Blog

Birds Bees and Business – Mole National Park, Ghana.

stoutj123

Written by PhD student Elaine Marshall, whose thesis focuses on gender in ecosystem restoration and management.

I recently returned from a 10 day trip to Ghana, participating in the ‘Birds Bees and Business’ project kick off, led by Vogelbescherming (VBN) ‘Birdlife Netherlands’, with Birdlife International in-country partners: Ghana Wildlife Society, the UK’s RSPB, Naturama (Burkina Faso), SOS Foret (Cote D’Ivoire), NABU (Birdlife Germany), as well as the ‘Fair Climate Fund’ (Netherlands) and ‘Tiigalpa’ (Burkina) NGOs, and a regionally important natural product social enterprise called ‘Vitara’.

Arriving in a hot, humid Accra, I met with the core team including project leader who I have worked with on and off since 2017. The following morning we flew Northwards to Tamale, and with the Harmattan winds blowing from the Sahara, the dust impeded much visibility both from the plane, and during the wider regional visit. Once all project partners had arrived in Tamale, and as the sun went down and the impossibly large fruit bats began their night patrols, we assembled in the evening cool to begin our journey working together, in French and English, introducing our technical backgrounds, organisations and interests. The next day we departed overland on a 3 hour drive to Mole National Park in Savannah Region, the location of our 6 day inception workshop.  

Leaving the urban chaos of Tamale, you are immediately struck by the amount of degradation in the landscape, the absence of trees other than occasional small shea (Vitellaria paradoxa), baobab (Adansonia), African locust bean (Parkia biglobosa) or Kapok (Ceiba pentandra), the volumes of charcoal being sold on the side of the road (bulked up for collection by commercial scale intermediaries), grazing livestock – particularly goats, and areas of extensive ‘controlled’ burning.

The inception workshop was a carefully planned opportunity to enable us all to present our individual work and research, identify what we bring to the project including opportunities for synergy, support and partnership across the region, and input into a Theory of Change for the region, building on collective in-country partner progress, across the 3 project pillars of biodiversity conservation, socio economic well-being, and climate change adaptation and mitigation.

I presented a summary of my PhD research to date, including my conceptual framework drawing on feminist political ecology (FPE), outlined research questions and methodological approach for evaluating differentiated gender perspectives around restoration and sustainable land management (SLM). It generated lots of interest across the project partners, including interesting discussions around the sensitive nