 6, 2024 (confidential).

fig 2.4 Aerial view of the Mary Ward College as it was offered for sale in 1975.

Source: BGS

Andrew Barkwith

Associate Director of Operations at British Geological Survey

1. Business as Usual

Pros: Maintains existing infrastructure. Minimal disruption to operations. Opportunities for workspace reconfiguration.

Cons: Long-term maintenance impacted. Limited flexibility. Limited improvement in workspaces.

2. Partial Refurbishment

Pros: Less schedule impact. Achieves degassing of site. Low impact on electrical capacity.

Cons: Limited long-term benefits. Disruptions during refurbishment. Limited scope for new science.

3. Full Refurbishment

Pros: Enhances BREEAM Energy Issue performance. Utilises existing space efficiently. Improves building fabric.

Cons: Requires ambitious BREEAM score commitment. Disruption to workspace during construction.

4. New Build / Relocation

Pros: Compliance with regulations. Potential for new science opportunities. Improved energy efficiency.

Cons: Challenges in achieving BREEAM Excellence. Disruption to workspace during construction. High negative impact on electrical capacity.

5. Hybrid

Pros: Flexibility of spaces. Position as world-class leaders. Positive impact on decarbonisation.

Cons: Relocation expenses. Risk to business continuity. Disruptions during construction.

analysts, among others. The campus has multiple facilities including research laboratories, technical workshops, archives, core stores, monitoring systems, and office spaces. Additionally, BGS maintains an open and collaborative presence, regularly welcoming school groups, university researchers, and government officials. Its presence has greatly influenced the socioeconomic development of Keyworth and the surrounding Rushcliffe borough.

The campus features a mix of older and newer buildings, with only two recent constructions. While materials like brick and concrete are durable, it was evident that the buildings lacked adequate insulation, as evidenced by the thin windows and the necessity to use curtains to minimise heat loss. It became evident that the older buildings, while having historical charm, require significant upgrades to meet contemporary standards of energy efficiency and functionality.

The laboratories, critical hubs for scientific research, were a focal point of the retrofitting

analysis. However, their configuration reflects outdated designs, limiting their functionality and usability. Two primary concerns emerged during our assessment of the laboratories: acoustics and thermal conditions. The presence of loud noises in some labs significantly detracted from the work environment, while inadequate insulation and outdated windows compromised thermal comfort and energy performance. Addressing these issues emerged as the top priorities for retrofitting, as they directly impacted their productivity and well-being.

During our exploration of the campus facilities, we encountered small, closed cubicles that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic for e-meetings. However, it was apparent that these spaces were not adequately ventilated, resulting in uncomfortably warm conditions. Given the shift towards remote collaboration, there is a clear need for designated, properly ventilated spaces to accommodate virtual meetings effectively.

Additionally, we were made aware of the requirements of additional storage space in the core stores to accommodate the growing volume of geological samples received on campus. Addressing this requirement is crucial to maintaining the integrity and accessibility of BGS’s extensive sample collection.

The campus also features interspersed green spaces and a unique Geological Walk, showcasing three billion years of Earth’s history. While these areas offer educational and recreational value, the overall landscape strategy feels outdated, with limited collaborative spaces for employees.

The BGS community demonstrates strong ecological awareness through independent recycling efforts and participation in habitat restoration programs, which is likely due to the diverse demographic of employees, with varied interests and passions. However, the campus’ sustainability initiatives could be better integrated into its retrofitting strategy to enhance environmental impact and employee well-being.

fig 2.5 BGS Campus Site Visit in October 2024. Photo by Priyanka Awatramani

fig 2.6 BGS Campus Site Visit in October 2024; looking into the courtyard. Photo by Priyanka Awatramani

ill 2.1 BGS Campus Plan highlighting the buildings designated for retrofitting

1

3

Noise from large machinery and ‘chillers’ causes an unpleasant working environment. *Acoustics are a primary issue.

2 Inadequate ventilation and noisy air circulation vents make it difficult for employees to concentrate and work without noise cancelling headsets. *Acoustics are one of the major considerations for employee comfort.

4

Some tests and machinery require staff to work directly in the labs for polonged periods to time to run tests and studies. Appropriate desks and workspaces are required.

Interior lab layouts should encourage collaboration. The BGS labs are currently spread apart, making it difficult for teams to meet, collaborate and share knowledge.

Labs are dated, isolated, and do not reflect the innovative research being undertaken by the BGS.

BGS management recognise the interconnection between employee well-being and design of physical space. They want to ensure the building architecture and spaces within the BGS promote employee well-being and research excellence.

Appropriate solar control is required to better regulate interior temperatures.

fig 2.7 NEIF Archaeological Radiocarbon Laboratory at BGS. Source: Geo-Biosciences Advanced E-Learning Academy

To address retrofitting of BGS, rockwool insulation is a viable option due to its excellent thermal and acoustic properties, as well as its fire-resistant characteristics. However, the production of rockwool presents significant environmental and waste management concerns. Rockwool is made from natural stone, primarily basalt, and recycled slag, which are melted at extremely high temperatures—around 1500°C17—to form fibers. This process is highly energy-intensive and heavily reliant on fossil fuels, leading to substantial carbon emissions during manufacturing. The carbon footprint of Rockwool can range between 1.12 and 1.8 kg CO₂-equivalent per kilogram of material produced, depending on the energy source

17 Anders Schmidt, Anders Ulf Clausen, Allan Astrup Jensen, and Ole Kamstrup, Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Three Insulation Materials: Stone Wool, Flax, and Paper Wool (dk-TEKNIK Energy & Environment and Rockwool International, March 2003): 76.

and efficiency of the manufacturing process.18 To compare, the carbon footprint of Cork is around 0.19 kg CO₂-equivalent per kilogram.

Moreover, rockwool production involves a complex supply chain that depends on the extraction and transportation of raw materials, further increasing its environmental impact. The durability of rockwool, while beneficial for long-term use, becomes problematic at the end of its life cycle. Unlike biodegradable materials, rockwool does not break down naturally and often ends up in landfills. In the UK, construction and demolition waste accounts for 62% of total waste, and its disposal contributes to the growing landfill crisis. The UK faces a critical challenge, with

42% of its landfills already reaching capacity,19 emphasising the urgency for better waste management solutions. This waste not only occupies valuable landfill space but also poses risks to soil and water quality due to potential leaching of contaminants.

Efforts to recycle rockwool exist but are limited by economic and logistical challenges. The fibrous nature of the material and the contamination from mixed construction waste often make recycling inefficient or costly. Additionally, the energy required to recycle rockwool can offset its environmental benefits, perpetuating its reliance on energy-intensive processes.

18 Craig Jones and Geoffrey Hammond, The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) Database, Version 3.0, November 10, 2019, http://circularecology.com/embodied-carbonfootprint-database.html

19 Environment Agency, 2020. “Remaining Landfill Capacity.” Retrieved from https://www.data.gov.uk/ dataset/237825cb-dc10-4c53-8446-1bcd35614c12/ remaining-landfill-capacity ”

map.07 LANDFILLS AT CAPACITY

REFLECTIONS

The landscapes of extraction and architecture are intricately linked, since landscapes around the world are being shaped by extraction activities. Understanding this is crucial, especially considering that the typical lifespan of modern buildings is around 50 years. Mapping these sites of material extraction provides a critical perspective on the construction industry by revealing the sites where the material is derived from, the emissions associated with their transport and processing, and the broader environmental impacts of these activities. This spatial and process-oriented understanding highlights the inefficiencies and carbon-intensive nature of current supply chains. Decarbonisation efforts must extend beyond solely reducing carbon emissions to encompass broader environmental factors such as water usage, material sourcing, and waste generation. This prompts a need to reconnect design with landscape and agricultural practices. As proposed by Material Cultures, the initial drawings when designing a building should carefully consider the selection of materials and their potential impact on people, the

economy, and environmental factors such as climate and ecology. 20

In response to these challenges, we propose adoption of ethically produced, low-carbon, and regenerative biobased building materials that can significantly reduce dependence on conventional materials such as concrete, steel and aluminum. These materials not only have low embodied carbon but also reduce environmental degradation and simplify supply chains, making it easier to trace and manage emissions effectively. By prioritising materials with minimal ecological footprints and streamlined logistics, the construction sector can move towards more sustainable and transparent practices. As a prestigious research institution, BGS is well-positioned to lead innovative retrofitting solutions. They can integrate biobased materials and technologies into their operations, setting a benchmark for environmentally conscious practices. By doing so, they not only advance their commitment to Net Zero goals but also inspire broader industry adoption of ecologically conscious construction practices.

20 Material Cultures. Material Reform. London: Mack Books, 2023.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“Climate Change Act 2008,” 2008.

“Measuring UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Office for National Statistics.” Accessed February 18, 2024. https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/ environmentalaccounts/methodologies/ measuringukgreenhousegasemissions.

“New-European-Bauhaus-Economy_Digital-version_DML. Pdf.” Accessed February 18, 2024. https://www. irresistiblecircularsociety.eu/assets/ uploads/20230707-New-European-BauhausEconomy_Digital-version_DML.pdf.

“Our Waste, Our Resources: A Strategy for England,” n.d.

“Plants for a Future.” Accessed February 17, 2024. https:// pfaf.org/user/.

“Reducing Our Carbon Emissions.” Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/services/ our-council/our-environment/reducing-our-carbonemissions/

“UK Innovation Strategy,” n.d.

Anderson, Jane. “Embodied Carbon (Aka Embodied Energy) & EPDs.” Accessed January 21, 2024. http://www. greenspec.co.uk/building-design/embodied-energy/.

Bide, Compiled T P, P S Balson, E Campbell, and S Green. “United Kingdom Continental Shelf Marine Sand and Gravel Resources Scale 1:1 500 000,” n.d.

Bide, Thomas. “Thinking Big - Defining Resources for Major Coastal Defence Projects.” In 18th Extractive Industry Geology Conference, 14–20. EIG Conferences Ltd., 2014.

British Geological Survey. “Aggregates | Mines & Quarries | MineralsUK.” Accessed April 17, 2024. https://www2. bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/mines/aggregates.html.

Cameron, D G, E J Evans, N Idoine, J Mankelow, S F Parry, M A G Patton, and A Hill. “Directory of Mines and Quarries 2020,” no. 11th Edition (2020).

Casey, Diana. “Options for Switching UK Cement Production Sites to near Zero CO2 Emission Fuel: Technical and Financial Feasibility,” n.d.

Climate Change Data. “Emissions.” Accessed April 16, 2024. https://climate-change.data.gov.uk/dashboards/ emissions.

Dyson, Anna. Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme, 2023. Environment Agency. “Remaining Landfill Capacity.” Accessed 2020. https://www.data.gov.uk/ dataset/237825cb-dc10-4c53-8446-1bcd35614c12/ remaining-landfill-capacity.

Hartwell, Rebecca, Graham Coult, and Mauro Overend. “Mapping the Flat Glass Value-Chain: A Material Flow Analysis and Energy Balance of UK Production.” Glass Structures & Engineering 8, no. 2 (September 1, 2023): 167–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40940-022-00195-9.

Hutton, Jane. Reciprocal Landscapes: Stories of Material Movements. Routledge, 2019.

Jones, Craig, and Geoffrey Hammond. The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) Database. Version 3.0, November 10, 2019. http://circularecology.com/ embodied-carbon-footprint-database.html

Lot, Graham, David Highley, Don Cameron, and John Cowley. “Mineral Planning Factsheet: Building and Roofing Stone.” British Geological Survey, 2007. Accessed April 17, 2024. https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/ eprint/534424/1/mpf_buildingstone.pdf.

Material Cultures. Material Reform. London: Mack Books, 2023.

MiningWatch Canada and Environmental Justice Atlas. Mapping the Mining Impacts of the Energy Transition. November 23, 2021. https://miningwatch.ca/ news/2021/11/23/new-report-maps-mining-impactsenergy-transition.

Pick Everard. Feasibility Report. Natural Environmental Research Council, British Geological Survey Laboratories, Keyworth, issued March 6, 2024 (confidential).

Schmidt, Anders, Anders Ulf Clausen, Allan Astrup Jensen, and Ole Kamstrup. Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Three Insulation Materials: Stone Wool, Flax, and Paper Wool. dk-TEKNIK Energy & Environment and Rockwool International, March 2003.

Sinay. “How Much Does the Shipping Industry Contribute to Global CO₂ Emissions?” September 22, 2023. https:// sinay.ai/en/how-much-does-the-shipping-industrycontribute-to-global-co2-emissions/.

UK Green Building Council. Net Zero Whole Life Carbon Roadmap: A Pathway to Net Zero. November 2021. https://ukgbc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ UKGBC-Whole-Life-Carbon-Roadmap-A-Pathway-toNet-Zero.pdf.

United Nations Environment Programme, and Yale Center for Ecosystems +Architecture. “Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future.” United Nations Environment Programme, September 2023. https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/ handle/20.500.11822/43293.

United Nations Environment Programme. G lobal Resources Outlook 2019: Natural Resources for the Future We Want. United Nations, 2020. https://doi. org/10.18356/689a1a17-en.

BIOBASED MATERIALS

Biobased construction materials are derived from natural resources, including earth, plants, animals, fungi, and microorganisms. These materials typically have low embodied carbon, with some offering carbon sequestration potential. They are renewable, biodegradable (when produced without synthetic additives), and contain fewer toxic chemicals and pollutants.1 Biobased materials can be considered regenerative if produced in a nonexploitative and tempered way. Regenerative materials are, “extracted at a rate and in such a way that allows the ecosystems they are harvested from to fully regenerate, either remaining healthy or as a part of a managed recovery towards a more resilient state”. 2 In an architectural context, local biobased materials lend identity to the design of buildings, connecting architecture with the unique ecological and cultural characteristics of the region. This chapter explores the availability of biobased materials in the UK and the benefits and limitations of biobased materials for construction.

What biobased materials are available in the UK for use in construction? What opportunities do they provide?

For this study, we explored six living biobased materials with significant potential for retrofitting: Clay, Hemp, Mycelium, Timber, Aquaculture and Straw. We acknowledge that the viability of these materials varies across the regions in the UK; therefore, to begin, we mapped the industries and opportunities of these materials for all regions of the UK since material sourcing is landscape specific and industries are at varied statuses and levels of development. This helped to assess the ease of scalability for production and manufacturing. We further cross-analysed their building suitability and code compliance to identify areas requiring further research. Simultaneously, we conducted open-ended

1 Material Cultures, Material Reform (London: Material Cultures, 2022), 111.

2 Material Cultures, 2024 Building Skills Report, 17, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures. org/2024-building-skills-report/

interviews with industry professionals involved in fields such as seaweed farming, marine rewilding, straw construction, and biobased architecture. The insights gathered informed recommendations for UKRI institutions, highlighting the biobased materials most viable for specific regions. For the East Midlands, straw and seaweed emerged as the most promising materials for retrofitting projects. Straw is readily available as for use as insulation, and Seaweed (kelp), and shellfish with further R&D could be a long-term solution. These materials also provide opportunities to strengthen local economies and enhance landscapes with their localised production and building material supply chains.

Despite its potentials, the biobased construction sector faces significant barriers, including a lack of awareness and understanding of biobased materials and their benefits, and limited standardised testing and certifications hindering their widespread adoption. Similarly, there are ongoing debates around material certification for construction purposes. Biobased materials also have underdeveloped supply chains and a lack of key actors leading to slow industry growth. Finally, there are regulatory challenges associated with approvals for farms and production sites due to the lack of standardisation.

Biobased industries are in their nascency in the UK, however, there are a few architectural practices including London-based nonprofit Material Cultures, who are raising awareness for the applicability of biobased materials in construction through built projects, community engaged workshops and research. Their work has served as a point of departure for this study. In this chapter, we review their report to speculate how Cultivating Commons contributes to professional discourse within the biobased research field. 3

3 Material Cultures, Circular Biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire. Energy Hub / York & North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, 2021, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures.org/cbconstruction/

3 tonnes of clay/shale are used in the manufacture of 1000 bricks

CLAYCLAY

Industries and Opportunities

Kimmeridge and Ampthill Clay Kellaways, Oxford Clay and Osgodby Formation

Lias

Marros Group

Bowland and Cravem Groups

Upper Cambrian Shales

POLICIES AND STAKEHOLDERS

Environment Agency

Natural England

Mineral Planning Authority

Local Planning Authorities like Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government in England

Brick clay comprises clay—a topsoil, shale and mudstone.4 It holds significant importance in various industries, including construction. Its limited availability makes it a valuable resource, particularly for its regenerative properties and ecological benefits. Clay deposits are alive with microorganisms and ecosystems, contributing to soil health and biodiversity. In our exploration of the UK’s clay industry, we mapped the spatial distribution of clay reserves across the country along with extraction sites and brick manufacturing facilities. These are mainly concentrated around the Midlands and southern England. In 2021, approximately 4 million tonnes of clay and shale were extracted, highlighting its indispensability as a construction material.5

Clay finds versatile applications in construction, serving as the foundation for bricks, tiles, and raw materials for cement and plasters. Its structural integrity and insulating properties make it invaluable, ensuring that buildings remain thermally comfortable by absorbing and storing heat, then gradually releasing it as temperatures fluctuate. While

4 “Brick Clay Mineral Planning Factsheet” BGS, 2022. accessed April 17, 2024, https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/ eprint/532490/1/Brick%20Clay%20Mineral%20 Planning%20Factsheet.pdf

5 “Brick Clay Mineral Planning Factsheet” BGS.

most conventional bricks are fired, rendering them non-biodegradable, more ecological alternatives like adobe bricks and compressed earth blocks need to be prioritised. These alternatives typically incorporate additives or stabilisers like cement, fly ash, lime, or agricultural waste, which vary based on local practices, the intended performance of the bricks, and the available resources. For example, a study in Egypt found that clay bricks mixed with sludge and sugarcane bagasse reduced heat flow through wall systems by an average of 64% compared to conventional fired bricks.6 Clay plaster, often stabilised with lime, is another sustainable application for covering biobased materials. It is commonly used to render external facades, offering weather resistance while maintaining breathability to regulate humidity.

While clay offers immense potential for sustainable construction, it is crucial to recognise its limitations. Unlike renewable resources, clay cannot be rapidly replenished, and large-scale extraction can lead to significant landscape degradation.

6 Ahmed M. Seddik Hassan et al., “Thermal Performance Analysis of Clay Brick Mixed with Sludge and Agriculture Waste,” Construction and Building Materials 344 (2022): 128267, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2022.128267

fig 3.2 Clay Extraction Site

HEMP

Industries and Opportunities

2022

110 licenses issued for a validity period of three growing seasons

AREA UNDER HEMP CULTIVATION

UK: 810 ha

Europe: 33,000 ha

EU UK

£500 for one tonne of Hemp seeds before processing

7.5 tonnes

Potential yield of Hemp fibre per hectare

4 metres Growth per 100 days

SPECIES IN THE UK

Finola

Finola 2

Henola

Finola

Finola 2

Henola Fedora 17

Kompolti

POLICIES AND STAKEHOLDERS

Hemp, a variety of cannabis with less than 0.2% THC, is regulated as a controlled substance in the UK. Cultivation requires an industrial hemp license, permitting the production of non-controlled hemp products derived exclusively from fiber and seed. To ensure compliance and avoid undue attention, hemp crops must be located away from schools, public rights of way, and vehicular access. 7 While the licenses are valid for up to three growing seasons (three years), the number of hemp licenses issued has increased significantly, from six in 2013 to 136 in 2023, reflecting growing interest in hemp cultivation.8

As an alternative to non-loadbearing concrete, hempcrete is made from a mixture of hemp shiv and lime serving as a low-carbon building material. It offers great insulation and breathability; it reduces the energy required to heat buildings while preventing issues such as dampness, condensation, and mould. It allegedly has the capacity to absorb approximately 110-160 kg of CO2 per cubic meter of wall, contributing to carbon sequestration. 9 Hemp’s rapid growth cycle, low water requirement, and ability to prevent soil erosion offer this as a viable biobased material.

The practical applications of hempcrete have demonstrated its potential as a viable building material. For example, the British Science Museum in Wiltshire opted for a hempcrete

7 Home Office, “Industrial Hemp Licensing: Factsheet,” last updated December 18, 2024, https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/industrial-hemp-licensingguidance/industrial-hemp-licensing-factsheet

8 Home Office, “Hemp Licensing Changes Will Help Grow UK Economy,” last modified April 9, 2024, https:// www.gov.uk/government/news/hemp-licensing-changeswill-help-grow-uk-economy

9 “UK Hempcrete,” UK Hempcrete, accessed March 2024, https://www.ukhempcrete.com/

storage building to reduce relative humidity fluctuations and protect historic artifacts. It was noted that while construction costs were 10% higher, primarily due to design expenses, operational costs were two-thirds lower than traditional store buildings on-site. However, participants mentioned challenges such as a lack of contractors familiar with hempcrete in the UK, reflecting limited industry knowledge and adoption.10

Therefore, from an industrial perspective, we mapped the potential for hemp cultivation for its integration into biobased construction practices in the UK. First, we identified regions with suitable soil compositions, focusing on areas with Grade 1 to Grade 3 soil, which are optimal for hemp growth. Hemp can easily replace cereal crops like wheat, barley, and rapeseed, so we mapped farms growing these crops to assess the potential for replacing or integrating hemp cultivation. While cocultivation is theoretically possible, crop rotation is the more effective approach, as hemp’s deep root system improves soil structure and health. Beyond the potential cultivation avenues, we mapped existing hemp farms based on publicly available data to understand the current landscape of hemp cultivation in the UK. This mapping also included identifying hemp producers and pharmaceutical distributors to identify key stakeholders in the industry. However, it is important to note that due to restricted policies surrounding hemp cultivation, detailed information about hemp farms is not publicly available. This lack of transparency presents a significant barrier to scaling up the hempbased industry in the UK.

10 Thérèse Dams et al., “Crossing Boundaries Conference 2021 Full Paper,” (paper presented at the Crossing Boundaries Conference, University of Bath, 2021).

fig 3.3 Hemp Farm

MYCELIUM

MYCELIUM

Industries and Opportunities

MYKOFOAM

40%

less electricity than polystyrene

90%

less water than polystyrene

YIELD

10-30 days cultivation time for complete colonisation

2-4kg of fresh mycelium per 1 kg of dry substrate

SPECIES IN THE UK

Trametes versicolor

Fistulina hepatica

Laetiporus sulphureus

Grifola frondosa

Fomes fomentarius

Daedalea quercina

Fomitopsis betulina

Ganoderma australe

Daedaleopsis confragosa

Polyporus squamosus

POLICIES AND STAKEHOLDERS

British Mycological Society (BMS)

Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS)

Biorenewables Development Centre

DEFRA

UK Innovate

Mycelium is the vegetative part of fungi, consisting of a network of fine white filaments, that spread from a single spore throughout a substrate. When combined with organic matter derived from agricultural and industrial waste, mycelium forms a bio-composite suitable for a range of applications. These include low-value uses such as gap filling and packaging, as well as high-value composite materials for structural purposes. 11 Using agricultural by-products like sugarcane bagasse, rice husks, cotton stalks, and straw as growth substrates, mycelium-based products convert waste into continuous composites without excessive energy or water input or additional waste generation compared to conventional alternatives. 12

Mycelium is lightweight and versatile in nature, making it useful as a building material as an insulation. It provides both acoustic and thermal performance alongside significant fire resistance and moisture regulation properties.13 Mycelium-based products can repurpose waste from the paper industry to manufacture building materials. Mycelium composites are resistant to pests and mould, ensuring longevity and structural integrity in construction. Notable projects such as the

11 Libin Yang, Daekwon Park, and Zhao Qin, “Material Function of Mycelium-Based Bio-Composite: A Review,” Frontiers in Materials 8 (September 30, 2021): 737377, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2021.737377

12 “Mycelium Insulation,” UK Green Building Council accessed March 2024, https://ukgbc.org/resources/ mycelium-insulation/

13 Mykor Limited, “Mycelium Materials: Fantastic Fungal Innovations & Will Fungal Composites Take Over the World?” Mykor, accessed March 2024, https://www.mykor. co.uk/news/mycelium-materials-fantastic-fungalinnovations-will-fungal-composites-take-over-the-world

HY-Fi Installation in New York and the Mycelium Hayes Pavilion at the Glastonbury Festival showcase its architectural potential and aesthetic appeal. Mycelium biobased material research has been funded by Innovate UK14 and the EU15 which proves interest in this material and acceleration in certification processes.

To understand the potentials of the mycelium industry for its production we mapped urban areas as mycelium can grow in relatively small spaces. Focusing on urban environments complements the shift toward sustainable, high-density living, creating opportunities for repurposing under-utilised spaces for mycelium cultivation. Additionally, we mapped paper factories in the proximity since paper waste is a key substrate for mycelium insulation production. Locating mycelium production facilities near paper factories can minimise transportation distances and associated carbon emissions. We further mapped existing mushroom farms and dedicated mycelium producers to identify regions which have established infrastructure and expertise in fungal cultivation. However, it is important to acknowledge the possible presence of laboratories and other facilities cultivating mycelium for research or niche applications, for which comprehensive information was not readily available.

14 Mykor Limited, “New UKRI Funding Aims to Enhance UK Sustainable Biomanufacturing,” Mykor, accessed March 2024, https://www.mykor.co.uk/news/new-ukri-fundingaims-to-enhance-uk-sustainable-biomanufacturing

15 Mykor Limited, “Mykor Secures a £825k Pre-Seed Funding Round” Mykor, accessed March 2024, https:// www.mykor.co.uk/news/dj5kgcutix4gq9oi14v0xhj1h15151

fig 3.4 Urban Mycelium Farm All

MYCELIUM

CONDITIONS

PROCESS AND LABOUR

Cut Mushroom spores

Add substrate to bags

Add spores to substrate

Mycelium growth

map.10 MYCELIUM INDUSTRY

TIMBER

TIMBER

Industries and Opportunities

2046

2.5% increase in Softwood availability in the UK

12.3% increase in Hardwood availability in the UK

YIELD

40-150 years to reach mature stage and ready to be cut down

4-15m of growth in the first 5 years

86 tonne per acre average volume of natural pine clearcut

SPECIES IN THE UK

Sessile Oak

Pedunculate Oak

Ash

Beech

Silver or White Birch

Common or Down Birch

Sweet Chestnut

Sycamore

Black Poplar

Balsam Poplar

Hybrid Black Poplar

English Elm

Wych Elm Wild Cherry

Common Walnut

Black Walnut

Scots Pine

Cosican Pine

Sitka Spruce

Norway Spruce

European Larch

Japanese Larch

Douglas Fir Western Red Cedar

POLICIES AND STAKEHOLDERS

Natural England

Forestry Commission

Forestry Act

Landscape Recovery

Environment Agency

The timber industry plays a significant role in the UK’s environmental strategy. According to estimates from the Forestry Commission, approximately 10.9 million tonnes of roundwood was harvested from the UK forests in 2020, with softwood accounting for the majority (92%) of these removals.16 Softwood, known for its faster growth rates in the UK, comprises the bulk of timber harvested, with hardwood making up the remaining portion. However, the reliance on softwood presents challenges, as UK-grown softwood is typically graded as C16, necessitating the imports of higher-grade timber from Europe.17

While mapping the timber industries in the UK, it was difficult to obtain precise data on active woodlands in the UK complicating efforts to assess the industry’s spatial distribution. However, spatial datasets indicating possible harvested areas—such as coppice or ground preparation sites were mapped—suggested high concentrations in regions like Scotland and Wales. Additionally, mapping privately and publicly managed woodlands and timber

16 “Forestry Statistics 2021 Chapter 2: UK-Grown Timber,” Forest Research, 2021. Accessed April 17, 2024, https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/2022/02/ch2_timber_ fs2021_mlulwth-1.pdf

17 Exova Trada, “Specifying British-Grown Timbers,” 2017.

processing facilities provided further insights into the industry’s infrastructure and distribution across the country. It is important to note that the data for Northern Ireland is lacking hence the insights might be more applicable for Britain scale.

Despite these challenges, the UK’s abundant timber resources offer opportunities for utilising timber as a biobased material. Biobased materials such as hempcrete blocks or mycelium blocks, which require supports at frequent intervals, can complement traditional timber usage. Leveraging timber as a biobased material therefore has the potential to align with the net zero strategy, offering environmentally sustainable alternatives to conventional construction materials. Furthermore, as the UK aims to increase tree canopy and woodland cover to 16.5% by 2050, opportunities arise for expanding the timber industry sustainably.18 Sustainable forestry practices, including selective logging and reforestation, are vital in enhancing woodlands’ capacity as carbon sinks, aiding in greenhouse gas mitigation.

18 “Timber in Construction Roadmap,” GOV.UK, accessed April 17, 2024, https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications/timber-in-construction-roadmap/timber-inconstruction-roadmap

fig.3.5 Timber Harvesting Site

AQUACULTURE

SEAWEED

Industries and Opportunities

£1

cost per kg of dried seaweed in the UK

13 marine licences issued for commercial seaweed farming in the UK 2023

15,000 tonnes

(wet weight) of seaweed was harvested in the UK by some estimates

YIELD

Autumn Spring seeding harvesting

1500 kg per 100m line of wet seaweed is produced

1-2m of kelp is grown in 7-8 months along each line

Seaweed farming is an emergent industry in the UK have more than doubled since 2016.19 Kelp is gaining popularity for producers since it requires no arable land or freshwater, absorbs significant amounts of carbon dioxide, acting as a carbon sink to mitigate climate change, and thrives in nutrient-rich marine environments without the need for fertilisers or pesticides.

SPECIES IN THE UK

Chondrus crispus

Laminaria digitata

Saccharina

Sugar kelp

Ascophyllum nodosum

Sea Spaghetti

Saccorhiza

Polyschides

Channelled wrack

Bladder wrack

Himanthalia elongata

Serrated Wrack

Ulva Lactuca

Fucus Vesiculosus

Fucus Spiralis

Pelvetia Canaliculata

Corallina Officinalis

Sea Lettuce

Ulva intestinalis Gutweed

POLICIES AND STAKEHOLDERS

Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS)

Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)

Marine Management Organisation

DEFRA

Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust (SIFT)

20 Seaweed is mainly used in food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and agriculture, with future potential in biofuels and construction, 21 and presently, the UK has 97 seaweed-related businesses, mostly in England and Scotland, relying on wild harvesting. 22 According to the Cefas registry of aquaculture producers, there are also 101 active shellfish farming businesses in England and Wales and 103 in Scotland (2023). 23 Many UK companies are currently using seaweed sourced from other countries in their products due to availability and cost. According to the Scottish Shellfish Farm Production Survey 2023, producers would be interested in sourcing materials locally if the biomass were available in the UK. 24

19 Elisa Capuzzo, “The Developing UK Seaweed Industry,” Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science Blog, May 5, 2022, https://www.cefas. co.uk/News/the-developing-uk-seaweed-industry

20 World Bank Group, Global Seaweed - New and Emerging Markets, Report 2023, commissioned and published by the World Bank Group.

21 Hethel Innovation Ltd., University of East Anglia, and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy in Norfolk & the East of England (Norfolk, 2024), 3; World Bank Group, Global Seaweed - New and Emerging Markets, Report 2023.

22 Elisa Capuzzo, The Developing UK Seaweed Industry 2022.

23 Marine Directorate. Scottish Shellfish Farm Production Survey 2023. Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands, 26 June 2024.

24 Hethel Innovation Ltd. et al., A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy, 4.

Pairing the production of shellfish and seaweed could improve habitats for fish species, and potentially enhance fish stocks. Similarly, producing seaweed and shellfish together provides opportunities for farmers to diversify production and harvest across multiple seasons. In addition, introducing marine rewilding efforts alongside kelp production could help restore marine habitats, dissipate wave energy, and stabilise sediment reducing coastal erosion. Research has shown an increase in fish abundance diversify in areas producing kelp. 25 However, a major barrier to scaling kelp production is licencing and high startup costs. One avenue to increasing kelp farms could be co-location of farms with offshore wind farm sites. 26 As production expands in the UK, it will become increasingly important to address the social aspects of scaling aquaculture on the coast.

27

To better understand the opportunities for kelp and aquaculture sites in the UK, we inventoried existing aquaculture and seaweed sites, coastal communities and infrastructure such as ports, planned windfarms and vessel traffic routes. We also overlaid environmental factors that would inhibit or encourage production such as water turbidity, currents, wave height, and bathymetry. Cross-analysing these conditions provide insights to the potential for increasing and scaling kelp and shellfish production for construction materials.

25 Corrigan, S., Brown, A. R., Tyler, C. R., Wilding, C., Daniels, C., Ashton, I. G. C., and Smale, D. A. “Development and Diversity of Epibiont Assemblages on Cultivated Sugar Kelp (Saccharina latissima) in Relation to Farming Schedules and Harvesting Techniques.” Life 13, no. 1 (2023): 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13010209.

26 Ibid.

27 Hethel Innovation Ltd., University of East Anglia, and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy in Norfolk & the East of England (Norfolk, 2024), 3.

fig.3.6 Seaweed farming

CONDITIONS

Mid-intertidal zone

Ascophyllum Nodosum thrives in the mid-intertidal zone, enduring fluctuating tides, while Laminaria Hyperborea inhabits the sub-littoral zone, anchoring to rocky seabeds in depths of up to 20 meters or more.

PROCESS AND LABOUR

Preparation of seedstock

Anchoring seedstock to support lines

Harvesting

Shred seaweed

Spreading on drying platform

Packing dried seaweed

For a farm size of 25m x 25m 3 people to manage

fig.3.7 Dried seaweed biomass

fig.3.8 SeaWood Acoustic Panel

fig.3.9 Shellfish rendering explorations by Alejandra iturrizaga

Why Seaweed and Shellfish for BGS?

Seaweed and shellfish for construction is considered a long-term goal for the UK industry. There are global examples of seaweed used in building materials such as bricks by Sargablocks, Mexico28 and as fibreboards and acoustic panels by Blue Blocks, Netherlands. 29 Several practitioners across Europe experimenting with eelgrass (zoster sp.) for construction.30 Similarly, there is potential for shellfish biproducts be used as rendering.31 It is important to note that this project distinguishes seagrass from macroalgae species as they are vastly different in terms of physical properties, growing conditions, and viability as construction materials. 32 Seaweed refers to macroalgae species including: Saccharina latissima, Laminaria digitata and Laminaria Hyperborea.

In the nearby region of Norfolk, Cefas, Hethel Innovation and the University of East Anglia have developed the Seaweed in East Anglia (SEA) project to explore a path forward for the seaweed industry. They devised a set of short and longterm goals for mobilising the industry. Short-term efforts include, “product development, establishing a local biorefinery and seaweed nursery, create testbeds for seaweed cultivation and longer-term goals such as exploring the potential for seaweed in energy production and formalising an end-toend supply chain”. 33

Aligning with predictions for Norfolk, there are opportunities for a seaweed industry to emerge a bioregional economy that supports underserved coastal community and diversify rural economies. As stated in the report, A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy, by Hethel

28 Ana M. López-Contreras, Paulina Núñez, M.P. Gurrola, Rigoberto Rosas-Luis, and 6 others, “Sargassum in Mexico: From Environmental Problem to Valuable Resource,” Technical Report, August 2022, https://doi. org/10.18174/574423.

29 Rianne Reijnder, Sealutions: Looking at SeaweedBased Sustainable Building Materials in the Netherlands (Master’s thesis, TU Delft, 2022).

30 Studio Kathryn Larsen, “About,” accessed January 5, 2025, https://kathrynlarsen.com/about.

31 Katya Bryskina and Nataly Nemkova, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman, May 9, 2024.

32 Kathryn Larsen, email message to author, March 1, 2024.

33 Hethel Innovation Ltd. et al., A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy, 23.

Innovation, “This can be achieved by offering an additional income for fishers, harvesting and processing jobs and by using the products made to benefit the region, such as using seaweed fertilisers in agriculture settings to improve soil health and reduce overall carbon footprints”. 34 We envision the BGS retrofitting project as an opportunity to intersect the Hethel Innovation development timeline.

For example, the emergence of the biorefinery in the Norfolk region would be an immediate asset for facilitating the reuse of biproducts from energy production or fertilisers for use as acoustic panels. BGS could therefore serve as a testing ground for shellfish and seaweed construction materials and contribute to material development. Procuring biobased materials for the BGS retrofit could incite funding for the initiative within the Hethel Innovation project or comparable initiatives, and therefore the industry at large.

Furthermore, BGS is an organisation dedicated to geological and subsurface research. BGS is currently devoted to climate change adaptation research including decarbonisation research, taking form primarily as subterranean storage of CO2 and coastal modelling. Bridging this work, they may be interested in the climate benefits of kelp farms. Moreover, the BGS considers itself impartial to contributing to marine extractive industries such offshore oil and sand extraction but looking to history, it may be of interest for the BGS to engage in marine rewilding efforts. We will discuss how these efforts can be undertaken consciously, to support the emergent aquaculture industry, marine workers, and communities in the coming chapters.

34 Hethel Innovation Ltd. et al., A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy, 4.

fig.3.10 Site Visit: Visiting Allie Wharf from Norfolk Seaweed at Wells-next-the-sea, Norfolk on February 23, 2024. Photo by Alejandra Iturrizaga.

Industries and Opportunities

STRAW

8.1-8.3 tonnes / ha average winter wheat growth in 2021 in GB

5.8-6.2 tonnes / ha average spring barley growth in 2021 in GB

4 months

Average time for growth for wheat

SPECIES

Straw has been used in construction for thousands of years for thatching, insulation, waddle and daub and structures. Straw as a building material provides many benefits including reduces operational carbon, sequesters carbon, can be easily deconstructed, reused or disposed as compost, mulch or biomass fuel. Straw has low embodied carbon that exceeds current UK building standards for thermal efficiency. According to Material Cultures, cereals store C02 as they grow, and therefore straw holds approximately 40% of its dry weight in atmospheric carbon.35 Similarly, straw can improve interior air quality since it emits no toxins and contains zero or low volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and formaldehyde emissions compared to conventional building practices.36 Moreover, a common misconception is that straw has low fire retardancy, however, strawbale construction and compressed panels provide a nearly airless environment to comply with fire ratings.

37 Lastly, straw buildings have high breathability that helps managed moisture through its ability to absorb (natural fibres), adsorb (if concealed with a lime plaster) and desorb and because it has a vapour open structure.38 These natural systems are commonly called ‘breathable’. 39 In the coming

35 Material Cultures. Material Reform. London: Mack Books, 2023, 107.

36 Julia Bennett, John Butler, Barbara Jones, and Eileen Sutherland, Straw Construction in the UK: Technical Guide 1st ed. (School of Natural Building, January 31, 2022), 11.

37 Bennett et al., Straw Construction in the UK, 34.

38 Ibid.

39 Cíaran Malik, interview

chapter we will explore the potential replacements for lime plaster, including shellfish.

Straw takes different forms depending on its desired use. The most used straw bale in the UK area rectangular bales – small, Flat 8s or Field bales, otherwise straw can be used as compressed straw in panels or blown-in chopped straw.40 Construction grade straw must be, “dry with a moisture content below 20%, well compacted with tight strings, be of a uniform size and shape, and contain virtually no seed heads. Straws should be at least 150mm. There should be no sign of mould, or of vermin having nested during storage”. 41 The size and density, and tightness of the bales may vary and is determined by the type of baler used. Architects should therefore consider the type of baler and how that could alter the building design if using straw bale construction.42

We mapped existing straw producing croplands across the UK to understand what regions could produce straw for construction. Additionally, we mapped key stakeholders involved in the straw supply chain, including members of the British Hay and Straw Merchants Association (BHSMA), who play an important role in straw procurement and distribution. We also identified European Straw Building Association (ESBA) certified straw bale producers. We found out there are only three producers in the whole of UK that adhere to ESBA’s quality standards.

40 Bennett et al., Straw Construction in the UK, 18.

41 Bennett et al., Straw Construction in the UK, 21.

42 Ibid.

by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman, May 2, 2024.

fig.3.11 Straw Farm

map.13 STRAW INDUSTRY

BGS protected area cereal cropland

strawbale producer straw merchant

CONDITIONS

fig.3.12 Straw biomass

Why Straw for BGS?

We selected straw for retrofitting the BGS to improve insulation and interior conditions of the labs. Straw panels could be easily assembled on site, “straw is chopped in a machine known as a tub grinder. Once chopped, it can then be stored for a few weeks until it is blown into a panel with an off-theshelf insulation blower”.43

There are several examples across the UK of successful use of straw as a building retrofit material, such as the straw-clad, low-carbon buildings at University of East Anglia and the curtain wall assembly for the New Gateway Building at University of Nottingham’s Sutton Bonington Campus. Both projects exemplify the successful use of regionally available straw as a building material for institutional projects in the East Midlands and nearby East Anglia.

Straw is readily available in the East Midlands, as cereal crops constitute 50% of arable lands equating to 26% of the UKs total cereal

production.44 Despite this, there are no formal supply chains for construction bales in the UK. Although the opportunity exists for panels to be assembled on a project basis, the current market relies on prefabricated panels. Currently, two companies dominate the UK market including Modcell, a UK base company using whole bales for its panels and EcoCocon, Lithuanian based company that imports prefabricated compressed panels made from round bales. These market gaps present an opportunity for the BGS retrofit project to support the development of regional supply chains. As noted by Bennet et al., bales can be sourced direct from the field – this is the most cost-effective method of procurement as there is no added cost for storage. Carbon count is then limited to the harvesting machines and transport to a local site.45 In addition to reducing costs and carbon, a localised supply chain emerges, benefiting farmers and land workers.

43 “Four Big Questions Every Prefab Straw Panel Manufacturer Answers Every Day,” Passive House Accelerator, accessed January 4, 2025, https:// passivehouseaccelerator.com/articles/four-big-questionsevery-prefab-straw-panel-manufacture-answers-everyday

44 UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, Agricultural Facts: East Midland Region, accessed January 4, 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ agricultural-facts-england-regional-profiles/agriculturalfacts-east-midland-region

45 Bennett, Julia, John Butler, Barbara Jones, and Eileen Sutherland. Straw Construction in the UK: Technical Guide. 1st ed. School of Natural Building, January 31, 2022. Accessed January 4, 2025, 21-25.

fig.3.13 Presentation with Cíaran Malik on biobased materials for retrofitting and building performance in May 2024. Photo by Clara Olóriz.

fig.3.14 Straw insulation panel

CONVERSATIONS WITH INDUSTRY EXPERTS

Seaweed Farming; Marine Rewilding; Shellfish Plasters; Straw Industry and Building; Carbon Reduction with Biobased Materials

Cypren Edmunds President at Straw Building UK

Cíaran Malik

Tutor for ETS at Architectural Association

Bradley Nissen

Solutions & Innovation Coordinator at UK Green Building Council

The biobased material industry in the UK is growing, driven by the efforts of experts engaged in diverse areas of research and development. Industry professionals are undertaking research across various domains - some are exploring the regenerative properties of biomass cultivation, whereas others are focused on the technological aspects, testing materials for applicability in the construction sector.

Over the course of the study, we met with several industry experts to gain information and feedback on our proposal. These conversations, some with longstanding collaborators from the LU programme, and others with newly connected experts, have been instrumental to developing our project. Given the open and informal nature of these exchanges, discussions took place across various settings—online, in-person at studio, and even on site. We deeply value their contributions, experience and willingness to share their time and knowledge with us. We have chosen to respect the confidentiality of some experts by merging and consolidating their feedback into the overall summary.

The state of straw industry in the UK

Straw is gathering interest as a sustainable biobased construction material in the UK, but its adoption faces many challenges and opportunities that need systemic planning. We met with Cypren Edmunds, President of Straw Building UK, Bradley Nissen, Solutions and Innovation coordinator at UK Green Building Council and Cíaran Malik, teaching Environmental and Technical Studies at the Architectural Association, to obtain perspectives on this.

According to Cypren, the straw industry is actively working to establish certifications for construction-grade straw and buildings constructed with straw.46 These efforts aim to support the producers, manufacturers and builders while promoting the wider adoption of straw in structural applications. However, Cíaran offered a differing perspective, noting that there is currently no standardised construction grade for straw, as all types of straw can theoretically be used in construction.

Despite these efforts, straw-based construction faces other barriers including a limited skilled workforce and the need for specialised long-term maintenance strategies. Additionally, straw buildings need to be tested

and trialled to derive its maximum capacity, particularly as the building height increases. Therefore, real-world applications remain limited. University of Nottingham’s Gateway Building, designed by Make Architects, is the only identified case study we were able to find for institutional projects using straw.

Nonetheless, there are significant potentials for straw-based construction. After receiving suggestions from Cypren and Cíaran, we attended a lecture by Barbara Jones, a straw panel manufacturer and a leading advocate for straw construction. She claims the straw produced by her company are weather and fire resistant due to extreme compression, eliminating air pockets. Cíaran emphasises another key benefit of using biobased materials such as straw: their breathability.47 Unlike conventional materials that can seal buildings and cause condensation issues, straw allows moisture vapor to pass through— as water molecules are lighter than air molecules— promoting healthier indoor environments. For effective insulation using natural materials, a minimum thickness of 300mm is recommended by him.

Meanwhile, Bradley cautioned us on the ecological implications of dedicating (more) land for straw production.48 He reminded us that transitioning land to biobased material production could compete with food production or biodiversity preservation plans. He stressed the need to balance productivity with environmental impact in harvesting processes. He further clarified that while biobased materials store carbon during their lifecycle, accurately measuring and validating sequestration during construction applications remains a complex challenge.

He advised that for an effective end of use plan, biobased materials must avoid composites, as these can complicate recycling or composting. He proposed innovate solutions to integrate natural materials into existing buildings without compromising performance, such as the concept of material passports for documenting a material’s origin, composition, and end-of-life options to improve lifecycle. He also encouraged farmer-to-farmer conversations to share knowledge about straw production and its potential construction applications.

47

48

46 Cypren Edmunds interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz, and Emily Bowerman, May 20, 2024.

Cíaran Malik, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz, and Emily Bowerman, May 2, 2024.

Bradley Nissen, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz, and Emily Bowerman, May 30, 2024.

Katya Bryskina Co-founder of IIM-A Studio

The state of aquaculture in the UK

Aquaculture in the UK is evolving with the introduction of seaweed farming, particularly in regions like Scotland and Norfolk. We spoke with three industry professionals to understand the status of the seaweed and shellfish industries, and marine rewilding efforts in the UK. Aquaculture biproducts such as shellfish can be used for rendering according to Katya Brynskina and Nataly Nemkova,49 and kelp is currently desired for use in pharmaceuticals and fertilisers.

Last February, we met with Allie Wharf at the Morston Quay nearby to Norfolk Seaweed and shellfish operations.50 Undertaking seaweed farming was made possible due to their established shellfish operation, existing infrastructure and equipment, and generational knowledge of the Norfolk coast. Kelp requires specific conditions, such as clear water, water temperatures between 42–72°F (5–20°C), sufficient sunlight, and movement from currents, but protection from intense wave action. Therefore, they strategically located their farms nearby to a rock shelf and use long-line offshore kelp farming techniques. She explained that kelp is harvested between April –June, and oysters can be harvested anytime. Norfolk Seaweed has successfully expanded, securing a license to grow from 25 to 50 hectares next year, however, Allie explained that licensing is one of the biggest and most costly barriers of entry. Currently only have four people who manage the 25ha plot, however, they are exploring the use of remote sensing and monitoring tools to observe the offshore kelp farms with less manual labour.

Kelp production has the potential to provide environmental benefits if farmed in a sustainable way, for example Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture to diversify species. Kelp has potential to sequester carbon

Nataly Nemkova Co-founder of IIM-A Studio

(although the release of sequestered carbon upon harvesting remains under investigation) and create habitats for marine wildlife and seabirds. Implementing strategies that provide ecological benefits alongside kelp production could incentivise licensing.

Similarly, we spoke with Sam Fanshawe about opportunities to pair seaweed farming with marine restoration or rewilding efforts.51 To restore kelp or seagrass beds in the areas alongside the Lincolnshire coast, the historic locations of these species must be understood. Typically, restoration efforts are most successful in areas where historic species were located and areas with clear water and a suitable substrate like muddy or cobbled surfaces for it to latch on. Farms with floating kelp can block sunlight and inhibit growth, so it is ideally anchored on the seabed. Therefore, pairing seaweed farms directly alongside seabed restoration or rewilding efforts may not be possible.

Coastal and aquaculture industries could provide economic diversification opportunities for coastal communities, specifically fishermen. However, it is important to highlight the deep cultural connections that fishermen have with their vocation that could inhibit uptake. Many barriers of entry including high start-up costs, licensing, and infrastructure requirements and expert knowledge of marine environment and operations. For example, while kelp is often used for fertilisers and has garnered interest from the pharmaceutical industry, the raw product alone has limited profitability. Scaling production remains a challenge due to the high costs and the logistical issues around hatching kelp, with the only UK hatchery located in Scotland. Therefore, building awareness of the benefits of kelp both as an economic product and for its environmental contributions is critical to facilitate scalability of the seaweed industry.

Allie Wharf Farmer at Norfolk Seaweed

Sam Fenshawe Researcher at Blue Marine Foundation

Expert from Marine Research Organisation

49 Katya Bryskina and Nataly Nemkova, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman, May 9, 2024.

50 Allie Wharf, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz, and Emily Bowerman, June 6, 2024.

51 Sam Fanshawe, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz, and Emily Bowerman, June 6, 2024.

BIOBASED BUILDING MATERIALS MATRIX

ρ

σ

ρ 100 to 250 kg/m3 σ 0.05 to 0.2 MPa

λ-value 0.0.045-0.055W/mK

α 0.2-0.4

30 to 50 years

Moisture resistance Low

Wood Panels (MDF)

ρ

α 0.05 to 0.25

Seaweed

BIOBASED SUMMARY FOR UKRI

Evaluating the regional viability of UK biobased industries

To evaluate the viability and performance of biobased building materials, we compared their properties and capacities using data from various sources. For some materials, such as BlueBlock’s acoustic panels still in pilot studies detailed information is not made publicly available. Our matrix highlights areas where further R&D is needed and supports material selection based on specific usage in buildings.

To assist UKRI’s decision-making for retrofitting of their institutions, we also prepared a summary for each region’s biobased material availability and potential. This summary considers the findings for six materials and aligns with Cultivating Commons’ recommendation for regional procurement. Each material is ranked by its

regional availability and opportunities for retrofitting projects across the UK.

Together with the viability study on biobased raw materials and building materials, this map is a strategic tool to identify suitable materials for retrofitting projects. These rankings, however, are not deterministic; they may evolve due to factors like strategic investments and long-term development plans.

For instance, a region currently leading in material availability may be surpassed by others with targeted research and investments. While competition for resources and opportunities is natural, collaboration and knowledge-sharing among UKRI institutions can aide in innovation and propel the biobased construction industry.

CASE STUDY: ARUP & MATERIAL CULTURES

Local procurement of biobased materials

The report Circular biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire (CbC) by Material Cultures and Arup has been a primary reference for our study.52 Their project in Yorkshire targets 500,000 new homes in NEY region by 2038 using biobased materials. It addresses biobased materials for structural applications, insulation and lining in buildings; building elements are linked to potential biobased materials and addresses potential

52 Material Cultures, Circular Biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire. Energy Hub / York & North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, 2021, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures.org/cbconstruction/

procurement networks within the region. The report also presents opportunities of using biobased materials to develop a robust regional network of producers, suppliers, and manufacturers. Overall, the report offers a case example for the potential of biobased materials by addressing environmental impact, economic potential, resource management opportunities, skills development, policy, and funding.

The following section outlines areas that the Cultivating Commons (CC) project differs from and advances existing knowledge gathered from the Circular biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire report.

1. Regional Networks & Landscapes Of Production

The report considers the site-specific landscape benefits that biobased materials can provide; it suggests that best-management practices can be employed on farms or productive lands to improve biodiversity and produce in a way that is mutually beneficial for the crop/biobased crop and the landscape. Despite this notion, the report does not mention Landscape Architects or Planners within the proclaimed systems-based approach. We have explored a more holistic approach to regional landscapes of production, with an emphasis on establishing a robust green infrastructure network that considers individual productive landscapes as part of the regional matrix. Scaling up and adopting a regional landscape perspective and planning policy lens has ensured an understanding of how site-specific interventions contribute broadly to regional landscape health. This is the most critical gap in the report.

2. Transitioning From Extractive Industries To Biobased

The report identifies many opportunities associated with scaling the biobased material industry; however, it does not address the implications this could have on existing extractive industries. In the case of the East Midlands specifically, the region is highly industrialised, and many communities are economically reliant on quarries, mines, and other industries. Therefore, we considered the potential implications of scaling biobased industries, which could result in the downscaling of extractive industries. Our project will target upskilling opportunities for the workforce and consider policy implications associated with the closure of industrialised sites in relation to the regional landscape network.

3. Mobilising and Scaling the Biobased Industry

The report successfully identifies the need for a strong network of producers, manufacturers, and installers, and emphasises the need for funding. Who is willing to invest, and what is the recommended funding strategy? Further developing the network conceptualised by Material Cultures and Arup, we propose a tangible framework for mobilising the biobased

industry through Public-Common partnerships embedded within a community wealthbuilding framework. The CC project aligns directly with MC in intent; however, it leverages the BGS, a permanent government institution, as a springboard for funding upskilling, prototyping, research, and development, innovation and technologies, and optimising their network. The CC project proposes a rigorous policy framework to identify anchor institutions, stakeholders and actors, roles, and responsibilities to fund, facilitate, and support the uptake of biobased materials at all stages. Not only will the project provide a supply chain analysis, but it will also identify who, what, where, and how the individuals and organisations involved contribute to and benefit from participating. This builds on the work of MC by prototyping examples of funding streams and the roles councils, local governments, and UK institutions play.

4. Policy & Procurement

We focus on the application of biobased materials in institutional scale projects. Therefore, these projects follow a standardised tendering process. Acknowledging that many biobased contractors are small, privately owned businesses at this stage, it would be critical to reform the UKRI tendering process to divide tenders into smaller contracts –enabling smaller-scale businesses to access the tendered projects from the BGS. The demonstrate how biobased materials can be integrated in conventional project frameworks, we have devised an overlay for the RIBA – Plan of Work.

5. Insurance

The report identifies three key insurance scenarios that restrict the use of biobased materials including Professional Indemnity Insurance that protects design professionals, such as architects and their clients on design projects. The availability of insurance for using biobased materials is essential for designers to specify and design with these materials. Moreover, insurance costs can be prohibitive for buildings constructed with biobased materials. Therefore, support for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in accessing funding for testing and compliance can help address this challenge. Insurance remains an gap for ensuring scalability of biobased industries.

SUPPLY CHAIN NETWORK

Devising a cradle to cradle approach for material procurement

According to the Doughnut Economics model by Raworth, social well-being and environmental sustainability are highly interdependent.53 Therefore, our approach to meeting social and economic needs including materials for construction, accounts for the impacts on environmental systems that sustain us. To implement this in practice, followed a Cradle-to- Cradle approach, mirroring the works of the CbC report. A Cradle-to-Cradle or Whole Life-Cycle approach to building materials considers, “energy, material and information flows at each of its life-cycle phases, from initial material extraction to final dismantling”.54

To spatialise the potential supply chain network for the BGS, we mapped the existing cereal croplands, the existing seaweed farms nearby to the region, and the shellfish farms with potential for expanding to farm seaweed. In the short-term, seaweed farms could supply fertilisers to produce cereals, of which straw is a by-product. Also identified on the map are suppliers, manufacturers, and contractors with existing biobased construction knowledge. This map provides foundational understandings of how and from where these materials could be procured.

53 Hill-Hansen, Dani, Guldager Kasper Jensen, and Kate Raworth. Doughnut for Urban Development: A Manual. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press, 2023.

54 United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosystems + Architecture, Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future (2023), 11, https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/43293

map.16 SUPPLY CHAIN MAP FOR BGS

BGS

shellfish

BGS RETROFIT

Visualising the BGS biobased retrofitting project

Through this supply chain strategy, BGS can procure locally produced biobased materials such as straw, seaweed, shellfish and timber for its retrofitting. Based on the analysis in the previous section, the BGS campus faces several challenges, including smaller labs, inadequate insulation, limited natural light, and a lack of a cohesive outdoor strategy, as highlighted in fig 3.5. To address these issues, we propose an integrated retrofitting strategy that combines indoor and outdoor enhancements.

We propose a new landscape design for the courtyard to create green spaces that encourage communal activities, social interaction, and outdoor working. The planting is strategic to allow light to reach indoor spaces while maintaining a structured balance of groundcover, shrubs, and trees. This proposal supports local biodiversity, including pollination, and incorporates both evergreen and deciduous trees to provide shade during summer and filtered light in winter.

Recycled materials are used in pathways, combined with shellfish-based materials, to align with circular economy principles while improving rainwater permeability. To enhance the connection between the indoors and the courtyard, we recommend increasing façade openings to bring in more natural light and create stronger visual and physical links with the outdoor area.

Internally, we propose removing select internal walls to create open-plan workspaces and larger labs where feasible, improving flexibility and functionality. The retrofitting strategy incorporates natural, biobased materials that balance performance with a natural aesthetic: Straw-based insulation, finished with a mix of oyster and mussel shells, clay, and lime, is proposed to improve thermal efficiency and Seaweed-based acoustic panels are proposed in labs to curb noise and enhance sound control. The natural texture and colours of these materials support in a more conducive work environment for comfort and efficiency.

ill 3.4 Interior view of BGS labs retrofitted with straw insulation and kelpacoustic panelsby Alejandra Iturrizaga

ill 3.6 Improving the interior exterior connection through retrofitting by Alejandra Iturrizaga

ill 3.5 Existing conditions at BGS by Alejandra Iturrizaga

REFLECTIONS

From prototyping the BGS retrofit, it is evident that biobased materials are promising replacements for conventional building materials. However, scaling the biobased industry under a business-as-usual model risks replicating harmful practices that damage ecosystems and perpetuate socioeconomic inequalities. For instance, monoculture farming of straw has resulted in an abundant availability of the material, but this has also led to soil infertility and damaged ecosystems. Similarly, unmanaged expansion of seaweed farming could lead to overproduction or harm vulnerable ecosystems. Furthermore, without deliberate measures, profits from biobased industries could concentrate in the hands of large corporations, leaving industrialised communities vulnerable to economic displacement. The push for a Net Zero agenda could inadvertently exploit land, resources, and labour while failing to address underlying systematic issues.

As Naomi Millner and Patrick Bresnihan argue, the dominant net zero and carbon metrics for quantifying climate impacts actually “…keep us from addressing the climate crisis”.55 Focusing narrowly on carbon calculations dismisses the land, labour and ownership structures that exist within material supply chains.

Therefore, we propose that the biobased industry adopt an anti-capitalist model for procuring materials to deliver broader socio-economic and environmental benefits. Our project departs from mere decarbonisation targets to address three critical questions:

1. How are biobased materials produced?

The LANDSCAPE section devises strategies for biobased production that prioritises the quality and health of landscapes. Production methods must not only avoid harm but actively contribute to biodiversity restoration and ecological balance.

2. Who benefits from the production of biobased materials?

In the OWNERSHIP section, we counter the prevailing ownership structures within the supply chain by proposing a Public-Common Partnership model. This strategy ensures that profits and benefits are distributed equitably, remaining within local communities through democratic and inclusive frameworks.

3. Who will produce biobased materials?

This section addresses the tools, instruments and policies needed to enable a just transition for workers currently employed in quarrying and mining industries. A shift in the construction industry must prioritise fair labour practices and support industrialised communities in adapting new opportunities.

53 Naomi Millner and Patrick Bresnihan, All We Want Is the Earth: Land, Labour and Movements Beyond Environmentalism (London: Pluto Press, 2023: 131.

ill 3.7 Movement of materials and labour through the East Midlands landscape

BIBLIOGRAPHY

References for all biobased material facts and information

Clay

Clive Mitchell and Chloe Wrighton, “Mineral Planning Factsheet : Brick Clay,” NERC Open Research Archive, April 14, 2022, https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/ eprint/532490/.

Hemp

Alex Bragg and Joe Lloy, “Hemp Cultivation in the UK,” Savills Research, 2020, https://www.savills.co.uk/ landing-pages/landscope/HempSpotlight.pdf.

Mycelium

Alaneme, Kenneth Kanayo, et al. “Mycelium-Based Composites: A Review of Their Bio-Fabrication Procedures, Material Properties, and Potential for Green Building and Construction Applications.” Construction and Building Materials 344 (2022): 128200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2022.128200.

Caroline Chevallier, Martina Eandi, and Samuel Kalika, “Producing Mycelium Insulation,” Critical Concrete, March 29, 2021, https://criticalconcrete.com/ producing-mycelium-insulation/.

“Mycelium Insulation,” UKGBC, April 25, 2024, https:// ukgbc.org/resources/mycelium-insulation/.

Timber

“ 25-Year Forecast of  Softwood Timber Availability  (2022): NFI Forecast Report,” February 7, 2022, Forest Research, https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/2022/07/ FR_NFI_25Year_Forecast_Of_Softwood_Timber_ availabilty_2022.pdf.

Straw

“Hay and Straw Prices,” AHDB, 2024, https://ahdb.org.uk/ dairy/hay-and-straw-prices.

“Insight into UK Wheat Crop as Harvest Nears Close: Grain Market Daily,” AHDB, September 10, 2021, https://ahdb. org.uk/news/insight-into-uk-wheat-crop-as-harvestnears-close-grain-market-daily.

Lesiecki, M., and P. Kawalerczyk. “Properties of Lightweight Insulating Boards Produced from Triticale Straw Particles.” Materials 16, no. 15 (2023): 5272. https://doi. org/10.3390/ma16155272.

Zhou, Yaping, Abdelkrim Trabelsi, and Mohamed El Mankibi. “A Review on the Properties of Straw Insulation for Buildings.” ScienceDirect. Accessed January 8, 2025. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S1110016823008979

Seaweed

“Seaweedology,” Aston University, July 14, 2021, https:// www.aston.ac.uk/research/eps/ebri/case-studies/ seaweedology.

“Initiative Aims to Take UK Seaweed Sector to the next Level,” The Fish Site, November 30, 2023, https:// thefishsite.com/articles/initiative-aims-to-take-ukseaweed-sector-to-the-next-level.

Estridge, Paddy, and Duncan Smallman. “Co-Locating Seaweed Farming alongside Offshore Wind.” SeaGen, October 2022. https://www.seagen.io/education/ colocating-seaweed-farm-with-offshore-wind.html.

Bouasria, Manal, Yassine El Mendili, Mohammed-Hichem Benzaama, Valérie Pralong, Jean-François Bardeau, and Franck Hennequart. “Valorisation of Stranded Laminaria Digitata Seaweed as an Insulating Earth Material.” Journal of Building Engineering 67 (2023): 105919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.105919.

“About Hemp - British Hemp Alliance,” October 19, 2015. https://britishhempalliance.co.uk/about-hemp/.

“Four Big Questions Every Prefab Straw Panel Manufacturer Answers Every Day.” Passive House Accelerator Accessed January 4, 2025. https:// passivehouseaccelerator.com/articles/four-bigquestions-every-prefab-straw-panel-manufactureanswers-every-day

Architizer. “Hy-Fi.” Accessed January, 2024. https:// architizer.com/projects/hy-fi/

Bennett, Julia, John Butler, Barbara Jones, and Eileen Sutherland. Straw Construction in the UK: Technical Guide. 1st ed. School of Natural Building, January 31, 2022. Accessed January 4, 2025. https:// schoolofnaturalbuilding.co.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2022/03/Technical-Guide-UK-Feb-2022-1.pdf

Bryskina, Katya, and Nataly Nemkova. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman, May 9, 2024.

Capuzzo, Elisa, and Isla MacMillan. Review of Species and Farming Methods, Seaweed in East Anglia (SEA) Project February 2024.

Corrigan, S., Brown, A. R., Tyler, C. R., Wilding, C., Daniels, C., Ashton, I. G. C., & Smale, D. A. Development and Diversity of Epibiont Assemblages on Cultivated Sugar Kelp (Saccharina latissima) in Relation to Farming Schedules and Harvesting Techniques. 2023 Life 2023, 13(1), 209. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13010209

Dams, Thérèse, et al. “Crossing Boundaries Conference 2021 Full Paper.” Paper presented at the Crossing Boundaries Conference, University of Bath, 2021. East Yorkshire Hemp. “Home.” Accessed February 25, 2024. https://eastyorkshirehemp.co.uk/

Edmunds, Cypren. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman. May 20, 2024.

Fanshawe, Sam. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman. June 6, 2024.

Material Cultures. Material Reform. London: Material Cultures, 2022.

Forest Research. “General Biomass Information.” Forest Research: Forestry and Land Scotland. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/ tools-and-resources/fthr/biomass-energy-resources/ general-biomass-information/

Hassan, Ahmed M. Seddik, Ahmed Abdeen, Ayman S. Mohamed, and Bahaa Elboshy. “Thermal Performance Analysis of Clay Brick Mixed with Sludge and Agriculture Waste.” Construction and Building Materials 344 (2022): 128267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. conbuildmat.2022.128267

Hethel Innovation Ltd., University of East Anglia, and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science. A Roadmap for the Seaweed Economy in Norfolk & the East of England. Norfolk, 2024.

Home Office. “Industrial Hemp Licensing: Factsheet.” Last updated December 18, 2024. https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/industrial-hemp-licensingguidance/industrial-hemp-licensing-factsheet

Home Office. “Hemp Licensing Changes Will Help Grow UK Economy.” Last modified April 9, 2024. https://www. gov.uk/government/news/hemp-licensing-changeswill-help-grow-uk-economy

Material Cultures, Circular Biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire. Energy Hub / York & North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, 2021, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures.org/ cb-construction/

Material Cultures. 2024 Building Skills Report. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://materialcultures.org/2024building-skills-report/ Malik, Cíaran. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra

Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman. May 2, 2024.

Millner, Naomi, and Patrick Bresnihan. All We Want Is the Earth: Land, Labour and Movements Beyond Environmentalism. London: Pluto Press, 2023.

Mykor. Accessed January, 2024. https://www.mykor.co.uk/ Mykofoam Technical Data Sheet. Accessed Januray, 2024. https://www.firstplanit.com/doc_images/ brochure_attachment/technical_ documents_9847309.pdf

Mykor. “Mycelium Materials: Fantastic Fungal Innovations – Will Fungal Composites Take Over the World?” Accessed January, 2024. https://www.mykor.co.uk/ news/mycelium-materials-fantastic-fungalinnovations-will-fungal-composites-take-over-theworld

Natural Building Store. “Hemp Shiv - HempBuild Building Shiv (UK Grown).” Accessed February 25, 2024. https:// naturalbuildingstore.com/shop/hemp-shiv-hempbuildbuilding-shiv-uk-grown/

Nissen, Bradley. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman. May 30, 2024.

Larsen, Kathryn. Email message to author, March 1, 2024. López-Contreras, Ana M., Paulina Núñez, M.P. Gurrola, Rigoberto Rosas-Luis, and 6 others. “Sargassum in Mexico: From Environmental Problem to Valuable Resource.” Technical Report, August 2022. https://doi. org/10.18174/574423

Studio Kathryn Larsen. Accessed January 5, 2025. https:// kathrynlarsen.com/

Reijnder, Rianne. Sealutions: Looking at Seaweed-Based Sustainable Building Materials in the Netherlands Master’s thesis, TU Delft, 2022.

UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, Agricultural Facts: East Midland Region, accessed January 4, 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/ statistics/agricultural-facts-england-regional-profiles/ agricultural-facts-east-midland-region

UK Hempcrete. Accessed February 25, 2024. https://www. ukhempcrete.com/

UK Green Building Council. “Mycelium Insulation.” Accessed Januray, 2024. https://ukgbc.org/resources/ mycelium-insulation/

UK Hemp Ltd. “Interested in Farming Industrial Hemp in the UK?” Accessed February 25, 2024. https://ukhempltd. co.uk/pages/interested-in-farming-industrial-hemp-inthe-uk

United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosystems + Architecture. Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future. 2023. https:// wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/43293

Vincent, A., Stanley, A., and Ring, J. Hidden Champion of the Ocean: Seaweed as a Growth Engine for a Sustainable European Future. Seaweed for Europe, 2020.

Vitality CBD. “Where Is Hemp and Cannabis Grown?” Accessed February 25, 2024. https://vitalitycbd.co.uk/ pages/where-is-hemp-and-cannabis-grown Hemp Club Project. “Hemp Map.” Accessed February 25, 2024. https://hempclubproject.com/map/map.html

Wharf, Allie. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, Clara Olóriz Sanjuán, and Emily Bowerman. February 23, 2024.

World Bank Group. Global Seaweed - New and Emerging Markets. Report 2023. Commissioned and published by the World Bank Group.

Yang, Libin, Daekwon Park, and Zhao Qin. “Material Function of Mycelium-Based Bio-Composite: A Review.” Frontiers in Materials 8 (September 30, 2021): 737377. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2021.737377

LANDSCAPE

Stone and aggregate quarrying, agriculture intensification, marine extraction and anthropogenic pressures on marine ecosystems have fragmented landscapes and habitats, resulting in biodiversity loss.1 Currently, 72% of the UK’s land area is managed for agriculture and about one quarter is used for cereal crops. 2 Agriculture has had the greatest impact to biodiversity change. Fields have been expanded and simplified through the removal of hedgerows and ditches, while river margins have been drained to increase arable land. Fertiliser use, machinery advancements, and enriched pastures have transformed the landscape, creating uniform, dense grasslands with limited plant diversity and reduced habits for insects and birds. Similarly, pressures from climate change, overfishing, vessel traffic, and pollution have degraded the quality of the marine environment along the coast. If biobased material production were to be undertaken following conventional production methods, it could further compromise soil health, threaten vulnerable marine ecosystems, and introduce unforeseen impacts from scaling nascent aquaculture industries.

How can raw materials for biobased construction be produced in a way that enhances the resilience of both the sites of production and the regional ecosystem?

UK has committed to protecting and conserving a minimum of 30% of land and sea for biodiversity by 2030, known as 30x30.3 This includes protecting 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat by 2042 and improve species in decline or at risk of extinction.4

Acknowledging the broader UK ecological goals, we have addressed the ways raw materials - specifically straw, sea kelp and shellfish - can be sustainably farmed to improve ecological conditions in productive

1 National Biodiversity Network, State of Nature 2019: UK Full Report (September 2019), 19, https://nbn.org.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2019/09/State-of-Nature-2019-UKfull-report.pdf

2 National Biodiversity Network, State of Nature 2019, 19.

3 UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, 30by30 on Land in England: Confirmed Criteria and Next Steps, last modified January 16, 2023, https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/criteria-for-30by30-on-land-inengland/30by30-on-land-in-england-confirmed-criteriaand-next-steps

4 HM Government, Environmental Improvement Plan 2023 (July 2023), 31, https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/media/64a6d9c1c531eb000c64fffa/environmentalimprovement-plan-2023.pdf

landscapes. Moreover, we have demonstrated the ways single and multi-farm scale improvements can benefit the regional landscapes to reduce fragmentation, strengthen habitat quality and enhance circulation for species. Strategies include wind and riparian buffers, hedgerows, silvicultural practices and multi-trophic aquaculture alongside marine rewilding. These efforts will be discussed in depth in this chapter.

We have identified potential methods for the sustainable production of biobased materials; however, a critical question persists: how can we initiate and scale these methods? Who are the contributing stakeholders, what collaborations are required to catalyse the industry, and who will assume responsibility?

In addition to the environmental benefits, we have also considered the ways in which these methods are conceived and governed.

Referencing the works of Max Ajl, in A People’s Green New Deal, we critique the mainstream environmental and conservation efforts under capitalism, arguing that they are inherently constrained by the logic of profit and marketdriven mechanisms. We contend that they often prioritise corporate interests, maintain global inequalities, and fail to address the systemic causes of environmental degradation, particularly capitalism itself.5 Therefore, we are proposing a phased approach to biobased prototyping and transitioning conventional monoculture farms to agroecology. Agroecology is defined as “a global practice, vision and collective movement that aims to deliver security for everyone, local economic resilience, and the restoration of living systems through networks of securely housed landworkers who are valued, respected and appropriately rewarded”.6 Agroecological systems offer potential for improved ecological conditions on farms, based on a community-centred approach to land management, material production, and local economic benefits. This chapter outlines our phasing strategy to mobilise the biobased industry within the East Midlands bioregion, while contributing to landscape and community regeneration.

5 Max Ajl, A People’s Green New Deal (Verso, 2021).

6 Land Workers’ Alliance, Agroecology and Planning Reform (Land Workers’ Alliance, October 2018), https:// landworkersalliance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ Agroecology-and-Planning-Reform-1-1.pdf

LANDSCAPES OF EAST MIDLANDS

Documenting the varied habitats across the region

The East Midlands is characterised by diverse landscapes ranging from urban centres such as Nottingham, Leicester and Derby, productive croplands, pasturelands, limestone and chalk hills, ancient woodlands, rolling farmland dotted with rural villages, remote lowland heaths, and coastal stretches. The region serves as a transition zone between the flat agricultural plains of eastern England and the more varied upland landscapes to the west.7

Biodiversity has declined in the East Midlands for the past 200 years, to the lowest level for any English region.8 Despite losses, areas of nationally important biodiversity do remain, including woodland sites (Rockingham Forest, Leighfield Forest, Bardney Limewoods); upland areas (South Pennines Moors, Charnwood); heathland (The Coversands and Sherwood); grassland (the White Peak Carboniferous Limestone grasslands, the coastal grazing marshes and the Lincolnshire and Rutland Limestone) as well as Lincolnshire’s internationally important coastal habitats.9 It is home to two nationally designated landscapes: the Peak District National Park and the Lincolnshire Wolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which together account for 9% of its 15,624 km2 area.10 These sites provide important tourism assets and other vital services, such as carbon storage and clean water from peat bogs, or wave energy dispersion from saltmarsh and mudflats.

The Wash is the second biggest bay in the UK containing the largest area of saltmarsh and second largest expanse of mud and sandflats. It is home to the largest colony of common seals– about 90% of the English population, 11 It is also the largest estuarine system in the UK, measuring around 62,000 ha (620 km2) and is vital bird habitat.12 In the 1980s The Wash had the most productive mussel and cockle beds in the UK (70% of UK market).13 However, overfishing caused stocks of cockles and

7 Natural England, State of the Natural Environment in the East Midlands (Natural England, 2009), 2.

8 Government Office for the East Midlands, East Midlands Regional Plan (Nottingham: Government Office for the East Midlands, 2009).

9 Natural England, State of the Natural Environment in the East Midlands, 7.

10 Government Office for the East Midlands, East Midlands Regional Plan

11 Natural England, State of the Natural Environment in the East Midlands, 9.

12 RSPB. (2022). Defending the Wash. Retrieved January 2, 2025, from https://www.rspb.org.uk/helping-nature/ what-we-do/influence-government-and-business/ casework/defending-the-wash

13 Natural England, State of the Natural Environment in the East Midlands, 21.

mussels to collapse in the 1990s, impacting both birds and the fishing industry.14 The cockle fishery was closed in 1997, and mussel harvesting from natural beds remained low between 1990s.15 Consequently, Natural England classified nearly 15,000 ha of The Wash SSSI as in unfavourable declining condition.16

We have identified ten of the principal landscapes in the region. These will all need to be considered holistically in terms of how they are farmed, managed, governed, improved or regenerated. These include bogs & peatlands and woodlands; factories and quarries; urban areas and cropland; pasturelands; salt marshes, mudflats and inter-tidal zones. We have identified the key indicator species within each of the landscapes, their typical ranges, and their conservation and protection status according to the United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP).17 An indicator species is an organism whose presence, absence, or abundance reflects specific environmental conditions, serving as a measure of the health of an ecosystem.18 We have tailored the landscape interventions within the farms to support habitats and species circulation for all species, with particular emphasis on the requirements for indicator species.

To tailor our interventions to the East Midlands context, we have aligned our proposal with the works of Economist Molly Scott Cato who proposes a bioregional approach to regional economies, one that aligns with natural environmental systems rather than mere administrative boundaries. The East Midlands Bioregion has been delineated according to watersheds, climate patterns, and biodiversity to acknowledge the interconnectedness of ecosystems and communities.19 For example, we acknowledge that species and habitats reach beyond the administrative boundaries, and the impacts of human activities are also far reaching. Therefore, our proposal seeks to align biobased material production activities with the region’s inherent natural resources and ecological functions to promote sustainability and resilience.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid.

17 UK Biodiversity Steering Group, Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan (London: HMSO, 1994).

18 Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia, “Indicator Species,” Encyclopaedia Britannica, accessed January 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/indicatorspecies

19 Cato, Molly Scott. The Bioregional Economy: Land, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. New York: Routledge, 2013.

LEGEND FOR INDICATOR SPECIES

Priority Rating (UK BAP rankings) High, Moderate, Low

Range (full = 10km)

URBAN

Hedgehog

English Oak Quercus robur

Grass Snake Natrix helvetica

Common Lizard Zootoca vivipara

Common Knapweed Centaurea nigra

Brown Hare Lepus europaeus

Grey Partridge Perdix perdix

Poppy Papaver rhoeas

Lesser Spotted Woodpecker Dryobates minor

Common Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus

Bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta

Marsh Fritillary Butterfly Euphydryas aurinia Skylark Alauda arvensis

Common Bird’s-foot-trefoil Lotus corniculatus

BOG MUDFLAT

Large Heath Butterfly Coenonympha tullia

Bog Bush-cricket Metrioptera brachyptera

Sphagnum Mosses Sphagnum spp.

MARSHLAND

INTERTIDAL

Shore Crab Carcinus maenas

Common Periwinkle Littorina littorea

Bladderwrack Fucus vesiculosus

Water Vole Arvicola amphibius

Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus

Reed Canary Grass Phalaris arundinacea

PHASING THE NETWORK OF PRODUCTION

Phasing Methodology and Phase 0

We have devised a phased approach for mobilising the biobased industry. The sites marked with the grey plus symbol on the adjacent map indicate the sites selected for biobased material prototyping. Prototyping sites serve as testing grounds for new materials, biobased construction techniques, kelp fertilisers and more. The sites were selected according to landscape, ownership and administrative criteria to follow an agroecological approach – necessitating the engagement of community interests within the biobased supply chain. Through this approach, prototype sites serve as an opportunity for awareness building, upskilling, and education.

Firstly, to prototype biobased material production and construction, land and facilities are required. Therefore, community allotments, government-owned lands, and brownfields within 2km of a Natural England designated Priority Habitat 20 and within in areas of high unemployment 21 and unskilled manual workers22 could engage in prototyping biobased materials, while upskilling local labour. Similarly, existing shellfish farms could undertake seaweed prototyping to diversify their aquaculture production. Labour with specialised knowledge of biobased materials is essential to mobilising the biobased industry.

The chosen sites provide opportunities to build awareness of biobased industries and have the greatest impact on underserved communities in terms of investment and job creation. Refer to the Cultivating Commons PCP Handbook on page 115 for more information regarding the acquisition of lands and prototype initiatives.

Once multiple prototype sites are operating,

20 Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) Natural England Open Data Publication. Defra group ArcGIS Online organisation. Last modified November 2022. https://data.gov.uk/dataset/priority-habitats-inventoryengland.

21 Office for National Statistics (ONS), Census 2011: Economic Activity (Table QS601UK), accessed 1 January 2025, persons, United Kingdom, output area and above, last updated 13 June 2014, http://www.ons.gov.uk/census

22 Office for National Statistics (ONS), Census 2011: Social Grade (Table QS611UK), accessed 1 January 2025, persons, United Kingdom, output area and above, last updated 13 June 2014, http://www.ons.gov.uk/census

awareness builds, and a skilled workforce emerges, we envision existing cereal farms to transition to agroecological straw production. Farms located within 10km of prototyping sites and within 2km of a Natural England designated priority habitat would be engaged first.

The UK government has several grant schemes available to support biodiversity enhancement goals including the Countryside Stewardship scheme to encourage 65 to 80% of landowners and land workers to adopt nature friendly farming on at least 10-15% of their land by 2030. 23 Other Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMs) or Sustainable Farming Incentives (SFIs) could support land workers in actioning sustainable farming practices.

Our proposal explores opportunities to leverage existing grant programs to incentivise private land workers to transition to agroecological production. For ease of comparison of the interaction of varied land uses and habitats, we converted the UKCEH Land Cover Maps 24 and Priority Habitats Inventory (England)25 into a 1km x 1km grid. This resolution was desirable for identifying locations and areas for biobased production without being overly prescriptive about the exact farm locations at a regional scale. These maps feature overlays that represent key decisions for the selection of the farms, preserving their original shape for clarity. Beneath these overlays, the map illustrates the impacts of decision-making, with only those effects presented as the grided format.

Similarly, we have mapped existing aquaculture production sites along the coast and speculated that opportunities to diversify

23 HM Government, Environmental Improvement Plan 2023

24 R.D. Morton, C.G. Marston, A.W. O’Neil, and C.S. Rowland, Land Cover Map 2023 (land parcels, GB) (2024; NERC EDS Environmental Information Data Centre), https://doi.org/10.5285/50b344eb-8343-423b-8b2f0e9800e34bbd

25 Natural England, Priority Habitats Inventory (England) (Natural England Open Data Publication, last updated December 6, 2022), https://data.gov.uk/dataset/ priority-habitats-inventory-england.

production and partake in kelp farming could expand their business. The light blue crosses indicate farms that could potentially engage in the biobased industry due to their existing infrastructure, equipment, facilities, expertise in aquaculture, and network. Refer to the following pages for more detailed information on scaling existing aquaculture farms.

Following the evolution of the prototype sites and initial farming sites, we explored how the straw farms could emerge within the region more broadly if located within other areas with under skilled workers and within proximity to priority habitats at large. Simultaneously, we identified potential locations for expanding kelp farming based on a variety of economic and environmental factors further outlined in the coming chapter.

Lastly, we conducted a regional mosaic analysis to understand how the distribution of enhanced agroecological production sites could contribute to the overall structure and function of ecosystems within the broader region. This strategy was founded on the premise that sustainable agriculture sites have a role to play in regenerating and reducing fragmentation. Landscape fragmentation is a process where large, continuous habitats or ecosystems are broken up into smaller, isolated patches, often due to human activities such as agriculture, urban development, and infrastructure expansion. This fragmentation can lead to a range of environmental problems, including biodiversity loss and reduced genetic variability amongst species in a particular area, edge effect that exposes species to extreme conditions and predation, impacts to water quality and ultimately vulnerability to climate change. Our proposal addresses equally the locations of sites and farms to maximise funding and economic community benefits, whilst considering how site improvements contribute to the bioregion.

Nottingham

East Midlands Bioregion

Prototyping sites are located on underutilised council owned lands or council farms. So they become testing grounds for testing joineries and wall assemblies, testing farming methods and soil samples. They provide space and infrastructure for community engagement and upskilling programmes, becoming crucial in mobilising the biobased construction industry.

testing wall assemblies testing joineries tools and material storage

facilities built with biobased materials

soil sampling testing farming methods and species

Phase 1

Engaging existing farmers to transition to agroecological straw production

As prototype sites emerge and awareness buildings regarding the biobased industry, farms within 10km of prototyping sites, within 5km from areas with underskilled workers on sites and within 2km of Natural England designated priority habitats could be incentivised to transition from monoculture cereal production to agroecological straw farming.

STEP 3 5km from areas with underskilled workers (DE zone)

STEP 1 10km from prototyping sites

STEP 2 2km from Natural England designated Priority H abitats

Phase 2

Opportunities for regenerating and scaling existing industry

As awareness builds, labourforce competencies increase, and further research and development into biobased material certifications occur, the strategy moves to Phase 2. As more farms begin to produce construction grade straw, the network can expand to areas beyond prototyping sites and target under-skilled workers in the region more broadly. Moreover, Seaweed prototype sites could be licenced to expand, or farms could be paired with new windfarms.

STEP 2 5km from all areas with underskilled workers (DE zone)

STEP 1 2km from Natural England designated Priority H abitats

Phase 3

Taking up biobased production in the region at large

Once farms located within high unemployment with underskilled workers participate, we propose that farms in the broader region located within 2km of a priority habitat engage in agroecological production of straw. It is assumed that farmer-farmer awareness will build regarding the benefits of agroecological practices and that would accelerate the undertake of sustainable cereal production. Similarly, as kelp farms become more viable and the benefits or risks to local marine habitats are better studied, it is assumed that kelp farm licensing would be more accessible, and farms would expand along the coast.

2km from Natural England designated Priority H abitats

NETWORK OF PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPES

Designing a regional network for biobased production

The distribution of farms and prototype sites across the region, when viewed in isolation, result in a series of patches of farms and sites that could employ site-scale environmental improvement strategies such as wind buffers, riparian buffers, alley cropping and others to be further discussed in the coming pages. Similarly, marine habitats have been impacted by trawling, pollution, eutrophication and overfishing, therefore, sustainably farmed kelp and aquaculture could improve habitats and potentially restore vulnerable species. Although site-scale interventions are promising for improving the individual sites, we recognise that the individual farms play a role within the broader network for the circulation of species within the mosaic.

The landscape mosaic consists of the matrix (dominant landscape type), patches (individual landscape elements embedded in the matrix, such as hedges, settlements, or woods), and corridors (linear, connecting elements, such as river networks). 26 To study farm distributions within the regional mosaic, we have applied a 10km radius from phase 1 and 2 sites to provide a discernible boundary for the area of influence within the first two phases of the strategy. The landcovers and farms are shown within the 10km offset; 10km represents the average maximum habitat range for indicator species. These species could set a benchmark for the health of a particular farms and then could be evaluated upon converting conventional agriculture plots to agroecological production to see whether biodiversity or species populations have rose. Similarly, the restoration of marine species or shore birds could indicate the success of sustainable kelp and aquaculture farming.

Based on conversations with Allie Wharf, Sam Fanshawe and other marine experts, we conducted a multifactor analysis of

bathymetry, wave intensity, turbidity, fishing vessel traffic, proximity to ports, and Marine Protected Areas. 27 We were also informed that co-location of kelp farms alongside proposed windfarms may present a viable option for certifying kelp farms more easily. 28 Based on these variables and information gathered from desktop studies, we devised a strategy to facilitate certification of kelp farms, mitigate conventional monoculture production, and improve marine conditions by pairing of marine habitat restoration alongside the farms. The marine map demonstrates the feasibility of siting restoration efforts such as eelgrass (Zostera sp.), kelp (Saccharina latissima, Laminaria hyperborea), and mollusks (Ostrea edulis, M. modiolus) according to littoral zone (depth), substrate conditions, turbidity and historic species locations. 29 By cross analysing these conditions, we determined the best location for farms to be off the coast of Skegness with restoration efforts best occurring within the littoral zone further towards shore, or in the nearby bay; historic species records indicate the bay to be most suitable for restoration, however, according to present-day-conditions, there are other shoreline areas with similar substrates for instating seagrass meadows.

27 Imogen Shipperlee, A Roadmap for Driving the Seaweed Economy in the East of England, Seaweed in East Anglia, February 21, 2024, accessed January 1, 2025, https://hethelinnovation.com/wp-content/ uploads/2024/02/Roadmap-for-the-Seaweed-Economyin-Norfolk-and-the-East-of-England.pdf. The research and engagement work for the SEA Project was delivered by Hethel Innovation Ltd. (Rikke Nagell-Kleven (Project Manager) and Imogen Shipperlee), University of East Anglia (Colette Matthewman, Tomás Harrington, Gill Malin, and Sheng Qi), and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Elisa Capuzzo, Richard Heal, and Isla MacMillan).

28 Imogen Shipperlee, “Mapping the Opportunity for Co-location,” Seaweed in East Anglia, 6 February 2024, research conducted by Dr. Richard Heal, Senior Environmental Spatial Analyst, and Dr. Elisa Capuzzo, Senior Marine Ecosystem Scientist, The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science.

29 C.L.E. Johnson et al., Marine Restoration Potential (MaRePo), report for Natural England and The Crown Estate, published 12 September 2023, accessed 1 January 2025; Sam Fanshawe, interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Emily Bowerman, and Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, June 6, 2024.

26 Richard T. T. Forman, Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 4.

map.23

map.22 PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPE NETWORK

MOSAIC SIMULATIONS

Analysing multi-farm interventions within Nottinghamshire

The Nottinghamshire scale map provides a more detailed exploration of the distribution of farms and their function within the landscape mosaic.30 We converted the Nottinghamshire landcover and habitat layers into 250m x 250m grids to understand the distribution of farms within the mosaic at a greater resolution. On the following spread, we have simulated mosaic areas 5km x 5km to understand the influence improved farming practices have on ecological resiliency, habitat connectivity and species circulation. The diagrams on the following spread illustrate the potential interventions that could be implemented at a multi-farm scale to facilitate varied patterns for species habitat and circulation within the broader mosaic. The purpose of these simulations is to emphasis the influence single or multi-farm interventions can have on transforming the overall quality of the regional landscape when executed in accordance with shared environmental goals. Coordinating farming strategies at a multi-farm and mosaic scale, also foreshadows grant opportunities for land workers within a shared area.

East

Nottinghamshire

30 Forman, Land Mosaics, 4.

map.24

MOSAIC

BARTON IN FABIS

Sititng agroecological straw farms in Rushcliffe

agroecological farm floodplain stream woodland waterbody

Barton in Fabis is a small community of 258 residents in the district of Rushcliffe in Nottingham.31 Farms surrounding the area are located along the River Trent and are considered a priority habitat. However, the typical agrarian landscapes of East Midlands as observed during our recent site visit are characterised by monoculture farming practices with sparse wind buffers. This area, located on the outskirts of Clifton in Barton-in-Fabis along Fairham Brook, approximately 7 km from the BGS, features isolated ecological parcels. These parcels present opportunities for enhancement and connectivity within the ecological network. Integrating agroecological farming practices, particularly straw cultivation, could strengthen these connections and promote a more cohesive and resilient landscape.

Therefore, to improve biodiversity and soil health we propose a transition to agroecological practices including wildflower margins, intercropping, alley cropping, and agroforestry including silvopastures,32 shelterbelts,33 hedgerows and riparian buffer planting. Another strategy could

31 Barton-in-Fabis, “Home,” Barton-in-Fabis Parish Council, accessed January 1, 2025, https://bartoninfabis.org.uk/

32 Agroforestry Research Trust, “Silvoarable Systems,” accessed January 3, 2025, https://www.agroforestry.co.uk/ about-agroforestry/silvoarable

33 Woodland Trust, “Agroforestry Benefits: Farming, Nature, and Climate,” accessed January 3, 2025, https://www. woodlandtrust.org.uk/plant-trees/agroforestry-benefits.

Barton in Fabis and Thrumpton Housing Needs Survey 2020

This report was referenced for community demographic and housing availability information. Intensifying labour demands for agroecological farm production needs to consider the existing strain on the local authorities and available infrastructure, particularly housing.

East Midlands Bioregion

Clifton outskirts

fig 4.2 (a,b) Rushcliffe agrarian landscapes. Photo by Emily Bowerman

fig 4.3 Barton in Fabis and Thrumpton Housing

map.25 BARTON IN FABIS

AGROECOLOGICAL FARMING OF STRAW

Silvopasture systems

Alley cropping Forest farming Shelterbelt Riparian forest buffer Hedgerow

ill 4.9 (b) Regional view of straw farming sites near Barton in Fabis after

ill 4.9 (a) Regional view of straw farming sites near Barton in Fabis before

include growing perennial species for crops can improve the soil structure and fertility. For example, Thinopyrum intermedium also known as Kernza is a perennial wheat species currently being experimented in the United States for scaling up the production to ensure a similar yield compared to seasonal wheat. Kernza’s deep roots, extending up to 10 feet, improve soil health by enhancing nitrogen fixation and organic matter retention. Its perennial nature eliminates the need for annual replanting, reducing the impacts on land caused by tillage. Moreover, its tall stalks and fibrous structure make it a versatile material, including in usage for straw bale construction.

These strategies can be employed at a single or multi-farm scale to contribute to ecological resiliency within the broader mosaic. Healthy soil, reduced water consumption, improved biodiversity, and reduced diseases on farms can improve crop yields and ensure sustainability in the wake of changing climates that bring extreme weather events and threaten crop adaptation.34

34 Woodland Trust, Farming for the Future: How Agroforestry Can Deliver for Nature and Climate, 2022, accessed January 3, 2025, https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/publications, 9.

ill 4.10 Cross section through an agroecological farm within priority habitat

agroforestry with fruiting trees

weed control with wildflower mix

animal grazing wind buffers straw bales for sites

low impact combine harvester seaweed fertiliser application tree buffers wildflower margins growing multi-species perennial wheat

agroforestry

ill 4.11 Visualisation of agroecological farm

SKEGNESS

Sititng aquaculture production sites along the Lincolnshire coast

Skegness, a prominent tourist destination on the Lincolnshire coast, near The Wash, attracts more than four million visitors annually.35 The town’s reliance on seasonal tourism has contributed to significant levels of deprivation among its permanent population of 20,701 (2021). This is largely due to a lack of economic diversification and the challenges posed by an ageing population.36 To incite new investment in the community, East Lindsey District Council and Heritage Lincolnshire are undertaking two major development projects.

35 City Population, “Skegness,” City Population, accessed January 1, 2025, https://www.citypopulation.de/en/uk/ eastmidlands/lincolnshire/E63001717__skegness/

36 The Independent, “Abandoned to Poverty: Skegness Named Most Deprived Seaside Town,” The Independent, February 25, 2018, https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/this-britain/abandoned-to-poverty-skegness-named-most-deprivedseaside-town-8778953.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Lincolnshire

Skegness

Firstly, the Town Centre Transformation Town Deal project to enhance heritage buildings and areas,37 and secondly, the Skegness Gateway Project, a 31-hectare (91.5 acre) mixed-use development bringing education, upskilling and over 1,000 jobs to Skegness and surrounding communities.38 Recognising the surge of investment in Skegness and aligning with the UK Government’s plans for Regenerating Seaside Towns and Communities, sea kelp farming and sustainable aquaculture for biobased material production could be another avenue for economic diversification.39

37 East Lindsey District Council, “Town Centre Transformations: Skegness Town Deal Project to Transform Heritage Sites in Skegness,” East Lindsey District Council, accessed January 1, 2025, https://www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/article/23364/TownCentre-Transformations-Skegness-Town-Deal-project-to-transform-heritage-sites-in-Skegness

38 Skegness Gateway, “Masterplan,” Skegness Gateway, accessed January 1, 2025, https://skegnessgateway.co.uk/ masterplan/.

39 UK Government, Future of Seaside Towns: Government Response to the Liaison Committee Report, CP 967 (London: Government of the United Kingdom, 2023), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/future-of-seaside-townsgovernment-response-to-the-liaison-committee-report.

Skegness Neighbourhood Plan 2021-2031

This report outlines the vision for housing, economic development, environmental goals, and climate adaptation strategies for Skegness, particularly flooding issues.

Economic Sector, Retail, Leisure and Tourism Review

This report explores opportunities for economic diversification, including expanding tourism, and leveraging current attractions that draw people to the area. It also incorporates insights gathered from community engagements, highlighting actionable strategies to strengthen the existing tourism industry and diversify the local economy.

fig 4.4 Skegness . Source: Historic England

fig 4.5 Aerial view of Skegness 1941. Source: Historic England

fig 4.6 Skegness Neighbourhood Plan 2021-2031

fig 4.7

Economic Sector, Retail, Leisure and Tourism Review

SUSTAINABLE AQUACULTURE PRINCIPLES

Visualising Seaweed and Shellfish farming alongside marine rewilding

The town of Skegness has been selected as a prototyping area to simulate the potential impacts of expanding kelp and aquaculture production along the Lincolnshire coast. The renderings show the coastal town with an expansive and active waterfront area. We are proposing that kelp farms, depicted by the black hatches, could emerge within the infralittoral zone in areas with a total depth of 4-6m. Kelp farms specifically could also be paired with planned windfarms, located in areas with a 6m depth, considered the shallow circalittoral zone. The Wash bay area is considered one of the most highly degraded coastal landscapes in the UK and is extremely vulnerable to pollution, poor water quality, and eutrophication due to nearby agriculture and destruction to coastal marshes.

Acknowledging this, the UK has instated strict marine protected areas and goals for improving bird species in the Wash and surrounding areas including nearby Skegness.

We vision that the seaweed and aquaculture production sites could pair with restoration and rewilding efforts, represented by the white hatches to improve overall ecosystems, restore bird species, and potentially create enough habitat to revive fish stocks. Although no published studies exist regarding the benefits of kelp farms to fish populations, it is resumed that a revival of marine ecosystems

could provide safe places for juvenile fish. If these are in protected areas, it could potentially regenerate lost species.40

Sustainable farming practices could include multi-trophic aquaculture, floats hosting nesting or hunting grounds for seabirds, and suspended mussel, oysters and kelp for water filtration. In addition, restoration efforts could include kelp, seagrass and mollusk rewilding or shellfish reefs for wave dissipation. To increase investment and accelerate licensing, we have also demonstrated recreation opportunities paired with the farms.

It is important to note that the success of this proposal relies on engagement with fishers and marine workers. At this stage, no input has been given directly to participants in these industries. We also acknowledge the strong cultural and generational ties fishermen have to their craft. Therefore, the willingness to transition to aquaculture relies on existing aquaculture producers to expand their farms. However, in the longer-term, we anticipate that fishers could be interested in participating as an opportunity to diversify.

40 Sam Renshaw. Personal conversation with the author, June 10, 2024.

East Midlands Bioregion

Skegness

ill 4.12 (b) Regional view of seaweed farming sites in Skegness after

ill 4.12 (a) Regional view of seaweed farming sites in Skegness before

Aquaculture production sites host onshore activities including drying facilities, processing areas, and distribution areas. Vulnerable dune habitats located near to the water’s edge could be improved or protected with support from UK habitat and biodiversity grants schemes. Inshore areas with existing aquaculture farms could experiment with kelp production. Similarly, farms located in sensitive bay areas, could be rewilded with seagrass and mollusks alongside low-impact aquaculture operations. Kelp farms further offshore could be paired with recreational activities serving researchers and incentivise eco-tourism. Multi-trophic aquaculture production would diversify outputs for land workers and mitigate the negative effects of monoculture production. If water turbidity improves from the farms filtering sediments, it could be possible to have kelp rewilding in the infralittoral zones.

trail

oyster farm

1-5km

0 km

mussel farm kelp prototyping wharf

oyster reef

seabed rewilding

kelp farm; integrated multi-trophic aquaculture

5-10km

ill 4.15 Visualisation of coastal rewilding and aquaculture site

oyster farmer

seaweed farming

ill 4.16 Visualisation of aquaculture site in deep sea

REFLECTIONS

In this chapter we proposed a phased approach for undertaking biobased production in a way that ensures community interests and benefits foreground the strategy. The strategy proposes prototyping sites that make use of underutilised publicly owned lands in areas with high unemployment and underskilled workers. Then as biobased construction awareness and skills emerge, we foresee existing cereal undertaking agroecological practices, and aquaculture producers trialing kelp production. Finally, as production expands, farms across the region could engage in sustainable cereal production and seaweed farms would expand along the coast. The fact that biobased materials are regenerative and could be produced in a manner that provides broader ecological and community benefits improves their viability and broadens incentives for investors, funding and grant providers, and participants.

To demonstrate these benefits, we spatialised and visualised the proposed agroecological interventions to improve the production sites for biobased materials. In coastal environments, the strategies included marine rewilding alongside kelp and aquaculture production sites. Transitioning to biobased materials encouraged us to rethink the way we value landscapes of production; rather than serving as merely biomass production sites, they serve as productive ecological patches within the broader landscape network providing integrated ecological services. To understand how production sites operate at a site scale and their role within the broader landscape mosaic, we explored these interventions at a greater resolution using mosaic simulations. These studies demonstrated how farms could support varied agroecological functions depending on their

context and adjacent land uses. Furthermore, kelp and aquaculture production could provide increased economic opportunities for coastal communities such as Skegness. Marine biomass production could provide benefits to coastal communities who are challenged by limited economic opportunities and the impacts of climate change. Biobased material production and the possible rise in demand should kelp and shellfish biomass become a more viable construction material, could provide alternative avenues for fishermen or existing aquaculture producers. These strategies rely on collaboration amongst farmers within the region and incentives from Government funding regimes such as ELMs. All the propositions were informed by industry experts and desktop information, however, to assess their applicability, it is necessary to engage with fishermen, farmers and marine workers.

Evidently, human activities are at the forefront of landscape transformation and therefore must be undertaken in a way that prioritises environmental agendas to secure resilient productive landscapes at both a site and regional scale. Therefore, improvements to agricultural and aquaculture production for ecological betterment must be put into question if they occur under an ecomodernism agenda of greener capitalism, without addressing the social relations and ownership. The following chapter addresses the Ownership structures that exist within material supply chains. It also reveals how private farmers or aquaculture producers can be incentivised and benefit from the democratic participation in the bioregional economy for supplying kelp, shellfish and straw for biobased retrofitting projects.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agroforestry Research Trust. “Silvoarable Systems.” Accessed January 3, 2025. https://www.agroforestry. co.uk/about-agroforestry/silvoarable

Ajl, Max. A People’s Green New Deal. Verso, 2021. Barton-in-Fabis. “Home.” Barton-in-Fabis Parish Council. Accessed January 1, 2025. https://bartoninfabis.org. uk/

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Indicator Species.” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Accessed January 1, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/science/ indicator-species

Cato, Molly Scott. The Bioregional Economy: Land, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. New York: Routledge, 2013.

City Population. “Skegness.” City Population. Accessed January 1, 2025. https://www.citypopulation.de/en/uk/ eastmidlands/lincolnshire/E63001717__skegness/

East Lindsey District Council. “Town Centre Transformations: Skegness Town Deal Project to Transform Heritage Sites in Skegness.” East Lindsey District Council. Accessed January 1, 2025. https:// www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/article/23364/Town-CentreTransformations-Skegness-Town-Deal-project-totransform-heritage-sites-in-Skegness

Fanshawe, Sam. Interview by Priyanka Awatramani, Emily Bowerman, and Alejandra Iturrizaga Andrich, June 6, 2024.

Forman, Richard T. T. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995

Government Office for the East Midlands. East Midlands Regional Plan. Nottingham: Government Office for the East Midlands, 2009.

HM Government. Environmental Improvement Plan 2023 July 2023. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ media/64a6d9c1c531eb000c64fffa/environmentalimprovement-plan-2023.pdf

Johnson, C.L.E., M. Axelsson, L. Brown, K.H.O. Carrigan, A. Cordingley, A.L. Elliot, A. Downie, L. Gannon, B.C. Green, J. Jones, M.K. Marsh, F. McNie, S.R.A. Mills, N.M. Wallace, and H.J. Woods. Marine Restoration Potential (MaRePo). Report for Natural England and The Crown Estate, published 12 September 2023. Accessed 1 January 2025.

Land Workers’ Alliance. Agroecology and Planning Reform. Land Workers’ Alliance, October 2018. https:// landworkersalliance.org.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2018/10/Agroecology-and-PlanningReform-1-1.pdf

National Biodiversity Network. State of Nature 2019: UK Full Report. September 2019. https://nbn.org.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2019/09/State-of-Nature-2019UK-full-report.pdf

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) Natural England Open Data Publication. Last updated December 6, 2022. https://data.gov.uk/dataset/ priority-habitats-inventory-england

Natural England. State of the Natural Environment in the East Midlands. Natural England, 2009.

Office for National Statistics (ONS). Census 2011: Economic Activity (Table QS601UK). Accessed 1 January 2025. Persons, United Kingdom, output area and above. Last updated 13 June 2014. http://www.ons.

gov.uk/census

Office for National Statistics (ONS). Census 2011: Social Grade (Table QS611UK). Accessed 1 January 2025. Persons, United Kingdom, output area and above. Last updated 13 June 2014. http://www.ons.gov.uk/census

R.D. Morton, C.G. Marston, A.W. O’Neil, and C.S. Rowland, Land Cover Map 2023 (land parcels, GB) (2024; NERC EDS Environmental Information Data Centre), https:// doi.org/10.5285/50b344eb-8343-423b-8b2f0e9800e34bbd

Renshaw, Sam. Personal conversation with the author, June 10, 2024.

RSPB. “Defending the Wash.” 2022. Retrieved January 2, 2025, from https://www.rspb.org.uk/helping-nature/ what-we-do/influence-government-and-business/ casework/defending-the-wash

Shipperlee, Imogen. “Mapping the Opportunity for Co-location.” Seaweed in East Anglia, 6 February 2024. Research conducted by Dr. Richard Heal, Senior Environmental Spatial Analyst, and Dr. Elisa Capuzzo, Senior Marine Ecosystem Scientist, The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science. Shipperlee, Imogen. A Roadmap for Driving the Seaweed Economy in the East of England. Seaweed in East Anglia, February 21, 2024. Accessed January 1, 2025. https://hethelinnovation.com/wp-content/ uploads/2024/02/Roadmap-for-the-SeaweedEconomy-in-Norfolk-and-the-East-of-England.pdf. The research and engagement work for the SEA Project was delivered by Hethel Innovation Ltd. (Rikke Nagell-Kleven (Project Manager) and Imogen Shipperlee), University of East Anglia (Colette Matthewman, Tomás Harrington, Gill Malin, and Sheng Qi), and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Elisa Capuzzo, Richard Heal, and Isla MacMillan).

Skegness Gateway. “Masterplan.” Skegness Gateway Accessed January 1, 2025. https://skegnessgateway. co.uk/masterplan/

The Independent. “Abandoned to Poverty: Skegness Named Most Deprived Seaside Town.” The Independent, February 25, 2018. https://www. the-independent.com/news/uk/this-britain/ abandoned-to-poverty-skegness-named-mostdeprived-seaside-town-8778953.html?utm_ source=chatgpt.com

UK Biodiversity Steering Group. Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan. London: HMSO, 1994.

UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. 30by30 on Land in England: Confirmed Criteria and Next Steps, last modified January 16, 2023. https:// www.gov.uk/government/publications/criteria-for30by30-on-land-in-england/30by30-on-land-inengland-confirmed-criteria-and-next-steps

UK Government. Future of Seaside Towns: Government Response to the Liaison Committee Report. CP 967. London: Government of the United Kingdom, 2023. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ future-of-seaside-towns-government-response-to-theliaison-committee-report

Woodland Trust. “Agroforestry Benefits: Farming, Nature, and Climate.” Accessed January 3, 2025. https://www. woodlandtrust.org.uk/plant-trees/agroforestrybenefits

Woodland Trust. Farming for the Future: How Agroforestry Can Deliver for Nature and Climate. 2022. Accessed January 3, 2025. https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/ publications

OWNERSHIP

Who profits from sustainably produced biobased materials?

Practicing sustainable farming and aquaculture practices to produce biobased construction materials is promising. However, it remains unclear who benefits or profits within the supply chain. Evidenced by the uproars after COP 26, where significant opposition emerged to climate agendas that claim ‘green’ strategies and decarbonisation efforts that fail to consider the impacts to landscapes, as formerly discussed, and labour.1

Intervening in conventional material supply chains relies on more than just the use of alternative raw materials. It demands rethinking the underlying power structures and governance models in the production, manufacturing, movement and disposal of construction materials. According to Londonbased Dark Matter Labs, if resources2 flow through the existing governance structures, they could lead to further commodification, privatisation, and centralisation of natural assets and wealth validated by Net Zero agendas.3 For example, large corporations could transition to straw production or establish kelp farms, potentially monopolising the biobased industry. Additionally, materials for the BGS could be procured through conventional Public Private Partnerships (PPP), where public sector agencies hire private companies to finance, build, and operate large public projects. In the PPP arrangement, public money land or assets are given to private, for-profit, corporations to provide goods and services. 4

Furthermore, biobased materials could be procured from global supply chains, for example, importing pre-manufactured straw panels or kelp acoustic panels from Europe or

1 Naomi Millner and Patrick Bresnihan, All We Want Is the Earth: Land, Labour and Movements Beyond Environmentalism (Bristol: Bristol University Press, 2023), 1. 2 In Bioregional Financing Facilities – Reimagining Finance to Regenerate Our Planet by Dark Matter labs, resources refer to money. However, in this project, resources refer to money, skills, knowledge and biobased materials.

3 Samantha Power and Leon Seefeld, Bioregional Financing Facilities (Oakland, CA: The BioFi Project; London: Dark Matter Labs; San Francisco: Buckminster Fuller Institute, June 2024), 14.

4 World Bank, PPP Reference Guide Version 3: PPP Basics, August 2021, https://ppp.worldbank.org/ public-private-partnership/sites/ppp.worldbank.org/ files/2021-08/PPP%20Reference%20Guide%20 Version%203%20-%20PPP%20Basics.pdf, 5.

abroad. In this case, the communities located within the jurisdiction of the UKRI campus do not benefit from the procurement of goods, and wealth is extracted to remain within corporations.

How do we address the flow of money and capital within the biobased supply chain to address the structural characteristics of the economy that are driving the climate crisis?

The UKRI is considered an anchor institutiontypically publicly funded entity that have a degree of permanence in the local economythat can use their purchasing power to evoke change through progressive procurement models to not only meet project goals but benefit local community. We have referenced the democratic models for mobilising the biobased industry, such as Public-Common Partnerships (PCP) developed by ABUNDANCE to counter conventional PPP models. Specifically, the Food Systems in Common report provides a foundational framework to examine the ways council farms can be leveraged for sustainable agriculture production.5 Based on this report and through iterative feedback from industry professionals, we have developed a Cultivating Commons Public-Common Partnership (CCPCP) to mobilise the biobased industry in the East Midlands.

The PCP model connects various actors within the material supply chain through an overarching Federation for Biobased Construction Materials,6 who governs the equitable and sustainable material production. Complimenting this, we have devised a Biobased Retrofitting for Bioregional Economies (BRBE) - RIBA Plan of Work Overlay to integrate the PCP network and prescribe specifications for material production and sourcing according to conventional RIBA Plan of Work phases.7 The principle aim of the CCPCP is to leverage the power of the UKRI as a public institution to initiate systematic reform of supply chains through progressive procurement, ensuring that the benefits of the biobased retrofitting project remain within the communities where the UKRI operates.

5 Kai Heron, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn, “Food Systems in Common: Council Farms, Agroecological Food Sovereignty, and Public-Common Partnerships,” November 28, 2024.

6 See CCPCP Handbook pg.115.

7 Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), RIBA Plan of Work 2020 (London: RIBA Publishing, 2020).

Food Systems in Common

This report proposes a PCP model for using council farms, currently at risk of privatisation, to transition toward sustainable agroecological food sovereignty. The report emphasises collaboration between local authorities, farmworkers, and communities. This report was used as the basis for developing the governance and management structure of PCP actors and stakeholders. We adopted a similar structure for the Community Benefit Society and Federation to manage and facilitate replicating the PCP in other jurisdictions.

Public-Common Parternships: Democratising ownership and urban development

Wards Corner, located at the intersection of Seven Sisters Junction in Tottenham, Haringey, houses the Latin Village indoor market. In current disrepair, the community initiated a restoration initiative through the Wards Corner Community Benefit Society. This model ensures local and shared ownership of the market. The funding for the Wards Corner redevelopment relies on a combination of Community Share Offers, grant funding, ethical bank loans, and ethical investment, with a significant portion of the financing coming from debt raised public guarantees from Transport for London (TfL). We referenced the roles and responsibilities of the CBS within the PCP and the varied funding avenues for strategy mobilisation.

How we built community wealth in Preston

The Preston Model is a pioneering community wealth-building strategy developed to address inequality and reliance on inward investment. Collaborating with CLES, the council transformed procurement practices of anchor institutions, directing over £70 million into Preston and £200 million into Lancashire. The model offers valuable lessons for other communities, demonstrating how local governments can leverage anchor institutions, shift procurement practices, and create a more inclusive, resilient economy. It highlights opportunities for a locally controlled economy benefiting workers rather than distant shareholders.

What existing networks could be engaged for the BGS retrofitting within Nottinghamshire and the City of Nottingham?

The Nottinghamshire scale map contextualises the existing network of stakeholders and actors within the area immediately surrounding the BGS who could provide materials and resources for the retrofitting project. There is an existing straw merchant, higher education institutions who could provide Research and Development knowledge in the fields of technology, construction, and architecture; and several quarries that could shift their workforce toward biobased production should the industry expand, see pg. 124.

fig 5.2 Food Systems in Common report

fig 5.3 Public-Common Parternships: Democratising ownership and urban development report

fig 5.4 How we built community wealth in Preston report

NETWORK OF ACTORS

Mapping the network of biobased collaborators in Nottinghamshire

Engagement with industry professionals was essential to the development of the PublicCommon Partnership Policy Proposal. The following section distills our conversation with Kai Heron of ABUNDANCE,8 and the results from the survey we released in September 2024. to invite industry feedback regarding the mobilisation strategy for the PCP, the potential actors, and their roles and responsibilities within the proposal. The survey was distributed to thirteen professionals, and we received seven responses. When contacted, the respondents were shown a three-minute video that explained the PCP; upon completing the film, respondents were asked to respond to five questions. The results were coded thematically, with each response categorised according to key themes identified in the survey questions. These coded responses were then organised into summaries to facilitate comparison and analysis.

POLICY ENGAGEMENT

Survey and Conversations with Industry Professionals

PCP in Conversation with Kai Heron

What would incentivise anchor institutions such as local Universities or UKRI to promote a Cradle-to-Cradle approach and engage in PCPs for the procurement of materials?

On April 15, 2024, we spoke with Kai Heron of ABUNDANCE regarding the initiation strategy for the Public-Common Partnership (PCP). Prior to the conversation, it was unclear who would be responsible for mobilising the PCP and what factors would encourage collaboration between anchor institutions including local authorities, higher education institutions, and the BGS.

It is understood that councils may engage in PCPs to incentivise job creation and tax revenue, which can enhance the council’s image and economic viability. By relinquishing underutilised lands for use as prototype sites or flying factories, councils can leverage existing assets to generate jobs and stimulate local economic growth at minimal cost. Additionally, PCPs may support universities or educational institutions in fulfilling their sustainability agendas, for example, some Universities mandate engagement in green energy projects, climate change adaptation, community outreach, or participatory research. Likewise, Universities could partner to offer field courses on biobased materials or develop training and internship programs related to the research, development, or construction of biobased materials. Involvement in the PCP is mutually beneficial to the anchor institution and the local community where they operate.

To conclude, Heron emphasised the importance of including key actors and stakeholders within the PCP to ensure that the flow of money, knowledge, and resources is clearly defined.

1. Initiating the Public-Common Partnership (PCP)

Transitions to sustainable industries are typically undertaken by large scale corporations, however, the Cultivating Commons Public-Common Partnerships [PCP] proposes a community partnered approach.

a. Do you agree that the Public-Common Partnership [PCP] framework can be propelled by the British Geological Survey [BGS] for biobased materials in the East Midlands? Why or why not?

b. Are there any other policy participants we should consider?

A number of respondents, including IP1 and KF, supported the idea of the Public-Common Partnership (PCP) framework for transitioning to biobased materials. Most respondents agreed that PCP can foster collaboration between various stakeholders and all the respondents, excluding AB, agreed that the BGS and the UK Government would be the principal instigator of the PCP framework. IP2 suggested that in addition to UKRI funding, central government funding schemes could be overlaid on the PCP to understand how landscape recovery module of ELMs could also fund social infrastructure like PCPs.

Farming organisations could also be approached in the first instance. Central government funding schemes may not align/map on to this proposal, but work could be done to explore where they could be involved and what changes would be required for funding schemes like the landscape recovery module of ELMs to map on to projects which also fund social infrastructure like PCPs.

Regarding the uptake of biobased materials in construction, CM expressed skepticism, particularly regarding regulatory feasibility. CM believed that the focus on biobased materials might be too niche for government support and might face resistance due to a lack of widespread demand. AB also shared these concerns but and notes that PCP could provide a structure for guiding the transition, but the market may need to mature before it can fully succeed.

Respondents IP1 and IP2 essentialised the involvement of local communities and farming organisations at the onset of the PCP to ensure they have the required social licenses and capacity to support the transition. IP1 expressed concern that few farming and marine clusters exist in the East Midlands, therefore those would need to be formalised before engaging in a PCP framework. In addition to farmers and community representatives, CM recommended the inclusion of transport providers and upskilling the local planning authority.

8 Kai Heron, conversation with Priyanka Awatramani, April 15, 2024.

Kai Heron Abundance

2. Workforce Potential for Transition

In your opinion, what workforce from other industries including fishing, farming or aggregate quarrying, has the most potential to transition to producing biobased construction materials such as straw or seaweed? Why?

Respondents highlighted several industries that could transition to biobased material production. Conventional farming and fish stocks being challenged by the impacts of climate change, so producing more resilient wheat species for straw and the farming of multi-trophic aquaculture and kelp could diversify opportunities for land and marine workers in the UK. IP1 acknowledged the need for farmers or fishers to reskill for biobased production, however, agrees they are viable avenues. IP2 agrees that farming is the best starting point considering the existing straw industry. However, they highlighted that there remains certification and environmental issues to overcome. AW and CM suggest skill mapping be conducted to ensure the transferability of skills from extractive industries to biobased. CM also emphasised the importance of upskilling contractors on the use of certified biobased materials.

3. Requirements for Policy Uptake

From your industry perspective, what would be required for the successful uptake of this policy? Please share your reasoning.

Education and training, regulatory frameworks, supply chain development, financial incentives, demonstration projects, and research were all seen as requirements for implementing the PCP. CE noted the lack of innovation in the construction industry, and respondents commented that it is a conservative and risk-adverse sector. Similarly, IP2 echoed that farmers are often resistant to new supply chains and coastal communities may be reluctant to endeavour in new industries due to lack of predictability and ensured return on investment.

Furthermore, KF highlighted the limited capacity of local councils and suggested a program be devised to encourage professional placements of design consultants to support them. Similarly, IP2 stated the need to suppport marine workers in aquiring licenses, as the process is extremely costly and lengthy process for acquiring seaweed licenses and the value of establishing a strong network of producers, such as seaweed clusters. Moreover, they highlighted the importance of standards and certifications for sustainability goals across the value chain. To conclude, AB recommended that case studies be conducted to qualify successful examples of using biobased materials

4. Barriers and Challenges

Are there any barriers or challenges that might limit the implementation of the Cultivating Commons policy?

The prospects for scalability and economic viability are debated within the responses. KF and AB are optimistic, believing that as demand for biobased materials grows and production technologies improve, these materials will become economically viable. However, AF and IP1 express concerns regarding the cost of the end material and the limited viability of seaweed biomass, stating there could be difficulties in establishing new farming sites (obtaining marine licence and social licence to operate), costs of seaweed biomass (very expensive if farmed), missing links in the value chain, lack of key clusters. EC and CM argued that biobased materials will struggle to achieve cost parity with conventional materials in the near future, citing long-term viability concerns and the challenges of scaling up production particularly when relying on small-scale suppliers. Lastly, KF noted the limitations of publicly owned lands being leased at a less-than-market rate. KF also notes the need to incentivise manufacturers and producers to transition and questions where the initial investment will come from.

5. Other Comments

AW questioned the Technology Readiness level is the construction material from Seaweed.

Survey Participants

1. IP1 – Expert in Marine Research Organisation

2. IP2 – Expert in Policy

3. Allie Wharf (AW)– Norfolk Seaweed

4. Cíaran Malik (CM)– ETS Tutor at the Architectural Assocation and part of ACAN (Architects Climate Action Network)

5. Cypren Edmunds (CE)– President of European StrawBuilding Association

6. Kathryn Firth (KF)– ARUP masterplanning

7. Andrew Barkwith (AB)– Associate Director of Operations at BGS

CULTIVATING COMMONS POLICY BRIEF

Biobased Retrofitting of UKRI Institutions through Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs)

To the UK Government, the UK Research and Innovation, and Local Councils

Executive Summary

In 2019, the UK government set a target to achieve a 100% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (refer Climate Change Act 2008).1 This necessitates retrofitting public institutions such as the UKRI British Geological Survey (BGS). However, conventional retrofitting typically depends on carbon-intensive building materials, contributing to 40% of global emissions, according to the UK Green Building Council. 2 Consequently, emissions from material extraction and production have adverse effects on local well-being and ecologies.

This policy mandates the use of locally produced biobased materials, offering low embodied energy and in some cases contribute to carbon sequestration or soil regeneration. This supports UKRI’s net zero targets and benefits regional communities (of East Midlands) by transitioning away from conventional production and extraction.

This memo addresses policy gaps in decarbonisation efforts, inadequacies in building regulations, and challenges in retrofitting practices. It also identifies disparities in the biobased materials industry and proposes strategies to address them such as integrating biobased materials in building regulations, investing in research and capacity building, leveraging financial resources, and utilising public lands through Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs). These recommendations raise awareness, support funding and ensure sustainable procurement practices to uptake biobased material use in retrofitting public institutions.

The Issue

1. Policy Gaps in Decarbonisation

UK is targeting Net Zero by 2050; existing policies focus on reducing carbon emissions yet do not account for broader impacts of the construction sector to ecologies or human health.3

2. Inadequacies in Building Codes and Sustainable Practices

Current building regulations (Approved Documents B, E, and L) hinder the use of biobased materials.4 Existing material performance frameworks such as BREEAM, developed by nongovernmental actors, prioritise carbon reduction yet overlook broader social and economic impacts.5

1 “Climate Change Act 2008,” 2008. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ ukpga/2008/27/contents

2 UKGBC. “Climate Change Mitigation.” Accessed April 22, 2024. https://ukgbc.org/ our-work/climate-change-mitigation/.

3 Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. “Net Zero Government Initiative: UK Roadmap to Net Zero Government Emissions,” 2023.

4 Architects Climate Action Network, “The Carbon Footprint of Construction,” 2021.

5 Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), accessed January 1, 2024, https://breeam.com/.

3. Retrofitting Challenges

Current retrofitting approaches focus on reducing operational energy and materials typically go to landfills.6 Consideration for disposal, reuse and recycling materials is needed.

4. Neglect in material procurement

Material sourcing for retrofitting projects often ignore embodied carbon, production methods and manufacturing locations.

5. Failure to address the implications of extractive Construction Materials

The environmental and social impacts of extracted construction materials remain largely unaddressed in decarbonisation policies.

6. Assessing Variation in Biobased Material Industries

(Biobased materials studied: Timber, Clay, Straw, Hemp, Seaweed and Mycelium) Material-specific policies are required to address the challenges that limit their integration in mainstream construction practices.

The Challenge

1. Limited Awareness and Understanding of PCPs

Lack of awareness and understanding among stakeholders regarding the concept and potential benefits of Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs) could impede successful implementation.

[Addressed in Recommendation #2]

2. Securing Funding Sources

Relying only on public funding may pose challenges in ensuring financial resources for large-scale biobased retrofitting projects. [Addressed in Recommendation #2]

3. Overcoming Resistance to Change, Research and Verification

Resistance from stakeholders, including institutions and local communities, towards adopting biobased retrofitting methods and transitioning from traditional practices is prevalent. Additionally, limited material knowledge impacts the ability to obtain insurance coverage as builders need verified materials to comply with building regulations and insurance companies checks.7 [Addressed in Recommendation #2 and #3]

4. Balancing Local Procurement and fair bidding process

Establishing a fair and transparent bidding process for the procurement of biobased materials without imposing restrictive distance radius requirements. [Addressed in Recommendation #1]

6 Material Cultures, Material Reform, 54.

7 Material Cultures, and Arup. “Circular Biobased Construction in the North East and Yorkshire,2021.” Material Cultures: 102. Accessed April 21, 2024. https:// materialcultures.org/2021-circularbiobased-construction-in-the-north-east-andyorkshire/.

5. Technology and Innovation gaps

Limited technological advancements or innovations in the production of biobased materials may hinder scalability. [Addressed in Recommendation #2 and #3]

6. Limited Capacity for Large Projects

Local and regional businesses often face challenges related to their capacity to undertake large projects, including shortages in resources, inventory, and skilled manpower, restricting them from participating in bids for institutional scale projects. [Addressed in Recommendations #1]

Benefits of Biobased Retrofitting

• Contributes to carbon sequestration and soil regeneration.8

• Biobased materials reduce operational energy and embodied carbon. Up to 75% of a building’s emissions come from embodied carbon (ACAN);9 using biobased materials lowers operational energy and minimises the building’s carbon footprint.

• Biobased materials can often be composted at the end of their lifecycle rather than disposed in landfills.10

• Biobased material production can be regenerative, providing equal benefits to local economies and ecologies.

• Kelp farms can reduce wave attenuation and therefore soil erosion, provide biodiverse habitats, uptake nutrients, and mitigate acidification.11

8 Material Cultures, Material Reform: Building for a Post-Carbon Future, (Mack Books, 2022): 22.

9 Architects Climate Action Network, “The Carbon Footprint of Construction,” 2021.

10 Material Cultures, Material Reform, 55.

11 Câr-y-Môr. “Seaweed Farming in the UK: A Growing Industry and Its Local Economic Impact.” Accessed February 8, 2024. https://www.carymor.wales/ seaweed/seaweed-farming-in-the-uk.

• Cereal farming accounts for a quarter of UK’s land, meaning straw is abundantly available and could meet material demands with further certification.12

Note: After mapping and analysing the potentials of six biobased materials for each region of the UK, the policy focuses on seaweed and straw for prototyping the case of BGS. Straw was selected due to its availability in the East Midlands region, while seaweed presents a promising opportunity as a long-term industry that can transition from short-term use in fertiliser to a construction material with further research and development. The choice of materials may vary for other institutions depending on regional production capabilities and future interests in scaling up industries. Therefore, the selection of seaweed and straw for the BGS’s prototype does not imply that these materials are universally applicable or that they alone can transform the construction industry.

Abstract

The Cultivating Commons policy focuses on leveraging biobased materials to transition from carbon-intensive construction practices. It facilitates local production, fabrication and procurement of biobased materials for retrofitting public institutions through Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs), contributing to both regional ecologies and local community economies. The policy mandates the formation of PCPs between anchor institutions like the UKRI (BGS), local councils and universities, and local businesses and communities to mobilise the transition to biobased materials. The BGS retrofitting project will fund upskilling programs for local workers and farmers, support education, and facilitate research and development initiatives on common lands. Common lands such as council farms, protected landscapes and brownfields are utilised as test plots for biobased material production; this showcases uptake potential to local farmers and producers, encourage innovation in the biobased sector, and strengthens local economic resiliency. Overall, the policy optimises the BGS retrofitting project to catapult the use of biobased materials in conventional building practice.

12 Material Cultures, Material Reform,104.

1. Promotion of Biobased Materials in Building regulations and Procurement Processes

Crown Commercial Service

• Mandates the incorporation of minimum 30% biobased materials in public institution retrofitting projects.

• Mandates regional procurement of biobased materials by amending the Tender Documents in the Procurement Policy Notes (PPNs).

• Partitions large project tendering into smaller projects so local and regional businesses have capacity to engage in UKRI tendering process.

2. Investment in Research & Development, Capacity Building and Biobased Production

The UKRI

• Allocate funds for biobased material research and development so materials comply with building regulations and insurance requirements.

• Establish partnerships with local councils, and research institutions to study biobased materials that addresses technological gaps.

• Ensure MMO and DEFRA farming funds, grants, and incentives are leveraged for regenerative raw material production.

Local Institutions

Implement upskilling programs for the local workforce, facilitated by UKRI funding, to equip workers with the necessary skills for working with biobased materials and supporting the growth of the local talent pool.

3. Utilisation of Public / Common Lands for Research and Development

Local Councils

• Facilitate leasing of under-utilised public land to businesses for research, development and prototyping of biobased material production and use.

• Make county farms available for testing farming methods of biobased materials.

POLICY MEMO

The policy brief, addressed to the UK Government, the UK Research and Innovation, and Local Council, outlines the principal policy and supporting guidelines and recommendations to implement the Cultivating Commons Public-Common Partnership. This memo addresses policy gaps in decarbonisation mandates, inadequacies in building regulations, and challenges in retrofitting practices. It also identifies disparities in the biobased materials industry and proposes strategies to address them such as integrating biobased materials in building regulations, investing in research and capacity building, leveraging financial resources, and utilising public lands through Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs). The memo also defines key bodies responsible for actioning the items.

PCP HANDBOOK

Public-Common Partnerships are extremely dynamic and complex. Therefore, to clearly articulate the roles and responsibilities of actors, stakeholders and participants within the PCP model for the procurement of biobased materials for the BGS, we have devised the Cultivating Commons PCP Handbook. The Handbook provides an overview of PCPs and explains the benefits compared to conventional procurement models. Moreover, it addresses the power of anchor institutions, such as the UKRI, to adopt progressive procurement models so project benefits serve the local communities who facilitate their realisation. The Handbook is intended to exist as an independent resource for the UKRI British Geological Survey and other campuses.

*These documents exist independently from the thesis book and are therefore referenced accordingly.

THE CULTIVATING COMMONS PUBLIC-COMMON PARTNERSHIP

List of Abbreviations

BCP

Biobased Prototype Committee

BEF

Bioregional Evaluation Framework

BGS

British Geological Survey

BRBE - RIBA OVERLAY

Biobased Retrofitting for Bioregional Economies Royal Institute of British Architects Workplan Overlay

DEFRA

Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs

DEFRA

Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Community (DLUHC)

EMBCA

East Midlands Biobased Commons Association

PCP

Public-Common Partnership

PPP

Public Private Partnership

UKRI

UK Research and Innovation

The Power of Public Institutions

The Cultivating Commons PublicCommon Partnership emerged from the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) British Geological Survey’s (BGS) desire to retrofit their campus in Keyworth, UK in response to the UK’s Net Zero target.

Cultivating Commons is fueled by the desire to move beyond Net Zero to consider how the procurement of materials for the retrofitting of the BGS campus could propel a transition in the East Midlands and UK construction industry at large.

The proposal puts forward the question:

How can a public institution’s retrofitting project mobilise a Public-Common Partnership to propel the biobased construction industry in the East Midlands?

construction industry in the East models to not only meet project goals,

The proposed policy strategy leverages the power of anchor institutions which are typically publicly funded entities that have a degree of permanence in the local economy including the UKRI, Local Council and Higher Education Institutions.3 By using their purchasing power and other resources strategically, anchor institutions can evoke change through progressive procurement models to not only meet project goals, but benefit local community economies and ecologies.

This document demonstrates how this

This document demonstrates how this transformation could unfold. fueled industry at large.

Public Private Partnership (PPP)

Private Public Partnerships (PPPs) are collaborations between public sector agencies and private companies to finance, build, and operate large public projects. In a PPP arrangement, public money land or assets are given to private, for-profit, corporations to provide goods and services.9

Advantages from Pro-PPP professionals

• More predictable return on investment

Who profits from the project?

• Ensures efficient government investment?

Is public money being reinvested into the communities that government institutions serve?

• Direct flow of resources between private and public partner

How are services and goods procured? Do suppliers, manufacturers and labour benefit within the supply chain?

Disadvantages/Limitations

• Involves risks for private firms who hold sole responsibility for project delivery

• Dependency on private sector to fulfill project goals

• May not be cost-efficient

Who determines the metrics for cost-efficiency? Do they account for social or environment costs within the project lifecycle?

Public-Common Partnership (PCP)

“Public-Common Partnerships (PCPs) are an institutional form that democratises the management and ownership of an asset or resource”.7 PCPs were ceonceptualised in 2017 by a team of economic strategists now operating under ABUNDANCE. ABUNDANCE defines PCPs as, “a joint enterprise that incorporates ‘common associations’, public bodies, and wider stakeholders in the ownership and governance of assets”. 7

PCPs provide an organisational partnership framework where councils and other public bodies work with communities to design, manage, and expand the commons. This approach opposes the dominant Public-Private Partnerships model for institutions to de-risk their procurement strategies to distribute wealth and resources to the community at large.

Advantages from Pro-PCP professionals

• Addresses democratic deficits and reduces economic costs by exchanging finances, knowledge and practice between PCP members.7

• Generate non-monetary benefits such as social and ecological that benefit local communities and ecosystems. See Bioregional Evaluation Framework. 7

Disadvantages/Limitations

• High-reliancy on external funds

• Complex decision-making

• Underdeveloped supply networks

• Lack of engagement from desired partners

• Few precedent examples exist for regional scale partnership models

• High reliancy on local authorities, government bodies and asset holders

• Variable success rate and unpredictability of delivery outcomes

Progressive Procurement

Bioregional Evaluation Framework (BEF)

The Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) has developed a the progressive procurement strategy, Social Values Framework, to maximise social value delivered by those who supply goods and services to local anchor institutions, and directing spend back into the local economy.5 4 We have defined a Bioregional Evaluation Framework (BEF) that adopts CLES principles and includes ecological considerations. This demonstrates the ways UKRI can consider broader community and environmental goals within the procurement of goods and services for institutional retrofitting projects with locally-sourced biobased materials.

CLES has succesfully implemented this model in Manchester City by using 20% social value weighting in their tendering process. Through procurement activity, the Council has created 1579 new jobs, 562 apprenticeships and 7730 employment opportunities in the last year.6

Complimenting each BEF value are key metrics that could be used to evaluate the projects success in providing broader community benefits.

Manchester City Council aims to work with organisations who:

1. FAIR WAGES 2. EDI

Pay their staff fairly – at least the Real Living Wage

Promote equality, diversity and inclusion

3. GIVE BACK

Give something back to Manchester people

4. ENGAGEMENT

Create opportunities for key resident groups

5. LOCAL ECONOMIES

Boost local neighbourhood economies.

Social value is a broader understanding of “value” which moves beyond cost and, instead, recognises the value created for people, and [ecologies], and which is generated through local spend and investment.5

- Centre for Local Economic Strategies

BEF: Economic Inclusion

Promoting opportunities for all community members to participate in the economy, including support for local businesses, job creation, and fair wages. This can involve prioritising contracts for local suppliers and small and mediumsized enterprises (SMEs). 5

Evaluation metrics:

• Employment of BPOC communities and Women.

• Number of jobs created in the local community.

• Percentage of local hires.

• Number of apprenticeships or training opportunities provided.

• Total value of contracts awarded to local suppliers and SMEs.

• Increase in local business revenue as a result of procurement activities

• Economic multiplier effects, such as the number of additional jobs created in the community due to local spending.

BEF: Community Wellbeing & Social Cohesion

Encouraging active participation in community governance and decisionmaking processes, ensuring that residents have a voice in shaping the services and policies that affect their lives. 5

Evaluation metrics:

• Number of community consultations or engagement events held.

• Percentage of community members participating in decision-making processes.

• Number of partnerships formed with local organisations or community groups.

• Surveys assessing community members’ sense of belonging and trust in local institutions.

BEF: Regional Ecologies

Incorporating practices that protect and enhance the environment, such as reducing carbon footprints, promoting biodiversity, and ensuring sustainable resource use. This value aligns with broader goals of environmental stewardship.

Evaluation metrics:

• Reduction in carbon emissions or waste generated by projects.

• Number of sustainable practices adopted by suppliers and producers (agroecological production, waste reduction etc.).

• Amount of resources conserved (e.g., water, energy) through sustainable initiatives.

Initiating the Cultivating Commons PCP

[UKRI Representative]

Initiation Strategy

Who is responsible for initiating the Public-Common Partnership and how does it actualise?

Integrating social and ecological values within the procurement process will require a radical shift in the UKRI’s outlook on their roles and responsibilities to the community at large. As an anchor institution4, it is their responsibility to define and implement the Bioregional Evaluation Framework (BEF).

The UKRI, incentivised by Government Net Zero mandates, would retain consultants including a Designer and PCP Advisor with expertise in Community Wealth Building methodologies 4, to design the brief for the retrofitting project, guided by the internal BEF provided by the UKRI.

The UKRI’s adoption of the BEF would require the consultants to follow a BEF’s principles, encouraging the use of locally-sourced biobased materials.

The BEF guidelines would be embedded within the conventional RIBA workplan1 to form the Biobased Retrofitting for Bioregional Economies overlay (BRBE). The BRBE would prescribe the quality of materials, agroecological production methods among other considerations. See coming pages for BRBE Workplan Overlay.

Progressive procurement protocols would also incentivise outreach to Local Authorities to assess how the procurement of goods and services for biobased retrofitting can contribute to their existing initiatives. To support broader social, environmental and economic goals, the Local Authority could provide lands and resources to help kickstart the biobased industry. This mutually beneficial collaboration would initiate a Public-Common Partnership.

See coming pages for Cultivating Commons PCP.

PCP Summary

The Public-Common Partnership (PCP) is comprised of the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials, the East Midlands Biobased Commons Association (EMBCA), Biobased Prototyping Committee (BPC), Farming Cluster Representatives, and Members and Allies. In addition, regional and local environmental authorities provide advisory services to the Association and Committee upon request. Private farmers could engage with farming agroecological straw and aquaculture once initial awareness for biobased material production builds. Lastly, surplus of materials, funds, or resources from the East Midlands PCP can be redistributed to other regional PCPs by the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials (FBCM)

How to read the diagram:

Cultivating Commons PCP

Cultivating Commons PCP

Summary Public-Common Partnership (PCP) of the Federation for Construction Materials, the Biobased Commons (EMBCA), Biobased Committee (BPC), Farming Representatives, and Members addition, regional and environmental authorities provide services to the Association Committee upon request. Private engage with farming agroecological straw and aquaculture awareness for biobased production builds. Lastly, materials, funds, or from the East Midlands PCP redistributed to other regional Federation for Biobased Materials (FBCM)

the diagram:

Funding Actors & Grants

The proposal relies on Funding from Innovate UK and other grants or incentives to circulate from the Federation (FBCM) for Biobased Construction Materials to the regional Associations. Moreover, farmers seeking to transition to agroeocological farming of biobased materials could be supported by Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS), Farming Investment Funds (FIF) or the Coastal Community Fund (CCF).

It is critical to note that this list is not exhaustive and many funding avenues exist for research, sustaimable farming and aquaculture production, and rural economic regeneration.

Actors & Grants

relies on Funding UK and other grants to circulate from the (FBCM) for Biobased Materials to the regional Moreover, farmers transition to agroeocological biobased materials could by Environmental Land Schemes (ELMS), Farming Funds (FIF) or the Coastal Fund (CCF).

note that this list is not and many funding avenues research, sustaimable farming aquaculture production, and rural regeneration.

EAST MIDLANDS BIOBASED COMMONS ASSOCIATION (EMBCA)

[Designer]

The Designer(s) would be retained in RIBA Stage 0 and Stage 2. Firstly, in Stage 0 they would design the overall project to include the PCP framework and brief that follows the BEF. Once the design work is tendered, a Designer would be retained for the architectural retrofit project and be responsible for procurement, retrofitting design, execution, and partnership development.

The success of the PCP relies heavily on the Designer’s capacity to not only provide conventional design services but implement the BEF framework, form partnerships and build capacity within the UKRI and community at large to ensure the project contributes to broader community goals.

[PCP Advisor]

The PCP Advisor would be appointed to the project team with the Designer and retained in RIBA Stage 2. The PCP Advisor would focus on policy and partnership at a strategic level to promote commoning of knowledge, goods, services, members and allies. As part of the East Midlands Biobased Commons Association (EMBCA), they would also provide additional advisory services to the Biobased Prototype Committee (BPC) regarding opportunities for the workforce, distribution of resources, and bring awareness to emerging partnership opportunities within the EMBCA and amongst other Associations.

In collaboration with the Ward Representative, the Local Authority would identify underutilised public owned lands, brownfields and council farms, that could be lent to the EMBCA to uptake prototype activities and biobased material production. EAST MIDLANDS BIOBASED COMMONS ASSOCIATION (EMBCA)

[Local Council]

Local Council would be incentivised to participate in the EMBCA as it promises community welfare benefits, urban and rural renewal, job creation and employment opportunities, community engagement, economic diversification, and ecological resiliency and biodiversity enhancement.

[University Researcher]

University researchers would provide research services to the BPC related to biobased material technologies, biobased design and construction, or agroecological farming practices including soil or fertiliser testing. Initial partnership with Universities could be formted through the UKRI’s research network.

The BCP’s material prototyping, reskilling and upskilling activities and flying factory facilities would offer students and researchers the opportunity to engage in tangible projects with real-world implications and social impacts. Similarly, BPC would benefit from University partners’ resources, research outputs, and receive material innovation expertise.

BIOBASED PROTOTYPE COMMITTEE (BPC)

[Ward Representative]

The Ward representative is responsible for economic development opportunities within their ward. Therefore, they would be approached by the EMBCA to identify sites within their ward suitable for prototyping. Once identified, they would collaborate with the County Council (Local Authority) and Local Environmental Authority, to determine the feasibility of using underutilised publicly owned lands or brownfields for the prototype sites. The Ward Representative would link the prototyping sites and local authorities, providing advisory services to the BPC regarding governance and ownership.

[Community Interest Groups]

Community Interest groups represent local communities within jurisdictions of prospective and proposed prototype sites. The community will undoubtedly have opinions regarding the establishment of prototype sites or conversion of Council Farms within their communities. To ensure community voices are heard, Interest Groups, in collaboration with Designers or PCP Consultants as required, will conduct community engagement sessions to build awareness and skills for biobased industries, the benefits of prototype sites or regenerative farming on Council Farms, and build consensus.

BIOBASED PROTOTYPE COMMITTEE (BPC)

[Trade Unions]

The Trade Unions have two key roles. Firstly, build awareness for open job opportunities within the biobased sector, and secondly, connect with the quarry and aggregate sector to share opportunities for transitioning labour from extractive industries to biobased material production.

The Trade Unions would guide individuals to the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials e-portal to source job opportunities for prototype sites, on farms, and within the biobased industry more broadly. Trade Unions would distribute information to Community Interest Groups, ensuring opportunities are shared equitably and transparently.

FARMING CLUSTER REPRESENTATIVE

Farming Clusters include Land Workers, focused on land-based activities such as straw production, and Marine Workers including aquaculture producers and and kelp farmers.

The Clusters would connect Marine and Land Workers with the FBCM to establish best practices for producing biobased materials. The Clusters could advocate for farmers to receive certification by the FBCM and relay certification requirements to the farmers and producers. The raw materials would be circulated by the Farming Clusters to the EMBCA directly or to partnered members and allies within the PCP.

[Marine Workers]

Few Marine Clusters exist in the East Midlands currently. However, procurement of raw material for the BGS retrofit could foster a network of producers.

Initially, the Marine Workers would provide raw materials to the Clusters for distribution to the EMBCA or partnered Members and Allies for manufacturing. Eventually, with R&D and upskilling or reskilling, the marine industry could expand. Marine Workers engagement in ‘Commoning activities’ involves the use of kelp fertiliser on farms engaged in UKBF straw production, the manufacturing and production of construction materials, and the development of knowledge and research.

[Land Workers]

Land Workers within a Farming Cluster would recieve information regarding the benefits of agroecological farming practices, gain awareness for engaging in biobased material production and understand the pathway to achieve certifications from the FBCM. Land Workers provide raw materials to the Farming Clusters directly for distribution to the EMBCA or distribute materials to partnered Members and Allies for processing or manufacturing.

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORITIES

[Regional Environmental Authority]

Regional Environmental Authorities advise the EMBCA on landscape strategies for improving biodiversity on the farms and within the broader region. Environmental Authorities oversee the strategy, planning and design, and implementation to strengthen ecologies within the network of productive landscapes.

[Local Environmental Authority]

Local Authorities (Local Council and Ward Representatives) will consult the Local Environmental Authority on site specific matters related to the identification of prototype sites. The Environmental Authority provides ecological assessment services to ensure the site is suitable for the intended use, and helps identify constraints related to existing environmental conditions. Local and Regional Environmental Authorities will coordinate initiatives to ensure biodiversity and environmental design goals are congurent across scales and align with broader UK biodiversity targets.

MEMBERS & ALLIES

[Members]

Members constitute the labourforce within the PCP framework. The membership scheme invites Underskilled Workers and Transition Labour to participate in activities for reskilling and upskilling on BPC prototype sites. Members could join indepedently, or be sponsored by Trade Unions or Local Councils to participate; Members can join activities hosted by BPCs in other Regions if desired (programming across Regional Associations may vary).

[Allies]

Existing Contractors, Local Businesses, and Biobased Manufacturers would participate in the PCP as “Allies”. Allies provide services, skills, resources (tools or machinery for example) or manufactured construction materials to complete projects initiated by the PCP. Allies would participate for the duration of the retrofit project in their respective capacities; Allies are not necessarily permanent fixtures within the PCP framework but engage for particular projects.

To retain skilled Members within the PCP ecosystem, Allies could provide direct avenues for Members to achieve employment in the biobased sector. For example, workers upskilled or reskilled in biobased construction at a BPC site, could be employed by a Contractor who works on the PCP engaged retrofit project. The Contractor would provide employment and skill building and Members would receive training. It is assumed the shared knowledge and resources would be retained for future Public-Common Partnership retrofit projects within the region or provide training and knowledge sharing to other Members.

BIOBASED RETROFITTING FOR BIOREGIONAL ECONOMIES (BRBE) - RIBA WORK PLAN OVERLAY

Work Plan Overlay

The RIBA Plan of Work is a framework developed by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) to guide the planning, design, and construction process in architecture and construction projects.10

CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT1 ACAN

RIBA Work Plan overlay created by ACAN for retrofitting through a circular economy model. This serves as the basis for the proposed Biobased Retrofitting for Bioregional Economies overlay.

THE POWER OF PROCUREMENT8 CLES

Defining Social Values Framework by CLES and the integration in the project procurement protocols.

The following overlay outlines core tasks and procurement considerations for designing with biobased materials for retrofitting projects while upholding values outlined in the Bioregional Evaluation Framework.

The overlay was developed based on consideration of four existing frameworks and procurement guidelines:

LES MATERIAUX DE CONSTRUCTION BIOSOURCES2

Lessons from France for integrating biobased materials in conventional construction procedures. This was overlayed with the ACAN framework.

CHANGING PLACES5 CLES

Case examples of progressive procurement and Social Values Framework developed by CLES for the Manchester City Council

RIBA STAGES 0-1

RIBA STAGES 0-1 CORE TASKS

• Evaluate whether the building is suitable for retrofit.

• Conduct an initial building assessment of building fabric, airtightness, ventilation, and energy use of the existing building to determine whether retrofitting is the most efficient solution.1

• Identify opportunities for using biobased materials for retrofitting specific building elements. Specify opportunities to integrate biobased materials alongside recycled or reused materials where possible.

• Design a social values framework for the project to understand how the project can benefit the region at large through job creation, supporting local SMEs by sourcing materials and labour within the bioregion, reducing waste, and reskilling and upskilling etc. Clearly define goals with the appointed PCP consultant.

• Establish clear metrics for evaluating the economic implications, social values, and ecological impacts of proposed materials. For example, number of jobs created or number of apprenticeships or training opportunities provided, or total value of contracts awarded to local suppliers and SMEs.

RIBA STAGES 0-1 PROCUREMENT TASKS

• Develop a Procurement Strategy which appoints a Biobased Designer for all stages.

• Appoint a PCP Consultant to assist between Stage 0 to the end of Stage 1 to assist with the Preparation and Briefing and advise on the material procurement strategy.

• When assembling the project team and developing the procurement strategy, consider how project team members with Biobased material experience will be selected.

• Utilise the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials (FBCM) platform to identify bioregional networks of suppliers, manufacturers and material availability for use in the project.

• Engage stakeholders early on to understand how the institution can better design the project work plan to accommodate local suppliers’ capacity and needs within the overall project lifecycle.1

PROJECT PLANNING & DESIGN

RIBA STAGES 2-3 CORE TASKS

STAGES 2-3

• Set out the required changes and performance targets. In this stage of work, the focus is on balancing maximum carbon savings (retaining the maximum within the existing structure) whilst achieving the desired building performance and function for the client’s use (current and future).1

• Building components should be independent and exchangeable. Independence means that the assembly, transformation and disassembly of components within a building layer can be carried out without affecting others. 1

• Avoid mixing technical and biological materials together to preserve clean and non-toxic material cycles. For all new elements, consider the assembly and disassembly sequence.1

• Develop a waste management strategy during construction.1

• Design and detailing should ensure that biobased materials are utilised strategically to maximise benefits for both building performance standards and interior conditions. Design options can be evaluated from a performance, aesthetic and experiential value perspective. Establish metrics for evaluating these benefits.

• Finalise the design, ensuring that biobased materials are specified in the technical documentation.

RIBA STAGES 2-3 CORE TASKS

• PCP consultant advises on procurement of materials by conducting supply chain analysis.

• Employ an Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) approach. Hold discussions with contractors and specialist subcontractors relevant to the procurement route and test Biobased material objectives set out in the Concept Design.5

• Allocate a budget that reflects the potential additional costs associated with integrating biobased materials.

• Advisory: Clients should consider the long-term savings associated with the use of biobased materials, such as reduced energy costs and improved building performance.

RIBA

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION & TENDERING

RIBA STAGE 4 CORE TASKS

RIBA STAGE 4

• Plan for capacity-building initiatives such as upskilling or reskilling events at local Cultivating Commons prototype sites to support local labourforces, suppliers, and land and marine workers.

RIBA STAGE 4 PROCUREMENT TASKS

• Issue a pre-qualification questionnaire (PQQ) to potential contractors and suppliers that assesses their experience and capability in using biobased materials. This should be tailored to earlier input from local suppliers, manufacturers and contractors in Stages 0-1.1

• The specifications should clearly outline the requirements for biobased materials, including performance criteria, sustainability goals, and any relevant certifications (e.g., the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials).

• Conduct a competitive tendering process that evaluates bids based on both cost and transparency in the social and environmental impacts of the production, manufacturing and proposed installation of the biobased products or services.

• Tender local projects through regional Public-Common Partnerships for biobased materials.

• Prepare tender documents that include specific requirements for the retrofitting materials. A minimum of 40% of materials need to be biobased. Biobased materials need to be regionally produced on an agroecological site that is certified by the regional Biobased Commons Association.2

* Include a clause stating biobased materials can be sourced beyond bioregional boundaries upon client approval if unavailable within the region.

• Include community benefit clauses in contracts that require suppliers to deliver specific social value outcomes, such as hiring local workers, providing apprenticeships, or supporting local community initiatives.8

• Utilise digital platforms facilitate easier access to procurement opportunities for local suppliers and Small Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Platforms such as the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials can provide information on available contracts, submission processes, and deadlines.8

CONSTRUCTION & HANDOVER

RIBA STAGES 5-6 CORE TASKS

• Hold regular workshops during the construction phase to maintain collaborative problem solving and information flow between design and construction team.

• Document and record the materials used, performance metrics and other valuable information related to use of biobased materials for future development of material passports and further R&D.1

• Engage with clients and build a maintenance team to develop a maintenance plan.1

• Develop an end-of-life procedure for all materials by engaging manufacturers and suppliers to understand existing mandates. If none exist, co-develop a project specific strategy. 1

• Implement a contract management process that includes monitoring the use of biobased materials during construction, ensuring compliance with the tender specifications.

• Document social value outcomes achieved during the project and sharefindings with stakeholders to help institutions demonstrate their commitment to community benefits.1 5

• Include post-occupancy evaluations that assess the performance of biobased materials in terms of sustainability, comfort, and durability.

• Conduct final inspections to ensure that biobased materials have been installed correctly. Provide documentation and training on the maintenance of biobased materials to the facility management team.1

RIBA STAGES 5-6 CORE TASKS

• To deal with any construction problems that might change design details, develop strategies to address the uncertainties arising from using biobased materials. (ex. flexible procurement).2

• Ensure contractors provide a strategy for end-of-life for materials and propose reuse opportunities where possible. 1

• Oversee the procurement of biobased materials, ensuring that suppliers meet the specified criteria. Monitor the construction process to ensure compliance with the design and material specifications.

• Maintain ongoing communication with the Biobased Commons Association within the region the project is taking place to ensure feedback loops and information gathering regarding the construction, performance and maintenance of biobased materials.

RIBA STAGE 5-6

• Include a circular management strategy with a manual that outlines necessary future upgrades and adaptability instructions. 1

• Encourage yearly review of end-of-life strategies by clients and maintenance team. 1

• Monitor the performance of biobased materials over time. Gather feedback from users regarding comfort and functionality. Document and share feedback with the Biobased Commons Association for future projects.

• At end of the building, the deconstruction and disposal plan should be followed. 1

• Develop maintenance contract that specify the use of biobased materials for repairs and renovations, promoting a lifecycle approach to sustainability. 1

• Ensure inspection is performed by representative from the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials on a yearly basis. Information gathered regarding longevity and performance will support continued R&D. Information will be circulated to producers, suppliers and manufacturers to continue advancing the biobased supply network.

RIBA STAGE 7 PROCUREMENT TASKS

RIBA STAGE 7 CORE TASKS

REFERENCES

1. Architects Climate Action Network. Circular Economy in the Built Environment. January 2024. Accessed November 24, 2024. https://www.architectscan.org/_fi les/ugd/b22203_ a1b62ef7e0e24d0bb7b5a2c30dad3c9d.pdf.

2. Baechler, Cédric, Guillaume Laulan, Théo Lacoste, Alice Gandara, Olivier Ortega, and Alice Tripot. Guide matériaux biosourcés et commande publique. April 2020. General Directorate of Planning, Housing and Nature (DGALN) / Department of Town Planning and Housing.

3. Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES). “What Is an Anchor Institution?” Centre for Local Economic Strategies. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://cles.org.uk/what-is-communitywealth-building/what-is-an-anchor-institution/.

4. Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES). “What Is Community Wealth Building?” Centre for Local Economic Strategies. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://cles.org.uk/community-wealthbuilding/what-is-community-wealth-building/.

5. David Burch (CLES), Changing Places: New Directions in Social Value (2023), PDF fi le, accessed October 2023, https://cles.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Changing-Places-FINAL.pdf.

6. Council, Manchester City. “The Council and Democracy Social Value.” What is social value? | Social value | Manchester City Council. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://www.manchester. gov.uk/info/200110/budgets_and_spending/7730/social_value.

7. Heron, Kai, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn. “Food Systems in Common: Council Farms, Agroecological Food Sovereignty, and Public-Common Partnerships.” November 28, 2024.

8. Jackson, Matthew. The Power of Procurement: Towards Progressive Procurement: The Policy and Practice of Manchester City Council. Manchester: Centre for Local Economic Strategies, 2023.

9. World Bank, PPP Reference Guide Version 3: PPP Basics, August 2021, https://ppp.worldbank. org/public-private-partnership/sites/ppp.worldbank.org/fi les/2021-08/PPP%20Reference%20 Guide%20Version%203%20-%20PPP%20Basics.pdf, 5.

10. Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). RIBA Plan of Work 2020. London: RIBA Publishing, 2020.

Reflections on the Handbook

The Handbook presents a prototype for how the Public-Common Partnership (PCP) could be mobilised for the BGS retrofitting project. However, it is designed to be adopted and adapted to suit the specific needs of other Regional Biobased Associations. It is important to note that materials, stakeholders, actors, members, allies, and their respective dynamics will evolve throughout the project. One constant actor in all PCPs is the Designer. Designers contribute significantly to the Public-Common Partnership, from Stage 0 (project design) through to Stage 2 (retrofitting design), Stage 4 (tendering and specifications), and Stage 7 (ongoing maintenance and disassembly planning).

The PCP proposal makes it clear that Designers have the agency to design innovative approaches to construction and procurement throughout the project lifecycle. The PCP would benefit from further understanding of grants and funding avenues for the project remains a gap in the proposal. Additionally, the BGS’s current procurement framework remains unexplored due to limited correspondence with the BGS procurement representative. Despite these limitations, the proposed PCP offers valuable insights into the Initiation Strategy, the roles and responsibilities of actors, and how this could be integrated into the existing RIBA workplan. The Handbook should be read alongside the PCP Prototype Model on page 147

BASFORD

Siting prototype sites within urban communities

Basford is a ward situated along the River Leen, a tributary of the River Trent in Nottingham. Historically an industrial area, it hosted several lace, gas, and stone factories. Today, Basford faces a relatively high deprivation index and saw a rise in unemployment of approximately 86.5% over an 18-month period between 2019 and 2020, largely due to the impacts of COVID-19.9 The area’s industrial legacy has left several underutilised publicly owned sites, which could be repurposed as

9 Nottingham City Council, Area 2 – Basford, Berridge and Sherwood profile and analysis (Nottingham: Nottingham City Council, 2017), https://committee.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/documents/s110166/Enc.%201%20for%20Area%20Partner.

Basford Developments

This report highlights significant developments underway in Basford, emphasising the growing interest in the area for development and investment. This momentum positions Basford as a promising location for PCP activities.

Nottingham

Basford

fig 5.5 Aerial view of the protoyping site.

fig 5.6 View of the protoyping site

fig 5.7 Existing neighbourhood character All photos by Priyanka Awatramani

fig 5.8 Basford Development Report by Nottingham College

by Nottingham College

map.28 BASFORD

prototype sites or flying factories for the biobased industry. Focusing on prototype sites in less-favored areas like Basford could provide new employment opportunities, foster community engagement, and transform derelict or underutilised sites for public benefit.

In recent years, the community has attracted significant investment. In 2015, Nottingham College established its Basford campus, which houses the Construction Training Centre.10

10 Nottingham College, “Basford Campus,” Nottingham College, accessed December 30, 2024, https://www. nottinghamcollege.ac.uk/student-life/campuses/basford.

The College is now expanding to include a new Construction Skills Centre, offering additional apprenticeships and training opportunities for the local workforce.

The proposed prototype site is located on Vernon Road, adjacent to the Basford tram stop, on a former industrial site currently occupied by an underutilised warehouse. The site is bordered by 1850s-era row housing, typical of the area’s architecture. The developed portion of the site is available for lease, while the adjacent greenspace is designated as a priority habitat for improvement.To visibilise the development of the PCP within the physical landscapes it transforms, we constructed a physical model.

fig 5.9 (a-f) Google Earth Imagery of Basford Prototype Site

PROTOTYPE SITE MODEL

Simulating Prototype Site programming and activities

The model serves as a visual tool to simulate the roles and responsibilities of actors within the PCP and their dynamics in constructing and managing the prototype site. The model was designed to reflect the real-world conditions of the Basford site and suggested ways to optimise existing infrastructure for new use. The proposed design includes the re-use of remnant foundations of industrial buildings as the footprint for new construction. Similarly, relic walls from former factory buildings could be repurposed as perimeter walls. Lastly, existing plant materials could be retained where possible and improved to align with priority habitat goals; the prototype site has enhanced perimeter planting and buffers to adjacent greenspaces for circulation of species within the urban ecology.

The model reflects the prototype site within Basford; however, it is intended to be flexible and non-site specific to be adopted in other contexts. Furthermore, the depicted programming activities are speculative, and it is assumed that larger sites could host varied facilities for Flying Factories and on-site construction, whereas smaller sites may be suitable for workshops, community engagement, and training. The model sits on a base of core imagery of Long Eaton—another urban site close to Nottingham—generously shared by the BGS.

Photographs were taken of the model and composed as a video explaining how negotiations and

partnership amongst PCP actors and stakeholders contribute to the physical developments on the site. The video includes a five second stop motion video, demonstrating the supply, assembly, and construction of the site that foregrounds the labour networks involved in its conception.

The model will be exhibited at the British Geological Survey accompanied by The Cultivating Commons Handbook. The model

will serve as a conversation piece to evoke continual questioning of opportunities for the BGS to engage in the PCP and encourage visitors to contemplate their agency to contribute to democratic material supply chains.

The model was made possible with generous support from the team at the Wood and Metal Workshop who supported the design, assembly, and material sourcing. Additionally,

we thank the AA Materials Arcade, AA Model Workshop, AA Digital Photo Studio, AA Print Shop, AA Digital Prototyping Lab for their support and facilities. We would also like to thank the AALU first year students who helped shuttle the model from 1 Montague Street to 36 Bedford Square, and the AALU tutors, notably James Emery, for their insights on the model vision and design.

fig 5.10

Top View of Prototype Site Model

fig

CORE IMAGE [Long Eaton, UK]

PROTOTYPE

Site Assessment

The prototype site, located on underutilised council owned lands, is identified and conditions are reviewed by the Environmental Authority. The Trade Unions discuss local skill availability with the East Midlands Biobased Commons Association (EMBCA). The Community Interest Groups advocate for engagement with the surrounding community. PCP advisor explains roles and responsibilites for the PCP participants and formalise the Biobased Prototype Committee (BPC).

Site Assessment

The UKRI, funds the UK Biobased Federation, who finances the EMBCA for developing the prototyping site. The UKRI representative meets with the Association and Committee to discuss project implementation and phasing.

Site Preparation

The labourforce, who are members of the Association are supported by the Trade Union to prepare the site.

fig 5.13 (a-t) Images of the prototype site model for video animation

East Midlands Biobased Commons Association Biobased Prototype Committee Farming Cluster Representative Members & Allies Environmental Authority UKRI Representative

Site Planning

The EMBCA and BPC build consensus with the members around the delivery of the reskilling and upskilling programmes. They also discuss opportunities for allies to participate and support members in the PCP.

Site Planning

Post clean-up, The designer, PCP Advisor, and Ward Representative revisit the site to discuss next steps.

Design Mark-out

The Designer and labourforce mark-out the site.

Community Awareness Activities

The Designer promotes prototype initiatives and builds awareness for site activities as advised by the Community Interest Group Representative.

Pre-Construction

The Designer and University researchers engage with local farming clusters to connect with marine workers. The marine worker brings raw materials to the site and manufacturers supply seaweed plastic.

East Midlands Biobased Commons Association Biobased Prototype Committee

Farming Cluster Representative

Members & Allies Environmental Authority

UKRI Representative

Pre-Construction

The ward representative reviews progress with the local council and researcher.

Crop Testing

University researcher and the land worker experiment crop propagation and growing with kelp fertiliser.

Construction of Site Storage

The temporary structure is constructed using the seaweed plastic. University Researchers experiment with shellfish plasters.

Experimental Construction of Site Office

The Designer and University researcher have straw delivered to the site by a landworker. They discuss assembly methods with contractors and labourforce interested in upskilling for the construction of straw panels.

East Midlands Biobased Commons Association Biobased Prototype Committee Farming Cluster Representative Members & Allies Environmental Authority UKRI Representative

Experimental Construction of Site Office

The labourers mark-out the site office building and start to build it. It will serve as headquarters for the EMBCA. The build is an experimental process for testing plasters and different biobased construction methods.

Flying Factory & Supply Chain Mapping

Once complete, the BPC begins site programming and operating under the guidance of the EMBCA. They define a plan for the flying factory to supply materials for the retrofitting of BGS.

Member & Ally Engagement

Community Interest Groups engage with the labourforce to receive feedback and relay information to the BPC to discuss how they can best support contractors, underskilled workers, and transition labour.

Workshops & Material Showcase

Materials workshops are conducted by the EMBCA.

Manufacturers and contractors come to the site to share the final products, produced agroecologically through the PCP, formulating the supply chain map.

PCP Expansion Planning

The network of producers, manufacturers and PCP members discuss expansion opportunities and where the next prototype site or PCP could be mobilised. Surplus of skilled labour, research knowledge, and materials will be redistributed to other PCPs by the EMBCA.

East Midlands Biobased Commons Association Biobased Prototype Committee Farming Cluster Representative Members & Allies Environmental Authority UKRI Representative

REFLECTIONS

Anchor institutions such as the British Geological Survey (BGS) have major influence in the communities where they are located. They have potential to mobilise radical responses to the climate crisis, such as the biobased industry, by leveraging their purchasing power and adopting alternative procurement strategies for retrofitting projects. The Cultivating Commons PublicCommon Partnership (CCPCP) strategy calls for the BGS to redefine its role as a public institution by incorporating Social Values into procurement processes such as aligning its practices with the principles outlined in the Bioregional Evaluation Framework (BEF). By following the BEF, it would incentivise the institution to provide grants and funding to collaboration of UKRI institutions and local actors such as Councils, Higher Education Institutions, Farming Clusters, and labor workers.

The success of this framework relies on addressing two key barriers. Firstly, the BGS does not have research expertise in biobased materials, and they focus on geological research and development. Therefore, funding for the retrofitting comes from the UKRI so they must be aware of the varied aspects of the biobased sector that the PCP addresses and would be applicable for funding; the PCP strategies address all stages of the materials supply chain including production, farming, manufacturing, transportation, assembly, construction and recycling or disposal. Within each of these phases, there are expansive areas for UKRI to invest in research and development. Ultimately, securing funding from the UKRI for the BGS retrofitting to initiate the PCP would require a well-articulated funding plan and strategy that is not currently outlined in the PCP.

Secondly, the PCP relies on collaboration between many actors and stakeholders, one being private farmers. To expand agroecological practices to farms within the jurisdiction of the BGS, it requires the Farming

Clusters to incentivise the participation of the land workers. Since the project did not engage directly with local farms it remains unclear whether they would be willing to uptake agroecological practices and their interest in engaging the PCP framework.

In addition to barriers for establishing the industry, there exist others for sustaining the network. A key risk is the lack of capacity within local Councils to provide lands at a below-market-rate. For example, a council with underutilised lands may have greater incentive to sell lands to developers for housing rather than use as prototype sites. However, this could be nuanced, since the prototype sites are considered low-impact developments with potential ease for disassembly, could enable their conception on higher risk sites with priority habitats unsuitable for housing or permanent structures.

Furthermore, due to limited funds, there is a risk that corporations could purchase biobased flying factories or sites from the council if they were to become profitable. For example, a large corporation investing in biobased industry could buy out the council to monopolise the series of production sites. Although not addressed in the chapter, it is important for safeguards to be in place to ensure that land or operations are not sold off for private gain but remain dedicated to community-centered goals.

To conclude, the PCP framework outlined in this chapter demonstrated its viability for the UKRI BGS campus in the East Midlands bioregion. However, it is intended to be self-replicating under the governance of the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials. Other UKRI institutions seeking to retrofit their campus could connect with regional biobased associations to optimise surpluses of materials, resources, knowledge or skills from other regions and undertake a similar strategy in their locale.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Architects Climate Action Network. Circular Economy in the Built Environment. January 2024. Accessed November 24, 2024. https://www.architectscan.org/_ files/ugd/b22203_ a1b62ef7e0e24d0bb7b5a2c30dad3c9d.pdf.

Baechler, Cédric, Guillaume Laulan, Théo Lacoste, Alice Gandara, Olivier Ortega, and Alice Tripot. Guide matériaux biosourcés et commande publique. April 2020. General Directorate of Planning, Housing and Nature (DGALN) / Department of Town Planning and Housing.

Burch, David (CLES), Changing Places: New Directions in Social Value (2023), PDF file, accessed October 2023, https://cles.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ Changing-Places-FINAL.pdf.

Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) and Preston City Council, How We Built Community Wealth in Preston (Manchester: CLES and Preston City Council, May 2019)

Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES). “What Is an Anchor Institution?” Centre for Local Economic Strategies. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://cles. org.uk/what-is-community-wealth-building/ what-is-an-anchor-institution/.

Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES). “What Is Community Wealth Building?” Centre for Local Economic Strategies. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://cles.org.uk/community-wealth-building/ what-is-community-wealth-building/.

Council, Manchester City. “The Council and Democracy Social Value.” What is social value? | Social value | Manchester City Council. Accessed December 28, 2024. https://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200110/ budgets_and_spending/7730/social_value.

Heron, Kai, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn. “Food Systems

in Common: Council Farms, Agroecological Food Sovereignty, and Public-Common Partnerships.” November 28, 2024.

Heron, Kai, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn. “PublicCommon Parternships: Democratising ownership and urban development.” September, 2021.

Heron, Kai. Conversation with Priyanka Awatramani, April 15, 2024.

Jackson, Matthew. The Power of Procurement: Towards Progressive Procurement: The Policy and Practice of Manchester City Council. Manchester: Centre for Local Economic Strategies, 2023.

Millner, Naomi, and Patrick Bresnihan. All We Want Is the Earth: Land, Labour and Movements Beyond Environmentalism. Bristol: Bristol University Press, 2023.

Nottingham City Council. Area 2 – Basford, Berridge and Sherwood profile and analysis. Nottingham: Nottingham City Council, 2017. https://committee. nottinghamcity.gov.uk/documents/s110166/Enc.%20 1%20for%20Area%20Partner.

Nottingham College. “Basford Campus.” Nottingham College. Accessed December 30, 2024. https://www. nottinghamcollege.ac.uk/student-life/campuses/ basford/

Power, Samantha, and Leon Seefeld. Bioregional Financing Facilities. Oakland, CA: The BioFi Project; London: Dark Matter Labs; San Francisco: Buckminster Fuller Institute, June 2024.

Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). RIBA Plan of Work 2020 London: RIBA Publishing, 2020.

World Bank. PPP Reference Guide Version 3: PPP Basics August 2021.

LABOUR

Workers in quarrying and mining face health and safety risks, including exposure to hazardous dust, physical injuries, and mental stress due to dangerous working conditions and isolation. Additionally, many experience job insecurity, low wages, and limited access to training and career development opportunities. Therefore, labour considerations need to be central to the industrial shift in the construction industry. The transition towards biobased materials, while necessary for addressing climate change, could exacerbate the situation by offloading the pressures of this production and management to already vulnerable communities like land and marine workers, and other informal workers. And hence, it demands a comprehensive strategy to foreground the labour force for the design, planning and implementation of this proposal. Agroecology, as highlighted during the conference Locating The Agrarian Struggles For Land held on November 29, 2024 at the Architectural Association, extends beyond ecological measures to encompass the fair treatment of workers and equitable resource distribution. It advocates for a reduction in reliance on heavy machinery and industrial equipment, instead promoting manual, community-driven and ecologically sensitive approaches to agriculture. While this approach supports biodiversity and better environmental management, it entails a significant increase in labour demand. Workers will be required to manage complex ecosystems and handle diverse cropping systems on the farms, and process biobased materials in flying factories, which collectively demand a more labourintensive approach compared to mechanised monoculture farming or conventional resource extraction.

Furthermore, the transition to agroecologically sourced biobased materials in the construction industry will also disrupt traditional labour structures. By replacing 40% of conventional materials with biobased alternatives as proposed in the RIBA Overlay titled Biobased Retrofitting for Bioregional Economies, could lead to significant workforce

shifts. This change can be speculated to affect approximately 40% of workers in the mining and quarrying industries, creating the potential for job losses. In 2021, The UK’s construction material mining and quarrying industry directly employs 50000 individuals directly across its 2300 sites.1 And beyond this, the sector boasts a wide and complex value chain involving transportation of raw materials to sites, operating heavy machinery and processing materials into end products like cement and concrete. The Mineral Products Association reports the industry supports 3.2 million jobs in the supply chain, 2 showing its extensive impact on employment.

Without careful planning and transition strategies, these displacements could result in extreme socio-economic issues echoing historical precedents. The consequences of poorly managed transitions are observed during the largest miners’ strike in the UK in the 1980s. The abrupt closures of mines and the lack of support for affected workers led to severe communal divides, economic hardship, and long-lasting social impacts that persisted for decades.3 These highlight the importance of strategic planning and actor engagement in managing industrial transitions to avoid repeated detriment to industrialised communities. This section investigates the industrialisation of the East Midlands as a historical process, transitioning into a call for a Just Transition that outlines policies, strategies, and systems essential for this proposal. Given that the history, scope of quarrying, and management practices in the East Midlands are closely tied to its administrative boundaries, the maps in this section specifically reflect the region’s political boundaries.

1 “The Mineral Products Industry At A Glance (2021),” Mineral Products Association, 2021, https://www. mineralproducts.org/Facts-and-Figures.aspx

2 Mineral Products Association, The Mineral Products Industry at a Glance (2021).

3 BBC News, “Miners’ Strike 1984: Why UK Miners Walked Out and How It Ended,” BBC News, July 5, 2023, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68244762

EAST MIDLANDS INDUSTRIAL HISTORY

Tracing the evolution of industrialisation and its impact on communities

The East Midlands is rich in geological diversity, with significant formations including Carboniferous limestone in Derbyshire and the Coal Measures in North Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, which fueled the region’s industrial growth. Triassic sandstone and Jurassic rocks are found in areas like Leicestershire, with the latter containing marine fossils from a time when the region was submerged by shallow seas. Additionally, Quaternary deposits from the Ice Ages have significantly influenced the region’s landscape, contributing to the distribution of sediments such as glacial tills, sands, gravels, and river terraces that affect soil fertility and agriculture.4

The mudstone in Nottingham, primarily composed of red and brown mudstones and associated with the Mercia Mudstone, was deposited during the Triassic period in a semi-arid, shallow marine environment. It plays a crucial role in the Coal Measures sequence and serves as an important stratigraphic marker in the region’s geology. The mudstone influences local topography and soil

4 British Geological Survey, Structure and Evolution of the East Midlands Region of the Pennine Basin, Subsurface memoir (British Geological Survey, 2011), https://webapps.bgs.ac.uk/memoirs/docs/B06182.html

Closure of Babbington Colliery in Cinderhill

Carrington Station looking south

The Beeching Report leading to closures of thousands of railways and stations

McKechnie Brothers Ltd Engineering Works off Middlemore Lane and the disused Coppy Hall Colliery, Stubber’s Green

Dr Oliver Wakefield Regional Geologist at BGS

quality and is significant for understanding the area’s geology. Much of this mudstone is now “rotting,” as noted by Oliver Wakefield, a BGS employee, leading to cave excavations and the development of bricks as replacements for clay.

The region’s mineral extraction, including extensive coal and iron deposits, traces back to the seventeenth century, particularly in North Derbyshire. By 1829 there were around 92 mines in the region.5 However, until mid-nineteenth century mining and related industries remained local and small-scale, restricted by expensive inland transportation. Unlike the north-east, where coal was being transported via sea, the East Midlands relied on fragmented canal networks. While these canals facilitated the transportation of minerals to London and supported the iron industry’s early growth, they were insufficient to sustain large-scale industrial expansion. During the early nineteenth century, coke furnaces were established along the canals to convert iron ore into pig iron. By then, Derbyshire had become the fourth most productive county for pig iron, primarily supplying the West Midlands. Despite this early success, the region’s iron industry stagnated in subsequent decades, hindered by inadequate infrastructure and diminishing local resources.6

The advent of railways in the mid-nineteenth century transformed the East Midlands’ industrial landscape. Initially fragmented, the railway network expanded significantly with external investments, connecting every part of

Dr Tom Bide Mineral Resource Geologist at BGS

the region. This revolutionised transportation, drastically reducing costs and enabling large-scale, deep mining operations. Over four decades, approximately 41 new collieries opened, particularly along the NottinghamMansfield axis, doubling coal production within 20 years.7 Similarly, railways revitalised the iron industry by importing iron ore from other parts of the region, ensuring continued production of pig iron. The industrial base diversified as counties like Lincolnshire utilised locally produced iron to manufacture steamdriven agricultural machinery by the 1840s. This period of rapid industrialisation positioned the East Midlands as a key player in the broader industrial revolution, not only in extractive industries but also in engineering, clothing, and textile manufacturing.8 Historically, these towns experienced significant population growth and rapid urbanisation during the 19th and early 20th centuries, as they attracted workers from other regions for jobs in factories, mines, and other industrial enterprises, becoming key centres of production.

However, throughout the twentieth century, the coal industry in the UK faced a steady decline with accelerating job losses.9 With closures of collieries, the shift in employment from industrial to service sector had severely affected East Midlands where coal and iron had been pivotal to economic development. A study by Beatty and Fothergill acknowledges that deindustrialisation has been a significant phenomenon in the UK, leading to a substantial decline in manufacturing and

mining jobs in older industrial towns.10 Towns like Amber Valley, Corby, Derbyshire, Mansfield, Newark and Sherwood, etc. from East Midlands are classified as older industrial towns. These towns are now experiencing stagnation or decline in population due to economic difficulties, lack of job opportunities, and the migration of younger residents seeking employment in larger cities. As a result, these towns are characterised by aging populations and high unemployment, creating significant challenges for the local economy and labour market.11

Despite these difficulties, these towns still retain a higher proportion of industrial and manufacturing employment compared to London and major regional cities, maintaining their continued importance as industrial centres. The research highlights that many jobs in these towns are low-paid and predominantly manual, with a high reliance on welfare benefits. Additionally, many residents commute to neighbouring areas for work, redefining the role of these towns within broader urban networks.12 In the East Midlands, the mining and quarrying sectors currently employs 6,000 of the 22,000 people working in these industries across England. This makes the region the largest employer in this sector nationwide.13 Tom Bide, a BGS expert with a deep interest and investment in the mining and quarrying industry of the East Midlands, shared valuable insights into the region’s industrial transitions and the global factors influencing these shifts.

10 Beatty and Fothergill “The Long Shadow of Job Loss,”1.

5 J. V. Beckett and J. E. Heath, “When Was the Industrial Revolution in the East Midlands?” Midland History 13, no. 1 (1988), 80

6 Beckett and Heath, “Industrial Revolution in the East Midlands,” 82.

7 Beckett and Heath, “Industrial Revolution in the East Midlands,” 88.

8 Beckett and Heath, “Industrial Revolution in the East Midlands,” 91.

9 Christina Beatty and Steve Fothergill, “The Long Shadow of Job Loss: Britain’s Older Industrial Towns in the 21st Century,” Frontiers in Sociology 5 (August 19, 2020), 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2020.00054

11 Beatty and Fothergill “The Long Shadow of Job Loss,”11.

12 ibid

13 Office for National Statistics, “Labour Market in the Regions of the UK: December 2024 ,” Office for National Statistics, December 17, 2024, https://www.ons.gov.uk/ employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/ employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/ regionallabourmarket/december2024

LAND UTILISATION SURVEY OF GREAT BRITAIN, 1931-38

A JUST TRANSITION

What is a Just Transition?

The 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change incorporated the concept of a ‘just transition’ for workers and communities, which was later signed by more than 50 countries in the COP24 climate conference in 2018, including the UK. This declaration recognised the need for equitable measures as the global economy adapts to the challenges of climate change.14

The concept of a just transition emerged in the 1980s driven by labour movements and trade unions concerned about the repercussions of environmental policy changes as the workers in fossil fuel industries were at risk of losing unemployment.15 This idea has now evolved into a broader framework that integrates inclusivity, social equity and sustainability, making sure the impacts of industrial transitions are mitigated, as observed during UNDP’s 2030 Agenda “reaching the furthest behind first”.16

14 United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosystems +Architecture, “Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future” (United Nations Environment Programme, September 2023).

15 Mairon G. Bastos Lima, “Just Transition towards a Bioeconomy: Four Dimensions in Brazil, India and Indonesia,” Forest Policy and Economics 136 (March 2022), 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102684

16 Lima, “Just Transition towards a Bioeconomy,” 1.

fig 6.2 (a-c) Labour in the rock quarries of Charnwood forest

Why Transition?

A transition from extractive industries to biobased industries is imperative in the changing landscapes.

Mining and quarry industry in decline

The UK’s mining and quarrying industry is in significant decline. As per a report by BDS, a quarter of aggregate (crushed rock and sand & gravel) pits and quarries with permitted reserves are inactive, and over 30% of active sites are projected to exhaust reserves by 2026. Low replenishment rates, coupled with lengthy planning processes, as noted by Tom Bide, make it economically inviable to continue extracting.17

Older industrial towns

Older industrial areas continue to struggle with structural economic deprivation indicated by low employment rates, low earnings, and poor job density—only 66 jobs for every 100 working-age adults were reported in 2019. Many new jobs in these regions are concentrated in service sectors, often characterised by low pay, poor working conditions, and limited career progression, perpetuating the deprivation in these towns.18

Community Vulnerabilities

Regions like Lincolnshire are facing a lack of skilled workers in key industries like agriculture, forestry, fishing and construction.19 Simultaneously, over-reliance on tourism has worsened the situation by offering no economic diversification opportunities, making them vulnerable. 20

Fish stocks in decline

Fish landings in the UK have steadily decreased since the late 19th century, despite increased mechanisation and fishing efforts in the 20th century. By the 1950s, overfishing led to a decline in fish stocks in the North Atlantic, with more abundant low-value species replacing higher-value species in the catch. The continued decline in fish stocks is posing economic and ecological challenges for coastal communities reliant on fishing. 21

17 “Aggregates Reserves in Decline,” Agg-Net, October 17, 2022, https://www.agg-net.com/resources/articles/planningdevelopment/aggregates-reserves-in-decline

18 Melanie Gower, “Regeneration of Former Industrial Areas in the UK,” House of Lords Library, February 29, 2024, h ttps:// lordslibrary.parliament.uk/regeneration-of-former-industrial-areas-in-the-uk/ 19 Katya Bozukova, An Employment, Skills and Economic Profile of Lincolnshire’s Seaside Coastal Community, Lincolnshire Observatory for Research, Intelligence and Consultation, April 2020, https://www.coastalcommunities.co.uk/knowledge_ hub_files/2-exec-summary-final_rPle.pdf

20 Sheela Agarwal, Steven Parker, and Miguel Moital, “Economic Performance Amongst English Seaside Towns,” Current Issues in Tourism, published July 20, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2234070

21 Elise Uberoi et al., “UK Fisheries Statistics,” House of Commons Library, October 11, 2022: 23-24. https:// researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN02788/SN02788.pdf

A Call for a Just Transition

The just transition involves two key processes: Transitioning Away from Extractive industries and Transitioning Towards Biobased industries.

The first process focuses on developing policies, tools and instruments essential for phasing out extraction-based practices while the second process emphasises supporting the workforce in adopting biobased initiatives such as the production of biobased materials and construction material assemblies at flying factories.

TRANSITION AWAY FROM EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

TRANSITION TOWARDS BIOBASED INDUSTRIES

TRANSITION AWAY FROM EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

We propose that mobilising biobased industries must be anchored in significant policy-level changes that mandate the inclusion of biobased materials in construction while actively reducing reliance on extractive materials like those sourced through quarrying and mining. These extractive practices not only have profound ecological damages, but as noted earlier have severe social impacts. Therefore, a transition to biobased industries offers a viable solution towards creating economic diversification opportunities for vulnerable groups, such as fishermen, mining workers, and the unemployed.

To move away from extractive practices, we mapped high-risk areas to target support where it is needed most, ensuring that workers are proactively engaged and supported in transitioning to sustainable industries. By keeping workers informed and involved throughout this journey, we can support the communities in building resilience and drive the adoption of transition toolkits, enabling a smoother and more equitable shift.

Policies

The UK Government has adopted the COP15’s 30 by 30 target—a goal to protect 30% of its land and sea for nature by 2030. 22 According to the Institution of Civil Engineers’ Research & Development Group, mining and quarrying is one of the top three contributors to biodiversity decline in the UK. 23 The UK GBC highlights that mining and quarrying activities have already driven the loss of over 1,000 species. 24

Despite the impacts to biodiversity and trending decline in domestic extraction resulting from limited resource availability, restrictive planning permissions, and environmental taxes, the UK remains one of Europe’s largest extractors of construction

minerals. 25 The industry is challenged to meet demands of the construction industry, reduce carbon emissions and mitigate biodiversity loss.

In response, the UK has implemented a demolition tax that has prompted material recycling. 26 Currently, recycling and secondary materials comprise approximately 28% of its total aggregates supply. 27 Despite the uptake of recycling practices, the restrictions imposed on local quarry operations have resulted in increased material imports. Increased importation offloads localised environmental impacts to exporting countries, often exploiting labour and landscapes in extractive sectors.

28  To support biodiversity and climate goals, the UK must reduce material extraction and must rethink its construction materials industry through a more holistic lens.

This can be enforced by adopting UKGBC’s embodied ecological impacts frameworks alongside embodied carbon calculations. 29 This means evaluating material choices not only for carbon emissions but also for their impacts to ecosystems, associated with their extraction both locally and globally.

Additionally, imported construction materials could be restricted more heavily to disincentivise the imports of goods and encourage a shift towards locally produced low-impact biobased materials; the restrictions on importing conventional building materials could propel the development of a local biobased materials industry.

Finally, transparency in the supply chain is crucial to mitigate local and global impacts of UK companies to foreign labour forces and landscapes. This could be facilitated by a mandatory environmental impact reporting for imported materials to ensure accountability and reduce global ecosystem damages.

22 Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, “30by30 on Land in England: Confirmed Criteria and Next Steps,” October 29, 2024, https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/criteria-for-30by30-on-land-inengland/30by30-on-land-in-england-confirmed-criteriaand-next-steps

23 Eva MacNamara et al., Embodied Biodiversity Report, research by Expedition Engineering, supported by the Institution of Civil Engineers, November 3, 2023, https:// expedition.uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/231103_ Embodied-Biodiversity_Report_Compressed.pdf

24 UK Green Building Council, “Aggregates,” last modified September 21, 2023, https://ukgbc.org/our-work/ topics/embodied-ecological-impacts/aggregates/

25 Gorm Dige et al., Effectiveness of Environmental Taxes and Charges for Managing Sand, Gravel, and Rock Extraction in Selected EU Countries (European Environment Agency, 2008), 23.

26 Dige et al., Effectiveness of Environmental Taxes, 8.

27 UK Green Building Council, “Aggregates.”

28 Dige et al., Effectiveness of Environmental Taxes, 48.

29 UK Green Building Council, “Embodied Ecological Impacts,” last modified September 21, 2023, https://ukgbc. org/our-work/topics/embodied-ecological-impacts/

Areas at Risk

To understand which areas will be deeply impacted by these policies, we began by mapping county-wise employment in mining, calculated by dividing the total employees in the East Midlands by the number of quarries in each county. Additionally, we also mapped the available landbank—typically calculated by dividing the available reserves with 10-year or 3-year average sales for the area—for aggregates (crushed rock and sand & gravel combined) and a 10-year change in extraction of aggregates from 2013 to 2022. We derive that four out of six counties in the region have reduced their extraction by 20% or less, likely due to a diminishing landbank in those areas. However, Derbyshire and Northamptonshire have increased their sales by more than 100%, resulting in a net increase in sales for the East Midlands during this period.30 Despite advances in recycling efforts and stricter environmental regulations, material extraction is still dominant in the East Midlands.

This analysis highlights the potential socioeconomic impact of transitioning away from extractive industries in the East Midlands. Implementing the strategies to reduce mining and quarrying operations could lead to job losses, particularly in areas highly reliant on these industries. Through a cartographic analysis, we are showing how the districts with high concentrations of quarries, which are already deprived, face a heightened risk of further deprivation. Simultaneously, areas which are highly reliant on mining industries but not in a deprived zone may be put under threat of deprivation. As noted in the report by European Commission on how to implement a successful regional just transition,31 the earlier a managed transition starts, the better. Hence, prioritising a deliberate plan for these areas will be crucial to manage any negative impacts.

30 East Midlands Aggregates Working Party, Annual Report 2022, published by North Northamptonshire Council on behalf of the East Midlands Aggregates Working Party, 2021 data, https:// www.northnorthants.gov.uk/minerals-and-waste-planningpolicy/minerals-and-waste-monitoring-reports-and-localaggregates

31 Jenny Kurwan et al., Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition, European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy, June 2023, https://energy.ec. europa.eu/system/files/2023-06/exchangeEU_Lessons%20 Learnt__final.pdf

map.30 AREAS AT RISK (STEP 1)

map.30

Phasing Strategy

To effectively manage a Just Transition, we examined a range of case studies from the UK and around the world. These studies highlighted the importance of a tailored phasing plan to outline key activities across all stages of the transition process. Every Transition is unique, and hence we integrated insights from two distinct strategies: the UK’s approach to transitioning the coal industry, which served as a contextual benchmark,32 and Australia’s strategy for

32 Jenny Kurwan et al., Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition.

managing the decline of its steel industry, chosen for its relevance to the construction materials sector.33 Building on these frameworks, we incorporated our biobased initiatives and activities discussed earlier to develop a comprehensive, 30-year speculative phasing plan. This plan bridges lessons learned from other industries with the unique demands and opportunities of transitioning toward a biobased economy.

This plan is structured across three ideas: governance, worker support and environmental action. Phase 1 involves pre-transition planning (years 1–5), where Local and Regional Councils establish a Transition Steering Team (TST) to coordinate efforts among quarry operators, trade unions, community representatives, and environmental authorities. The TST connects

Aaron

and Claudia

of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions, Stockholm Environment Institute, June 2021, https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/ closure-of-steelworks-in-newcastle.pdf

regional biobased associations to map workforce skills and run awareness campaigns, while environmental authorities assess land rehabilitation needs for quarry sites funded by the quarry operators.

Phase 2 focuses on pre-transition implementation (years 6–15), with a strong emphasis on supporting workers and ecosystems. Besides the redundancy packages from the government, the TST facilitates reskilling programs supported by educational institutions and biobased industry initiatives. Reskilled workers are encouraged to establish SMEs in biobased sectors, with financial and infrastructural support from the UK Biobased Federation. Environmental authorities initiate land rehabilitation for biodiversity, recreation, and biobased prototyping. Phase 3 outlines long-term goals (years 16–30) to secure long-term employment in biobased industries while ensuring alignment with climate resilience. Local councils monitor outcomes, while repurposed lands are managed for agriculture, biodiversity restoration, and education.

Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition

This report outlines frameworks for effective transitions such as start early with adaptive strategies aligned to climate goals, supported by inclusive, multi-level governance that engages communities and youth. Drive economic diversification through education, reskilling, and infrastructure development. Ensure environmental restoration with accountability, repurpose land and infrastructure, and preserve cultural heritage to support sustainable regional development and community well-being.

of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions

This report, examines the decline and eventual closure of a major steelworks plant in Newcastle, Australia. It proposed a transition timeline through phased actions. It emphasized pre-closure planning, proactive community engagement, skills development, and employer collaborations. Key initiatives included redundancy negotiations, retraining programs, and job placement efforts, supported by ongoing monitoring to ensure economic and social resilience post-closure.

33

Atteridge

Strambo, Closure

Closure

fig 6.3 Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition

fig 6.4 Closure of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions

Workforce Skill Mapping

Workforce skill mapping is a critical component of any just transition strategy. While this mapping requires detailed engagement with workers to understand their backgrounds, experience, and expertise, we have developed a framework that bridges the gap between mining skills and biobased sector skills. Drawing insights from Tom Bide and other research reports, we compiled a comprehensive list of skills typically held by quarry workers, alongside the education or training required to acquire them.34 Similarly, through consultations with biobased industry stakeholders,

EDUCATION / TRAINING

SKILLS IN QUARRYING

ADMINISTRATION

Record keeping Human Resource

MANAGEMENT

Risk Assessment

Health and Safety

Site Supervising

OPERATIONS

Blast Hole Drilling Machinery for Crushing Excavation Equipement Heavy Vehicles

TECHNICAL & ENGINEERING

Maintenance and Repair (machines, tools, equipements) Software and Automation Mechanical

PHYSICAL LABOUR

Assisting

BASIC Few Weeks to Months; on site training

INTER TECH. Intermediate Technical Level; About 6 months; Apprenticeship or Training

ADV TECH Advanced Technical Level; 1 to 4 years; Qualification requried

RESKILLING LEVELS REQUIRED

Low Medium High

34 Minerals Council of Australia, The Future of Work: The Changing Skills Landscape for Miners (Canberra: Minerals Council of Australia, 2019).

we identified the skill sets common among biobased producers and manufacturers.

These skills were organised into five broad domains, including Administration, Management, Operations, Technical & Engineering, and Physical Labour. Using speculated statistics for mediumscale quarries, we distributed the skills across roles based on the number of workers in each position. To estimate the proportion of biobased skills, we used our PCP model, which helped derive the distribution of skills in this sector. For example, biobased industries require more physical labour due to agroecological practices and construction needs, while the use of machinery is limited, thus reducing the demand for operational skills.

The labour skills were then flown into biobased skills depending upon the ease of adaptability, as represented by the colours, and in general the possible avenues for workers to transition between domains. Finally, we overlaid the actors from our PCP model to identify those responsible for upskilling and reskilling activities, ensuring that workers can successfully transition into the biobased sector. SKILLS IN BIOBASED

MANAGEMENT

Construction Project Management

Monitoring Farm Production

Logistical Planning

Health and Safety

Contracting

ADMINISTRATION

Monitoring, Regulating and Reporting

Human Resource

Planning and Applications

TECHNICAL & ENGINEERING

Maintenance and Repair (machines, tools, equipements)

Software and Automation

PHYSICAL LABOUR

Planting

Harvesting

Lifting

Processing (Baling, Drying, etc.)

Building

OPERATIONS

Boats

Agricultural Machinery

Heavy Vehicles

TRANSITION TOWARDS BIOBASED INDUSTRIES

e-portal by the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials

For the second process, i.e. a transition to biobased materials, we need to ensure workers can effectively adapt to and benefit from this shift. The establishment of a comprehensive e-portal serves as a central platform that bridges this industrial shift by facilitating collaboration, knowledge sharing and access to resources across the sectors in the biobased economy. Hosted by the Federation for Biobased Construction Materials, the e-portal will be structured for not just workers but all actors like businesses, land and marine workers and designers.

For Members

The e-portal will support workforce transition by offering access to reskilling programs, prototyping sites, and job opportunities in the biobased sector. It will feature interactive maps of prototyping locations and farmer clusters, along with job boards for biobased industry roles, helping workers acquire the skills needed.

For Businesses

Businesses will benefit from the e-portal through access to information of biobased producers, experts such as UK Straw Building, CEFAS, SAMS, etc., and educational resources. It will also provide information on funding, grants, and policies, helping businesses adopt biobased materials and expand their operations.

For Land and Marine Workers

The portal will guide land and marine workers in how to get involved in production of biobased materials, offering resources on agroecological practices including a catalogue of species. It will also feature funding opportunities and environmental expert contacts to support their transition to sustainable, biobased farming.

For Designers

Designers will be provided with information for sourcing biobased materials for their projects, and they could further explore successful precedent projects. The portal will connect designers with experts and researchers to provide inspiration for developing biobased construction materials.

Prototype Site Applications

The e-portal will enable interest groups to apply for establishment of new prototype sites, where they can test biobased materials and technologies. It will provide clear guidelines on available sites, supporting innovation and the biobased production.

Additional features on the e-portal could include user profiles to track jobs or events, an event calendar for upcoming activities, a news and updates section dedicated to latest news on policies, technological advancements, and case studies in the biobased construction sector and interactive educational resources.

UK JUST TRANSITION

Mapping priority areas for a nationwide transition

We imagine that with efforts from the federation, a national transition is possible and achievable. However, we acknowledge that some areas will need to be prioritised and identifying areas for investment is a crucial step in facilitating this transition from extractive materials to biobased materials. Therefore, we targeted regions with significant potential for biobased materials to identify areas requiring further support to align with the needs of local communities and workers.

Mapping Extractive Material Sites

Using the geological survey and databases, we identified sites across the UK where extractive materials like stone and sand are mined. These sites may include quarries, gravel pits, and sandbanks, which are sources of raw materials for construction and manufacturing industries. In addition to this, we also identified the industries involved in the processing of materials, such as steel and cement production. These industries are major consumers of extractive materials and play a significant role in driving demand for these resources. Material extraction has severe environmental impacts associated, such as habitat destruction and land degradation. Therefore, we identified areas where extractive activities are particularly intensive or where environmental vulnerabilities are high, such as the 10km zones around these sites. The 10km metric is used to speculate the approximate commuting distance for the workers. These areas can be prioritised for investment in transitioning these areas towards biobased materials to mitigate negative environmental impacts and promote ecosystem restoration.

Overlapping Biobased Potentials and Prioritising Areas of Socio-Economic Vulnerability

From our biobased industry exploration, we extract the biobased material potentials in these high environmental vulnerability zones. By considering factors such as crop production, active woodlands, and aquaculture industries, this map pinpoint areas to assess whether the areas proximate to quarries are feasible for a transition to biobased materials. Within these identified areas, prioritising investment in areas with a low socio-economic status can support the underskilled communities in the transition. We identified regions where communities reliant on extractive industries may be facing job displacement or economic challenges, such that support and investment can help facilitate a smoother transition by creating new employment opportunities in the biobased sector, ensuring social equity.

map. 32 a UK BIOBASED TRANSITION INVENTORY

map. 32 b UK BIOBASED TRANSITION POTENTIAL

10km dia. grid area of deprivation biobased opportunity concentration of quarries in the region few low many high

REFLECTIONS

The East Midlands, with its long industrial history and its background of deprivation following industrial decline, serves as a reminder of the need to avoid repeating the patterns of economic and social dislocation. Transitioning away from extractive industries and toward biobased practices is not merely an economic shift but a broader cultural and systemic transformation that requires inclusive and equitable approaches. The current proposal, grounded in conventional just transition principles tries to test how the PCP can facilitate this transition.

We know that a critical component of this transition is not just where the labour is coming from but also acknowledging what is their role. Labour in this discussion not just encompasses quarry workers but also land and marine workers. Therefore, there is potential to investigate the transition of fishermen to sustainable aquaculture and farmers to agroecological farming, to fully explore the potential for diversification and skill adaptability in the biobased industries.

The current exploration lacks this level of exploration due to logistical limitations as dealing with workers in a private field such as fishing and farming requires consistent and robust engagement as the practices are culturally rooted. However, it is important to remember that a PCP framework in the biobased industry bestows more responsibility onto the labour to uphold ecological values.

Given the importance of ensuring fair treatment of workers and adherence to ecological principles, such a transition demands robust governance and regulatory frameworks. The Federation for Biobased Construction Materials can serve as a guiding body, but additional regulatory mechanisms are essential to oversee labour practices. An evaluation framework will be critical to monitor the implementation of suggested practices and ensure that the transition remains on course. Ultimately, the transition is not solely about economic diversification but about empowering labour as active stewards in the biobased industry.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agarwal, Sheela, Steven Parker, and Miguel Moital. “Economic Performance Amongst English Seaside Towns.” Current Issues in Tourism, published July 20, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2234070

“Aggregates Reserves in Decline.” Agg-Net, October 17, 2022. https://www.agg-net.com/resources/articles/ planning-development/aggregates-reserves-indecline

Atteridge, Aaron, and Claudia Strambo. Closure of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions. Stockholm Environment Institute, June 2021. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/ uploads/2021/06/closure-of-steelworks-in-newcastle. pdf

Bastos Lima, Mairon G. “Just Transition towards a Bioeconomy: Four Dimensions in Brazil, India and Indonesia.” Forest Policy and Economics 136 (March 2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102684

BBC News. “Miners’ Strike 1984: Why UK Miners Walked Out and How It Ended.” BBC News, July 5, 2023. https:// www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68244762

Beatty, Christina, and Steve Fothergill. “The Long Shadow of Job Loss: Britain’s Older Industrial Towns in the 21st Century.” Frontiers in Sociology 5 (August 19, 2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2020.00054

British Geological Survey. Structure and Evolution of the East Midlands Region of the Pennine Basin. Subsurface memoir. British Geological Survey, 2011. https:// webapps.bgs.ac.uk/memoirs/docs/B06182.html

British Geological Survey. Structure and Evolution of the East Midlands Region of the Pennine Basin. Subsurface memoir. British Geological Survey, 2011. https:// webapps.bgs.ac.uk/memoirs/docs/B06182.html

Bozukova, Katya. An Employment, Skills and Economic Profile of Lincolnshire’s Seaside Coastal Community. Lincolnshire Observatory for Research, Intelligence and Consultation, April 2020. https://www. coastalcommunities.co.uk/knowledge_hub_files/2exec-summary-final_rPle.pdf

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. “30by30 on Land in England: Confirmed Criteria and Next Steps.” October 29, 2024. https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/criteria-for-30by30-on-landin-england/30by30-on-land-in-england-confirmedcriteria-and-next-steps

Dige, Gorm, David Legg, Henry Leveson-Gower, et al Effectiveness of environmental taxes and charges for managing sand, gravel and rock extraction in selected EU countries. European Environment Agency, 2008. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/282975851_Effectiveness_of_ environmental_taxes_and_charges_for_managing_ sand_gravel_and_rock_extraction_in_selected_EU_

countries

East Midlands Aggregates Working Party. Annual Report 2022. Published by North Northamptonshire Council on behalf of the East Midlands Aggregates Working Party. 2021 data. https://www.northnorthants.gov.uk/ minerals-and-waste-planning-policy/minerals-andwaste-monitoring-reports-and-local-aggregates

Gower, Melanie. “Regeneration of Former Industrial Areas in the UK.” House of Lords Library, February 29, 2024. https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/regeneration-offormer-industrial-areas-in-the-uk/

Kurwan, Jenny, Timon Wehnert, Emma Krause, Moritz Schäfer, Besa Maraj, and David Mairle. Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition. European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy, June 2023. https://energy.ec.europa.eu/ system/files/2023-06/exchangeEU_Lessons%20 Learnt__final.pdf

MacNamara, Eva, Lottie Macnair, Pete Winslow, Bruce Martin, Ailsa Roberts, and Rachel De Matei. Embodied Biodiversity Report. Research by Expedition Engineering, supported by the Institution of Civil Engineers. November 3, 2023. https://expedition.uk. com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/231103_EmbodiedBiodiversity_Report_Compressed.pdf

Minerals Council of Australia. The Future of Work: The Changing Skills Landscape for Miners. Canberra: Minerals Council of Australia, 2019.

Office for National Statistics. “Labour Market in the Regions of the UK: December 2024.” Office for National Statistics, December 17, 2024. https://www.ons.gov. uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/ employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/ regionallabourmarket/december2024

“The Mineral Products Industry at A Glance (2021).” Mineral Products Association, 2021. https://www. mineralproducts.org/Facts-and-Figures.aspx

Uberoi, Elise, Georgina Hutton, Matthew Ward, and Elena Ares. “UK Fisheries Statistics.” House of Commons Library, October 11, 2022. https://researchbriefings. files.parliament.uk/documents/SN02788/SN02788. pdf

UK Green Building Council. “Embodied Ecological Impacts.” Last modified September 21, 2023. https:// ukgbc.org/our-work/topics/embodied-ecologicalimpacts/

UK Green Building Council, “Aggregates.” Last modified September 21, 2023. https://ukgbc.org/our-work/ topics/embodied-ecological-impacts/aggregates/

United Nations Environment Programme and Yale Center for Ecosystems + Architecture. Building Materials and the Climate: Constructing a New Future. United Nations Environment Programme, September 2023.

map. 33 SELF-EXPANDING PCP

CONCLUSION

Cultivating Commons is a territorial proposal for mobilising the biobased industries to not only meet Net Zero targets, but improve productive landscapes, transform ownership structures and contribute to a JUST transition for industrial labour forces. We imagine that with efforts from the federation, a national transition is possible.

We recognise that it is unlikely for a single building retrofit project to propel the transition of an entire industry. However, BGS is one of eighty UKRI institutions with the potential to engage in a PCP initiative for procuring materials. Our proposal strategises a network of actors and stakeholders who can engage in the biobased industry. In speaking with industry experts, the potential to collaborate efforts were made apparent in biomass production, biobased material experimentation and research, and progressive procurement such as PCP. Looking at precedent PCP examples prompted us to question why PCP proposals typically exist as standalone proposals and have yet to be replicated, particularly within the same sector for example, food production or pharmaceuticals industries. We believe this is largely due to the complexity of PCP frameworks, the high degree of commitment required by participants, specifically anchoring bodies such as councils, higher education institutions, or government bodies.

Despite these limitations, we envision that if UKRI were to uptake PCPs for their retrofitting projects, biobased economies could emerge across the UK. We know that each of the industries associated with the production, processing and construction of biobased materials, are operating in a silo, trying to simultaneously address all these varied challenges. Cultivating Commons proposes or

a more interdependent network, where one industry supports another to establish a self-replicating system that could expand to regions across the UK.

This project could lead to other areas of inquiry. The rise in biobased materials could reduce demands on extractive industries. Future investigations could explore opportunities for decommissioned mine sites to be restored to host flying factories or prototype sites. This could provide opportunities to reprogramme otherwise unusable land. In addition, we were recently made aware of the projects undertaken by the East Midlands Development Corporation. Initiatives in this proposal could be combined with their existing projects or provide new insights on economic development opportunities.

There is a growing interest in biobased materials evidenced by the daily information released about biobased material developments and their decarbonisation benefits. Currently, a lot of biobased materials are imported. Although claimed to be a sustainable solution, if they flow through existing supply chains, they perpetuate greenwashing. Despite having improved less toxic or carbon intensive properties, they could still travel long distances and rely on exploited labour. This raises the importance of the designer’s role within the supply chain. Designers cannot succumb to mere Government mandates in response to Net Zero. We have the capacity and knowledge to radically rethink the way we procure materials for our projects. To conclude, Cultivating Commons calls on designers to put forth more robust and conscious procurement strategies that consider the landscapes, ownerships and labour within the conception of our projects.

APPENDIX I: TERM 1, 2, & 3 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS

Goal: Reach out to industry professionals for gaining industry operations and build collaborations

E-mail Sample:

Hi there,

My name is Emily Bowerman, and I am a Landscape Architect currently studying at the AA School of Architecture in London in the Landscape Urbanism program. My colleagues Alejandra and Priyanka and I are undertaking thesis research exploring the potentials of using biobased materials in the construction industry – one of those materials being seaweed.

We are extremely interested in the sustainable seaweed practices your farm is undertaking. We are looking to learn more about seaweed production in the UK and would greatly appreciate your input on our work.

As we are in the initial stages of our study, there are lots of opportunities to shape and mould our work to reflect current industry needs. Therefore, we were wondering if there would be an opportunity to arrange a phone call or meet with you to share more about our research and learn more about sustainable seaweed farming.

We appreciate how busy you and your team are, however, if there is an opportunity over the next month or so to arrange a visit to the farm, we would be extremely interested in doing so.

Please let us know if you would be willing to accommodate this.

Thanks kindly,

Emily

APPENDIX II: ETHICS APPLICATION APPROVAL

APPENDIX III: TERM 4 SURVEY

Survey Description:

The panelists will be provided with a pre-survey video explanation of max. 3min in length of the Cultivating Commons policy initiative and asked to answer the following survey. The survey will have two parts. Firstly, a set of identification questions to document the participants’ title, organisation and general familiarity with the topics and dissemination protocols. The second part will include questions specific to the PCP model.

Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYZbQ_Mnx8Y

Goal: Evaluate the feasibility of the PCP model for mobilising the uptake of biobased construction materials in the East Midlands UK.

E-mail to Panelists:

Dear [panelist]

We wanted to first thank you for your time and valuable insights during our previous discussion. Your expertise has been crucial to our project, and we deeply appreciate your contributions.

As we enter the final term of our project on biobased materials in the construction industry, we wanted to follow up on our earlier conversations. Your input has greatly informed the policy framework we’ve developed to support the biobased industry in the East Midlands.

We would now like to request your critical review of the policy proposal. Your expertise in [tailor to panelist] will be essential in ensuring that the proposal effectively addresses the challenges and opportunities associated with the production, processing, procurement, and manufacturing of biobased materials, such as straw for insulation and seaweed for acoustic panels. We have engaged several other professionals in the field to gather in-depth understanding of the potential opportunities and barriers associated with the policy implementation.

We have prepared a brief survey to gather your feedback. It includes a short video explaining the policy, followed by five focused questions designed to capture your professional insights. The survey should take no more than 10 minutes to complete.

Your feedback will be invaluable in refining the proposal and enhancing its effectiveness. If you can participate, please follow the link below to access the survey and further instructions.

Thank you once again for your time and contributions to this project. We look forward to your feedback.

Kind regards,

Priyanka & Emily

Survey Form shared with panelists

APPENDIX IV: MODEL MAKING

All photos by Priyanka Awatramani, Emily Bowerman and Clara Oloriz

LIST OF MAPS

15 map.01 Geological Reserves & Stone Extraction

British Geological Survey. 2020. “Reserves & Quarries.” Directory of Mines and Quarries, 2020: 11th Edition. Keyworth, Nottingham, British Geological Survey. OR/20/036. © UKRI 2020. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: www2.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/download/dmq/Directory_of_ Mines_and_Quarries_2020.pdf.

British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits.

16 map.02 Sand and Gravel Reserves and Industries British Geological Survey. 2020. “Reserves & Quarries.” Directory of Mines and Quarries, 2020: 11th Edition. Keyworth, Nottingham, British Geological Survey. OR/20/036. © UKRI 2020. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: www2.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/download/dmq/Directory_of_ Mines_and_Quarries_2020.pdf.

McCarten, M., Bayaraa, M., Caldecott, B., Christiaen, C., Foster, P., Hickey, C., Kampmann, D., Layman, C., Rossi, C., Scott, K., Tang, K., Tkachenko, N., and Yoken, D. 2021. “Global Database of Cement Production Assets.” Spatial Finance Initiative, UK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment (CGFI).

McCarten, M., Bayaraa, M., Caldecott, B., Christiaen, C., Foster, P., Hickey, C., Kampmann, D., Layman, C., Rossi, C., Scott, K., Tang, K., Tkachenko, N., and Yoken, D. 2021. “Global Database of Iron and Steel Production Assets.” Spatial Finance Initiative, UK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment (CGFI).

British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits.

17 map.03 Distribution of sand & gravel extraction

Same as map.02

17 map.04 Distribution of stone extraction

Same as map.01

18 map.05 UK imports of construction materials in 2020

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Global Shipping Lanes. ArcGIS Online. Creative Commons by Attribution (CC BY 4.0). Last updated August 2023. Accessed January 5, 2025.

Chatham House. 2021. “resourcetrade.earth.” Data. Accessed February 25, 2024. URL: https://resourcetrade. earth/.

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. World Port Index Pub. 150. Springfield, VA: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, 2022. https://msi.nga.mil/Publications/WPI https://fgmod.nga.mil/apps/WPI-Viewer/

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). “Major Deposit Database.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://mrdata.usgs.gov/ major-deposits/

21 map.06 UKRI Institutions

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). “UKRI Institutions.” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://www.ukri.org/.

25 map.07 Landfill vs Composting Sites

UK Government. Historic Landfill Sites Dataset. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://www.data.gov.uk/ dataset/17edf94f-6de3-4034-b66b-004ebd0dd010/ historic-landfill-sites1#licence-info.

31 map.08 Clay Industries

Mitchell, Clive, and Chloe Wrighton. 2022. “Mineral planning factsheet: brick clay.” British Geological Survey. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/ eprint/532490/1/Brick%20Clay%20Mineral%20 Planning%20Factsheet.pdf.

British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits.

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. 2024. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (England). Last updated July 2, 2024. License: Other License.

33 map.09 Hemp Industries

DEFRA. “Provisional Agricultural Land Classification” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalenglanddefra.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/provisionalagricultural-land-classification-alc-england/explore Hemp Club. “Hemp Farms.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://hempclubproject.com/map/map.html.

Hemp Club. “Hemp Product Producers and Distributors.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://hempclubproject. com/map/map.html

UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. 2024. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (England). Last updated July 2, 2024. License: Other License.

35 map.10 Mycelium Industries

Farming UK. “Mushroom Farms.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://www.farminguk.com/agricultural-directory/ category/mushroom-growers_642.html.

Iturrizaga, Alejandra. 2024. “List of Mycelium Producers in the UK.” Dataset. Self-published.

Office for National Statistics. 2023. “Digital vector boundaries for Urban Areas in England and Wales as at 27 March 2001.” Dataset. Accessed June 9, 2023. URL: https:// services1.arcgis.com/ESMARspQHYMw9BZ9/arcgis/rest/ services/Urban_Areas_December_2001_EW_BGE/ FeatureServer.

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. 2024. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (England). Last updated July 2, 2024. License: Other License.

37 map.11 Timber Industries

Forestry Commission. “Possibly Harvested Woodlands.” National Forest Inventory Woodland GB 2021. URL: https:// data forestry.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/5b91b7041f8b46e099f64aa6d2013e9d_0/about. Contains, or is based on, information supplied by the Forestry Commission. © Crown copyright and database right 2023 Ordnance Survey [100021242].

Forestry Commission. “Sustainably Managed Woodlands.” Woodland that is sustainably managed in England - 31 March 2023. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https:// dataforestry.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e1c1d7ead37d4feea303c1bf6f5a0369_0/about. Contains OS data ©Crown copyright 2023.

Forestry Commission. “Timber Processing Sites GB.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://dataforestry. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e3950cc2d09f47a4ad60871797c83ea9_0/about. Contains Forestry Commission information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown copyright 2016.

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. 2024. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (England). Last updated July 2, 2024. License: Other License.

39 map.12 Aquaculture Industries

EMODnet Human Activities. “Main Ports, Goods-PassengersVessels Traffic.” May 1, 2014. Creation: Date identifies when the resource was brought into existence. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_Main_Ports_

Traffic_20231106. Available at: https://emodnet.ec.europa. eu/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/ metadata/379d0425-8924-4a41-a088-1a002d2ea748

EMODnet. “EMODnet Human Activities, Algae Production.” Accessed October 9, 2018. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_Algae_Producing_Industry_20220125. [URL: https://emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/emodnet/ eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7b849214-e6ae-4199a3f0-d4539f1f1289]

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Johnson, C. L. E., M. Axelsson, L. Brown, K. H. O. Carrigan, A. Cordingley, A. L. Elliot, A. Downie, L. Gannon, B. Green, J. Jones, M. K. Marsh, F. McNie, S. R. A. Mills, N. M. Wallace, and H. J. Woods. Marine Restoration Potential (MaRePo) Natural England Research Report JP054. Published September 2023.

Bowerman, Emily. 2024. “Public Register of Aquaculture Production Businesses in England and Wales.” Dataset compiled from the Cefas database. Self-published. Environment Agency. 2024. Risk of Flooding from Rivers and Sea - Key Summary Information. Last updated September 20, 2024. License: Other License.

GeoCoast/GeoCoast_Open (MapServer). GeoCoast_v1 Authority Coastline Cliff Erosion Worst (ID: 9). Feature Layer. Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolyline. Supported Query Formats: JSON, geoJSON, PBF. Last accessed January 5, 2025.

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC). 2023. UK Offshore Marine Protected Areas 2023. Shapefile, spreadsheet, and KML files. Published July 5, 2023. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ offshore-mpas/

EMODnet. “Human Activities, Energy, Wind Farms.” June 1, 2014. Creation: Date identifies when the resource was brought into existence. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet, Human Activities, Energy, Wind Farms. Available at: https://emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/ srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/8201070b-4b0b-4d548910-abcea5dce57f.

EMODnet Human Activities. “Aquaculture, Shellfish.” July 1, 2014. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_ Aquaculture_Shellfish_20220225. Available at: https:// emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog. search#/metadata/aa0d2b45-49c4-4b42-86bb8971a3c2d2cc

43 map. 13 Straw Industries DEFRA. “Provisional Agricultural Land Classification.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalenglanddefra.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/provisionalagricultural-land-classification-alc-england/explore

European Straw Building Association. “ESBA Certified Straw Bale Producers.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https:// strawbuilding.eu/map-of-straw-bale-producers/.

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. 2024. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (England). Last updated July 2, 2024. License: Other License.

The British Hay and Straw Merchants Association. “BHSMA Straw Producers.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https:// hay-straw-merchants.co.uk/members.

UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

44 map. 14 a, b, c Cereal production by region

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Cereal and Oilseed Rape Production Statistics. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/government/ statistics/cereal-and-oilseed-rape-production.

51 map.15 UK Biobased Summary

Natural England. “Administrative Boundaries - Environment Agency and Natural England Public Face Areas.” Accessed

April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalenglanddefra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e1215f2ecb0e476dad3dc2d60944d259/explore.

Iturrizaga, Alejandra. 2024. “List of UKRI Institutions.” Dataset. Self-published.

55 map.16 Supply Chain Map for BGS

DEFRA. “Provisional Agricultural Land Classification” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://naturalenglanddefra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agriculturalland-classification-

EMODnet Human Activities. “Aquaculture, Shellfish.” July 1, 2014. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_ Aquaculture_Shellfish_20220225. Available at: https:// emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog. search#/metadata/aa0d2b45-49c4-4b42-86bb8971a3c2d2cc.

EMODnet Human Activities. “Main Ports, Goods-PassengersVessels Traffic.” May 1, 2014. Creation: Date identifies when the resource was brought into existence. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_Main_Ports_ Traffic_20231106. Available at: https://emodnet.ec.europa. eu/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/ metadata/379d0425-8924-4a41-a088-1a002d2ea748 .

EMODnet. “EMODnet Human Activities, Algae Production.” Accessed October 9, 2018. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_Algae_Producing_Industry_20220125. [URL: https://emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/emodnet/ eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7b849214-e6ae-4199a3f0-d4539f1f1289]

European Straw Building Association. “ESBA Certified Straw Bale Producers.” Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https:// strawbuilding.eu/map-of-straw-bale-producers/. Forestry Commission. “Sustainably Managed Woodlands.” Accessed April 21, 2024. Woodland that is sustainably managed in England - 31 March 2023 | Forestry Commission. Contains OS data © Crown copyright 2023. https://forestrycommission.arcgis.com/pages/sustainablymanaged-woodlands.

Forestry Commission. “Timber forests.” Accessed April 21, 2024. National Forest Inventory Woodland GB 2021 | Forestry Commission. It contains, or is based on, information supplied by the Forestry Commission. © Crown copyright and database right 2023 Ordnance Survey [100021242]. https://forestrycommission.arcgis.com/ pages/national-forest-inventory-woodland-gb-2021.

Forestry Commission. “Timber processing sites.” Accessed April 21, 2024. Timber Processing Sites GB | Forestry Commission. Contains Forestry Commission information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown copyright 2016. https://forestrycommission.arcgis. com/pages/timber-processing-sites-gb.

Straw farms, “Straw Producing Croplands,” DEFRA, accessed April 21, 2024, https://naturalengland-defra.opendata. arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agricultural-landclassification-alc-england/explore UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

69 map.18 Phase 0

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England). November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/.

Straw farms, “Straw Producing Croplands,” DEFRA, accessed April 21, 2024, https://naturalengland-defra.opendata. arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agricultural-landclassification-alc-england/explore

Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official

Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Natural England Open Data Publication. “Open Mosaic Habitat (Draft) - Verified sites of Open Mosaic Habitat.” Feature Layer. May 26, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalengland-defra.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/03b0e55ff4204dcbb5e2f4e153c585e8/explore

75 map.19 Phase 1 + overlay

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Straw farms, “Straw Producing Croplands,” DEFRA, accessed April 21, 2024, https://naturalengland-defra.opendata. arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agricultural-landclassification-alc-england/explore

Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Natural England Open Data Publication. “Open Mosaic Habitat (Draft) - Verified sites of Open Mosaic Habitat.” Feature Layer. May 26, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalengland-defra.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/03b0e55ff4204dcbb5e2f4e153c585e8/explore

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

77 map.20 Phase 2 + overlay

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/ Straw farms, “Straw Producing Croplands,” DEFRA, accessed April 21, 2024, https://naturalengland-defra.opendata. arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agricultural-landclassification-alc-england/explore

Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Natural England Open Data Publication. “Open Mosaic Habitat (Draft) - Verified sites of Open Mosaic Habitat.” Feature Layer. May 26, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalengland-defra.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/03b0e55ff4204dcbb5e2f4e153c585e8/explore

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

79 map.21 Phase 3 + overlay

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Straw farms, “Straw Producing Croplands,” DEFRA, accessed April 21, 2024, https://naturalengland-defra.opendata. arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agricultural-landclassification-alc-england/explore

Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Natural England Open Data Publication. “Open Mosaic Habitat (Draft) - Verified sites of Open Mosaic Habitat.” Feature Layer. May 26, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalengland-defra.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/03b0e55ff4204dcbb5e2f4e153c585e8/explore

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

81 map.22 Productive Landscape Network + overlay?

Natural England. “Peaty Soils Location (England).” Feature Layer. December 8, 2022. Accessed April 25, 2022. Records: 9,028. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/1e5a1cdb2ab64b1a94852fb982c42b52/ explore?location=52.484865%2C-4.923507%2C9.60]

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff]

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Canal & River Trust. Canals by Navigation. Line dataset showing canals/waterways by named navigation on the Trust network. Item created February 24, 2023, updated July 20, 2023. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://www. arcgis.com/home/item. html?id=f3c249d59f0b464d8b09d25e39305a99.

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open.

83 map.23 Productive Marine Network + overlay

EMODnet Human Activities. EMSA Route Density Map, 1 km Resolution, 2019. European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet), revised December 17, 2024. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://ows.emodnethumanactivities.eu/geonetwork/srv/api/records/74eef9c613fe-4630-b935-f26871c8b661

EMODnet Seabed Habitats. Broad-scale Seabed Habitat Map for Europe (EUSeaMap), 2023. European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet). Accessed January 6, 2025. https://emodnet.ec.europa.eu/en/ seabed-habitats

84 0 map.24 Nottinghamshire landscape mosaic

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Populus, J., M. Vasquez, J. Albrecht, E. Manca, S. Agnesi, Z. Al Hamdani, J. Andersen, A. Annunziatellis, T. Bekkby, A. Bruschi, V. Doncheva, V. Drakopoulou, G. Duncan, R. Inghilesi, C. Kyriakidou, F. Lalli, H. Lillis, G. Mo, M. Muresan, M. Salomidi, D. Sakellariou, M. Simboura, A. Teaca, D. Tezcan, V. Todorova, and L. Tunesi. 2017. EUSeaMap, a European Broad-Scale Seabed Habitat Map. 174p. http:// doi.org/10.13155/49975

UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

86 map.25 Barton in Fabis

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData.

Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open.

92 map.26 Skegness

East Lindsey District Council. Skegness Neighbourhood Plan Policies Map - Referendum Version - September 2022. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/ media/21964/Skegness-Neighbourhood-DevelopmentPlan-Policies-Map/pdf/Skegness_Neighbourhood_Plan_ Policies_Map_-_Referendum_Version_-_September_2022. pdf?m=1675862212320.

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open

109 map.27 Nottinghamshire Network

“East Midlands.” Farmer Clusters. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://www.farmerclusters.com/profiles/east-midlands/.

DEFRA. “Provisional Agricultural Land Classification” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agriculturalland-classification-alc-england/explore

Google Maps. “Higher education institutions.” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://www.google.com/maps/ Natural England Open Data Publication. “Open Mosaic Habitat (Draft) - Verified sites of Open Mosaic Habitat.” Feature Layer. May 26, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://naturalengland-defra.opendata.arcgis.com/ datasets/03b0e55ff4204dcbb5e2f4e153c585e8/explore

Natural England. “Special Areas of Conservation (England).” Feature Layer. April 16, 2024. Accessed April 16, 2024. Records: 1,911. [URL: https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ e4142658906c498fa37f0a20d3fdfcff] Nottinghamshire County Council. “County Farms.” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk. © Crown Copyright and database rights 2013 Ordnance Survey 100019713. Produced using ArcGIS software. Office for National Statistics. 2023. “Coastal communities.” Dataset. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: https://www. arcgis.com/home/item. html?id=38d2dff9e81047458e3b4c3a8718e27b_

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Society Digimap. Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed on April 21, 2024

UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

Canal & River Trust. Canals by Navigation. Line dataset showing canals/waterways by named navigation on the Trust network. Item created February 24, 2023, updated July 20, 2023. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://www.

arcgis.com/home/item.

html?id=f3c249d59f0b464d8b09d25e39305a99.

142 map. 28 Basford

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

Natural England. Priority Habitats Inventory (England) November 14, 2024. Last updated December 6, 2022. Custom License. Accessed January 5, 2025. https://data. gov.uk/

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open

157 map.29 East Midlands Industrial History

Stamp, L. Dudley, ed. Land Utilisation Survey of Britain 1931-1938; National Library of Scotland. “Land Utilisation Survey of Britain, 1931–1938.” Accessed January 5, 2025. British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits.

162 map.30 Areas at Risk (1, 2, 3)

Canal & River Trust. Canals by Navigation. Line dataset showing canals/waterways by named navigation on the Trust network. Item created February 24, 2023, updated July 20, 2023. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://www. arcgis.com/home/item. html?id=f3c249d59f0b464d8b09d25e39305a99

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits.

163 map.31 Transitioning Away from Extraction Canal & River Trust. Canals by Navigation. Line dataset showing canals/waterways by named navigation on the Trust network. Item created February 24, 2023, updated July 20, 2023. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://www. arcgis.com/home/item. html?id=f3c249d59f0b464d8b09d25e39305a99

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open Society Digimap. “Social Grade / High Priority.” QS611UK (Approximated social grade - Household Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics. Accessed April 21, 2024. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains National Statistics data © Crown copyright and database right 2024.

British Geological Survey. BritPits Dataset. 2023. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/data/britpits

East Midlands Aggregates Working Party. Annual Report 2022. Published by North Northamptonshire Council on behalf of the East Midlands Aggregates Working Party. 2021 data. https://www.northnorthants.gov.uk/minerals-and-wasteplanning-policy/minerals-and-waste-monitoring-reportsand-local-aggregates

170 map.32 (a,b) UK BIOBASED TRANSITION POTENTIAL

British Geological Survey. 2020. “Reserves & Quarries.” Directory of Mines and Quarries, 2020: 11th Edition. Keyworth, Nottingham, British Geological Survey. OR/20/036. © UKRI 2020. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: www2.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/download/dmq/Directory_of_

Mines_and_Quarries_2020.pdf.

British Geological Survey. 2020. “Reserves & Quarries.” Directory of Mines and Quarries, 2020: 11th Edition. Keyworth, Nottingham, British Geological Survey. OR/20/036. © UKRI 2020. Accessed April 21, 2024. URL: www2.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/download/dmq/Directory_of_ Mines_and_Quarries_2020.pdf.

DEFRA. “Provisional Agricultural Land Classification.” Accessed April 21, 2024. https://naturalengland-defra. opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/provisional-agriculturalland-classification-alc-england/explore

EMODnet Human Activities. “Aquaculture, Shellfish.” July 1, 2014. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_ Aquaculture_Shellfish_20220225. Available at: https:// emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog. search#/metadata/aa0d2b45-49c4-4b42-86bb8971a3c2d2cc.

EMODnet. “EMODnet Human Activities, Algae Production.” Accessed October 9, 2018. Unique resource identifier: EMODnet_HA_Algae_Producing_Industry_20220125. [URL: https://emodnet.ec.europa.eu/geonetwork/emodnet/ eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7b849214-e6ae-4199a3f0-d4539f1f1289]

McCarten, M., Bayaraa, M., Caldecott, B., Christiaen, C., Foster, P., Hickey, C., Kampmann, D., Layman, C., Rossi, C., Scott, K., Tang, K., Tkachenko, N., and Yoken, D. 2021. “Global Database of Cement Production Assets.” Spatial Finance Initiative, UK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment (CGFI).

McCarten, M., Bayaraa, M., Caldecott, B., Christiaen, C., Foster, P., Hickey, C., Kampmann, D., Layman, C., Rossi, C., Scott, K., Tang, K., Tkachenko, N., and Yoken, D. 2021. “Global Database of Iron and Steel Production Assets.” Spatial Finance Initiative, UK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment (CGFI).

Ordnance Survey. OS Open Roads: Free OpenData. Coverage: All of Great Britain. Version Date: October 2024. Data structure: Vector. Supply format: ESRI® Shapefile, GML, GeoPackage, and Vector Tiles. Accessed January 6, 2025. https://osdatahub.os.uk/downloads/open

Society Digimap. “Semi-skilled and un-skilled manual occupations.” QS611UK (Approximated social gradeHousehold Reference Person (HRP) aged 16 - 64) - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics.

UKCEH Land Cover® plus: Crops 2022. UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, © UKCEH. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.

174 map.33 Conclusion map

Ordnance Survey. “OS MasterMap® Topography Layer.” Scale 1:1,250. February 2024. OS Digimap Licence. Copyright © Crown copyright and database rights 2024 Ordnance Survey (100025252). Sample image of MasterMap Topography. Accessed at https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/help/ copyright-and-licensing/citation/.

Ordnance Survey Northern Ireland. “OSNI 50m DTM.” Scale 1:50,000. 2014. Ordnance Survey Northern Ireland Open Data Licence. Copyright: Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Sample image of OSNI 50m DTM. Accessed at https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/roam/map/os

Iturrizaga, Alejandra. 2024. “List of UKRI Institutions.” Dataset. Self-published.

BaseMap

Ordnance Survey. “OS MasterMap® Topography Layer.” Scale 1:1,250. February 2024. OS Digimap Licence. Copyright © Crown copyright and database rights 2024 Ordnance Survey (100025252). Sample image of MasterMap Topography. Accessed at https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/help/ copyright-and-licensing/citation/.

Ordnance Survey Northern Ireland. “OSNI 50m DTM.” Scale 1:50,000. 2014. Ordnance Survey Northern Ireland Open Data Licence. Copyright: Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Sample image of OSNI 50m DTM. Accessed at https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/roam/map/os

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

9 ill 1.1 Methodology

22

29 ill 3.1 Biobased Materials icon; by Alejandra iturrizaga

30 All conditions, process and labour sketches by Alejandra iturrizaga

48 ill 3.2 Biobased Material Matrix

54 ill 3.3 Preliminary Supply Chain for BGS

56

57 ill 3.5 Existing conditions at BGS by Alejandra Iturrizaga

57 ill 3.6 Improving the interior exterior connection through retrofitting by Alejandra Iturrizaga

58 ill 3.7 Movement of materials and labour through the East Midlands landscape 63-67 ill 4.1 documenting landscapes of east midlands

71 ill 4.2 Biobased prototyping

72

74

76

82

87 ill 4.9 (a) Regional view of straw farming sites near Barton in Fabis before

87 ill 4.9 (b) Regional view of straw farming sites near Barton in Fabis after

88 ill 4.10 Cross section through an agroecological farm within priority habitat

90 ill 4.11 Visualisation of agroecological farm

95 ill 4.12 (a) Regional view of seaweed farming sites in Skegness before

95 ill 4.12 (b) Regional view of seaweed farming sites in Skegness after

96 ill 4.13 (a) Section from coast to deep sea

98 ill 4.13 (b) Section from coast to deep sea

98 ill 4.14 Design of recreational and habitat floats

100 ill 4.15 Visualisation of coastal rewilding and aquaculture site

102 ill 4.16 Visualisation of aquaculture site in deep sea

115 ill 5.1 Cultivating Commons PCP Handbook

154 ill 6.1 East Midlands industrial history timeline 161 ill 6.2 East Midlands industrial history timeline 164 ill 6.3 Transition Phasing strategy

LIST OF FIGURES

7 fig 1.1 Introduction cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

13 fig 2.1 Beyond Extraction cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

14 fig 2.2 1953 The site for the new McKechnie Brothers Ltd Engineering Works. Source: Historic England

14 fig 2.3 2005 Buddon Wood Quarry, Mountsorrel, Leicester. Source: Historic England

20 fig 2.4 Aerial view of the Mary Ward College as it was offered for sale in 1975. Source: BGS

22 fig 2.5 BGS Campus Site Visit in October 2024. Photo by Priyanka Awatramani

22 fig 2.6 BGS Campus Site Visit in October 2024; looking into the courtyard. Photo by Priyanka Awatramani

23 fig 2.7 NEIF Archaeological Radiocarbon Laboratory at BGS. Source: Geo-Biosciences Advanced E-Learning Academy

23 fig.25 NEIF Archaeological Radiocarbon Laboratory at BGS /

23 Source: Geo-Biosciences Advanced E-Learning Academy

29 fig 3.1 Biobased materials cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

30 fig 3.2 Clay Extraction Site

32 fig 3.3 Hemp Farm

34 fig 3.4 Urban Mycelium Farm

36 fig.3.5 Timber Harvesting Site

38 fig.3.6 Seaweed farming

40 fig.3.7 Dried seaweed biomass

40 fig.3.9 Shellfish rendering explorations by Alejandra iturrizaga

40 fig.3.8 SeaWood Acoustic Panel

41 fig.3.10 Visiting Allie Wharf from Norfolk Seaweed at Wells-next-the-sea, Norfolk on February 23, 2024. Photo by Alejandra Iturrizaga.

42 fig.3.11 Straw Farm

44 fig.3.12 Straw biomass

45 fig.3.13 Presentation with Cíaran Malik on biobased materials for retrofitting and building performance in May 2024. Photo by Clara Olóriz.

45 fig.3.14 Straw insulation panel

52 fig 3.15 Cover page of the report

52 fig 3.16 From the Report - Hemp Supply Chain Network Strategy (2036-38)

61 fig 4.1 Landscape cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

86 fig 4.2 (a,b) Rushcliffe agrarian landscapes. Photo by Emily Bowerman

86 fig 4.3 Barton in Fabis and Thrumpton Housing Needs Survey 2020 online report

93 fig 4.4 Skegness . Source: Historic England

93 fig 4.6 Skegness Neighbourhood Plan 2021-2031

93 fig 4.7 Economic Sector, Retail, Leisure and Tourism Review

93 fig 4.5 Aerial view of Skegness 1941. Source: Historic England

107 fig 5.1 Ownership cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

108 fig 5.2 Food Systems in Common report

108 fig 5.3 Public-Common Parternships: Democratising ownership and urban development report

108 fig 5.4 How we built community wealth in Preston report

142 fig 5.5 Aerial view of the protoyping site.

142 fig 5.6 View of the protoyping site

142 fig 5.7 Existing neighbourhood character

142 fig 5.8 Basford Development Report by Nottingham College

143 fig 5.9 (a-f) Google Earth Imagery of Basford Prototype Site

144 fig 5.10 Top View of Prototype Site Model

144 fig 5.11 (a-c) Close-up views of Prototype Site Model with activiities

145 fig 5.12 Full image Prototype Site Model with base of the core imagery

146-149 fig 5.13 (a-t) Images of the prototype site model for video animation

153 fig 6.1 Labour cover. Source image: Google Earth Pro

158 fig 6.2 (a-c) Labour in the rock quarries of Charnwood forest

165 fig 6.3 Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition

165 fig 6.4 Closure of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions

FIGURE CREDITS

fig 2.1 Google. East Midlands. Google Earth. Landsat/ Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 2.2 Aerofilms Ltd. The Site for the New McKechnie Brothers Ltd Engineering Works off Middlemore Lane, Aldridge, 1953 (EAW052462). Photograph.

fig 2.3 Historic England Archive. Mountsorrel Quarry, a granite quarry renowned for its distinctive pink rock, Leicestershire, 2018. Media ID 25847747. © Historic England Archive. Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// images.historicenglandservices.org.uk/industry/extraction/ mountsorrel-quarry-33500-010-25847747.html.

fig 2.4 “Photograph of Mary Ward College, Offered for Sale in 1975.” History of the Dispersal of the British Geological Survey from London. Earthwise, British Geological Survey. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://earthwise.bgs.ac.uk/ index.php/History_of_the_dispersal_of_the_British_ Geological_Survey_from_London.

fig 2.5 Awatramani, Priyanka. Photo taken October 2, 2024. fig 2.6 Awatramani, Priyanka. Photo taken October 2, 2024.

fig 2.7 Geo-Biosciences Advanced E-Learning Academy (GAEA). “3D Virtual Tours.” https://www.gaea.ac. uk/3d-tours/

fig 3.1 Google. East Midlands. Google Earth. Landsat/ Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 3.2 Macdonagh, Diarmuid. “Clay Extraction Near Wareham Approved.” Bournemouth Echo, December 7, 2018. https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ news/17276700.clay-extraction-near-wareham-approved/

fig 3.3 O’Dowd, Liam. “Hemp Easier for Farmers to Grow in the UK.” Leafie, November 12, 2024. https://www.leafie. co.uk/news/hemp-easier-farmers-grow-uk/

fig 3.4 True Shii Take Farm. “Urban Mycelium Farm.” BBE http://bbe.ac.uk/urban-mycelium-farm/. © Mike Botha, Vegout Fungi Ltd.

fig 3.5 Frazier, David R. “Logging in Idaho.” Photograph. Science Source. Accessed January 7, 2025.

fig 3.6 Car-y-Mor. “Car-y-Mor Seaweed Harvesting.” Carbon Copy. Updated February 2024. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://carboncopy.eco/initiatives/car-y-mor

fig 3.7 iStock. “Pile of Seaweed on White Background, Top View.” iStock. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www. istockphoto.com/photo/pile-of-seaweed-on-whitebackground-top-view-gm1039095884-278163325.

fig 3.8 BlueBlocks. SeaWood Materials. Photograph. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.blueblocks.nl/ portfolio/seawood/

fig 3.9 Iturrizaga Andrich, Alejandra. Shellfish Rendering Explorations. Physical model, July 2024.

fig 3.10 Iturrizaga Andrich, Alejandra. Photo taken February 23, 2024.

fig 3.11 Henson, Adam. “What Is Hay? And How Is It Made?” Countryfile, November 1, 2023. https://www.countryfile. com/farming/what-is-hay

fig 3.12 Henson, Adam. “What Is Hay? And How Is It Made?” Countryfile, November 1, 2023. https://www.countryfile. com/farming/what-is-hay

fig 3.13 Olóriz Sanjuán, Clara. Photo taken May 2, 2024.

fig 3.14 Insteading. “Straw Insulation Panels.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://cdn.insteading.com/wp-content/ uploads/2016/02/starw-quad.jpg

fig 3.15 Material Cultures, Circular Biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire. Energy Hub / York & North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, 2021, Cover, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures.org/ cb-construction/.

fig 3.16 Material Cultures, Circular Biobased Construction in the Northeast and Yorkshire. Energy Hub / York & North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, 2021, accessed January 4, 2025, https://materialcultures.org/cbconstruction/.

fig 4.1 Google. East Midlands. Google Earth. Landsat/ Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 4.2 (a,b) Bowerman, Emily. Photo taken October 2, 2024. fig 4.3 Midlands Rural Housing. Barton in Fabis and Thrumpton Housing Needs Survey 2020. In partnership with Rushcliffe Borough Council and Barton in Fabis and Thrumpton Parish Councils. November 2020. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.rushcliffe.gov.uk/housing/ strategic-housing/rural-sites-programme/barton-in-fabisand-thrumpton/.

fig 4.4 © Historic England, Aerofilms Collection. South Parade and environs, Skegness, from the south, 1930. Photograph by Aerofilms, flown on May 7, 1930, Flight AFL19300507. Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// historicengland.org.uk/images-books/archive/collections/ aerial-photos/record/EPW031866.

fig 4.5 © Historic England, Aerofilms Collection. The town centre and sea front, Skegness, 1930. Photograph by Aerofilms, flown on May 7, 1930, Flight AFL19300507. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://historicengland.org.uk/ images-books/archive/collections/aerial-photos/record/ EPW031862.

fig 4.6 East Lindsey District Council. Skegness Neighbourhood Development Plan: Referendum Version. September 2022. Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/media/21963/SkegnessNeighbourhood-Development-Plan/pdf/Skegness_ Neighbourhood_Plan_-_Referendum_Version_-_ September_2022_v.2.pdf?m=1676881199763.

fig 4.7 East Lindsey District Council. Skegness Neighbourhood Plan Economic Sector Review Report. November 2019. https://www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/ media/20105/Economic-Sector-Review-Report/ pdf/16._Skegness_Neighbourhood_Plan_Economic_ Sector_Review_Report_-_November_2019. pdf?m=1644229126813.

fig 5.1 Google. East Midlands. Google Earth. Landsat/ Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 5.2 Heron, Kai, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn. “Food Systems in Common: Council Farms, Agroecological Food Sovereignty, and Public-Common Partnerships.” November 28, 2024.

fig 5.3 Heron, Kai, Bertie Russell, and Keir Milburn. “Public-Common Parternships: Democratising ownership and urban development.” September, 2021.

fig 5.4 Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) and Preston City Council, How We Built Community Wealth in Preston (Manchester: CLES and Preston City Council, May 2019)

fig 5.5 Awatramani, Priyanka. Photo taken October 2, 2024.

fig 5.6 Awatramani, Priyanka. Photo taken October 2, 2024.

fig 5.7 Awatramani, Priyanka. Photo taken October 2, 2024.

fig 5.8 Nottingham College. “Basford Campus.” Nottingham College. Accessed December 30, 2024. https://www. nottinghamcollege.ac.uk/student-life/campuses/basford

fig 5.9 (a-f) Google. Basford Prototype Site. Google Earth. Landsat/Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 5.10 Bowerman, Emily, and Priyanka Awatramani. Prototype Site Models. Photographs, November 4, 2024.

fig 5.11 (a-c) Bowerman, Emily, and Priyanka Awatramani. Prototype Site Models. Photographs, November 4, 2024.

fig 5.12 Bowerman, Emily, and Priyanka Awatramani. Prototype Site Models. Photographs, November 4, 2024.

fig 5.13 (a-t) Bowerman, Emily, and Priyanka Awatramani. Prototype Site Models. Photographs, November 4, 2024.

fig 6.1 Google. East Midlands. Google Earth. Landsat/ Copernicus imagery. Accessed January 7, 2025

fig 6.2 (a-c) McGrath, Alan. “Charnwood Quarries.” Mercian Geologist 16 (2007): 241–250. Accessed January 7, 2025. http://www.emgs.org.uk/Mercian/Mercian%20-%20 Individual%20papers/Mercian%20Geologist%20 volume%2016%202004-2007/Mercian%202007%20 v16%20p241%20Chranwood%20quarries%2C%20 McGrath.pdf

fig 6.3 Kurwan, Jenny, Timon Wehnert, Emma Krause, Moritz Schäfer, Besa Maraj, and David Mairle. Driving Change: How to Implement a Successful Regional Just Transition. European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy, June 2023. https://energy.ec.europa.eu/system/ files/2023-06/exchangeEU_Lessons%20Learnt__final.pdf

fig 6.4 Aaron Atteridge and Claudia Strambo, Closure of Steelworks in Newcastle, Australia: Lessons from Industrial Transitions, Stockholm Environment Institute, June 2021, https://www.sei.org/wp-content/ uploads/2021/06/closure-of-steelworks-in-newcastle.pdf.

ill 2.2

Step1; Select Stone. “Ballast Quarry.” Select Stone Blog September 20, 2022. https://www.selectstone. com/2022/09/20/ballastquarry/

Step 2; Ramos, Pok. “Aerial Photography of Seashore.” Unsplash. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://unsplash. com/photos/aerial-photography-of-seashorepqN82ZS6OsI

Step3; MC-Bauchemie. “Steelworks Slag as a Binder for Construction Materials.” MC-Bauchemie News. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.mc-bauchemie.com/news/ inspirations/steelworks-slag-as-a-binder-for-constructionmaterials.html

Step 4; Rockwool. “How ROCKWOOL Stone Wool Is Made.” YouTube Video, 3:56. Published June 27, 2019. https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwdcBlSrITQ

Step 5; Rockwool Factory. “Heat Insulation Mineral Stone Rock Wool Board Slab Sheet Panel Roll Production Curing Oven Chamber.” Made-in-China.com. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://rockwoolfactory.en.made-in-china.com/ product/KFfmOwNcwQWC/China-Heat-InsulationMineral-Stone-Rock-Wool-Board-Slab-Sheet-Panel-RollProduction-Curing-Oven-Chamber.html

Step 6; ROCKWOOL. “ROCKWOOL® Trademark.” ROCKWOOL Website. Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// www.rockwool.com/in/rockwool-trademark/

Step 7; Warm International. “What Does Rock Wool Insulation Look Like?” Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// warm-international.com/what-does-rock-wool-insulationlook-like/

Step 8; ROCKWOOL. “Thermal Performance.” ROCKWOOL UK Advice and Inspiration. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.rockwool.com/uk/advice-and-inspiration/ why-stone-wool/thermal-performance/

Step 9; Kaminski, Peter. “Quarry Image.” Flickr. October 10, 2007. https://www.flickr.com/photos/ peterkaminski/1460851384

ill 3.2

1. Clay Rawpixel. “Clay Isolated on White Background.” Accessed January 7, 2025.

2. Compressed Earth Blocks

Kamal, Mohammad Arif. “Compressed Earth Blocks.” ResearchGate. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www. researchgate.net/profile/Mohammad-Arif-Kamal/ publication/370298758/figure/fig1/AS:1143128115385284 4@1682567672401/Compressed-earth-blocks.png

3. Adobe Bricks

Renovables Verdes. “Adobe Material.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.renovablesverdes.com/wp-content/ uploads/2023/01/que-es-el-adobe-material.jpg

4. Cob (Clay + Straw)

Dezeen. “Cob Building.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// static.dezeen.com/uploads/2019/03/cobbauge-cobbuilding-dezeen-hero.jpg

5. Hemp

Volusion Store. “Wild Harvested Hemp Stalk.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://cdn4.volusion.store/gzwteayeue/v/vspfiles/photos/STALK1-4.jpg?vcache=1729797792

6. Hempcrete Blocks

Quadra Concrete. “Hempcrete Blocks.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.quadra-concrete.com/wp-content/ uploads/isohemp-bloc-chanvre-gamme-1.jpg

7. Mycelium

Edinburgh College of Art. “Mycelium Product Design.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://productdesign.eca.ed. ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/mycelia-590x372. png

8. Dried Mycelium Composite Blocks

ETH Zurich. “Dried Mycelium Composite Blocks.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://fcl.ethz.ch/research/fcl-phase2/ archipelago-cities/alternative-construction-materials/ mycelium/_jcr_content/par/fullwidthimage/image. imageformat.930.1580458024.jpg

9. Mycelium Foam Insulation

Mycellium. “Mycelium Foam Insulation.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://mycellium.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ cover-6-900x600-Recovered-scaled-1-1024x627.jpg

10. Seaweed

Wallpapers.com. “Wild Harvested Seaweed.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://wallpapers.com/images/hd/ wild-harvested-seaweed-png-jck19-lqedog8bzb6v5hye. jpg

11. 20% Insulation Additive in Co

Earth Blocks. “Cob Blocks.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://earthblocks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ cob-blocks-feature.jpg

12. 50% Acoustic Panel

Material District. “Blueblocks: Seawood Materials.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://materialdistrict.com/wp-content/ uploads/2022/08/blueblocks-seawood-materials-ona9303-scaled.jpg

13. Seaweed Blocks

TBN. “Seaweed Blocks.” Accessed January 7, 2025. .

14. Straw Insulation Panels

Insteading. “Straw Insulation Panels.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://cdn.insteading.com/wp-content/ uploads/2016/02/starw-quad.jpg

15. Timber

Vecteezy. “Wooden Log.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https:// static.vecteezy.com/system/resources/ thumbnails/024/509/668/small_2x/wooden-log-asfirewood-isolated-on-a-transparent-background-createdwith-generative-ai-png.png

16. Solid Wood (Pine)

Crafty Pig Designs. “Solid Wood Pine.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.craftypigdesigns.co.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2013/07/00104_1-cbe.jpeg

17. Wood Panels (MDF)

Building Shop. “MDF Wood Panels.” Accessed January 7, 2025. https://buildingshop.co.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2014/11/MDF600.jpg

ill.4.1

Intertidal

Historic England. Historic England Photo 27482_028. Flown on June 20, 2012. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Marshland

Historic England. Historic England Photo 20621_010. Flown on October 12, 2006. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Cement Plant

Historic England. Historic England Photo 20275_018. Flown on June 22, 2005. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Aggregate Quarry

Historic England. Historic England Photo 20275_018. Flown on June 22, 2005. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Woodland

Historic England. Historic England Photo 34256_035. Flown on May 10, 2024. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Cropland

Historic England. Historic England Photo 27404_036. Flown on February 2, 2012. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

Bog, Urban Area, Pastureland, Mudflat

Historic England. Historic England Photo. © Historic England. Accessed January 7, 2025.

ill 6.1

1701, 1911 Muir, Ramsay. Philip’s New Historical Atlas for Students. London: Philip & Son, 1911.

1801 Art UK. “Progress or Pollution? How British Landscape Painting Captured the Industrial Revolution.” Accessed January 4, 2025. https://artuk.org/discover/stories/ progress-or-pollution-how-british-landscape-paintingcaptured-the-industrial-revolution

1810 Leicestershire Collections. “Watercolours, Prints, and Drawings.” Accessed January 4, 2025. https:// leicestershirecollections.org.uk/gallery/watercoloursprints-and-drawings

1849 Welland Antique Maps. Nottingham by K. Johnson & T. A. Prior, c.1849. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://www. wellandantiquemaps.co.uk/product/nottingham-by-kjohnson-t-a-prior-c-1849/

1880 Big Sky Fine Art. Prospect of Nottingham Castle and the Park. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://www. bigskyfineart.com/prospect-of-nottingham-castle-andthe-park~323

1900, 1905 Beckett, J. V., and J. E. Heath. “When Was the Industrial Revolution in the East Midlands?” Midland History 13, no. 1 (1988): 77–94.

1962, 1979 “Carrington Station.” Disused Stations. Last modified December 2023. Accessed January 4, 2025. http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/carrington/index. shtml

1953 Historic England. “Archive Collections: Aerial Photos.” Accessed January 4, 2025. https://historicengland.org.uk/ images-books/archive/collections/aerial-photos/

1963 Network Rail. “Dr Beeching’s Axe: Making the Connection.” Network Rail. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/our-history/ making-the-connection/dr-beechings-axe/

1986 Nottingham Post. “Nottinghamshire’s Lost Coal Mines and Their Stories.” Last modified September 2023. Accessed January 4, 2025. https://www.nottinghampost. com/news/history/gallery/nottinghamshires-lost-coalmines-stories-8757274

2011 Digimap. Digimap Society Service. EDINA, University of Edinburgh. Accessed 2024. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk

ill 6.2

1. Global impact of mining on biodiversity; Eva MacNamara et al., Embodied Biodiversity Report, research by Expedition Engineering, supported by the Institution of Civil Engineers, November 3, 2023, https://expedition.uk.com/wp-content/ uploads/2023/11/231103_Embodied-Biodiversity_Report_ Compressed.pdf

2. 30 by 30; Natural England. “30 by 30: A Boost for Nature Recovery.” Natural England Blog. December 11, 2023. https://naturalengland.blog.gov.uk/2023/12/11/30-by-30a-boost-for-nature-recovery/

3, 9. Quarry Images; Mainland Aggregates. “Understanding Quarrying: An Animated Guide.” Mainland Aggregates Blog Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www. mainlandaggregates.co.uk/blog/understanding-quarryingan-animated-guide.html

4. Supply chain; Corporate Finance Institute. Supply Chain Example. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://cdn. corporatefinanceinstitute.com/assets/Supply-ChainExample.png

5. Demolition; UK Home Improvement. “How to Dispose of Bricks and Rubble.” UK Home Improvement Blog Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www. ukhomeimprovement.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/ UK-Home-Improvement_How-to-Dispose-of-Bricks-andRubble.jpeg

6. Cultivating Commons. Global Cartography. 2025. 7. India Extraction Article; Reuters Foundation. “Mining Sand, Changing Landscapes.” Thomson Reuters Foundation News. May 9, 2016. https://news.trust.org/ item/20160509120656-r8djg

8. Raw Material Consumption; UK Government. “England’s Material Footprint.” Gov.UK Statistics. Accessed January 7, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ englands-material-footprint/englands-material-footprint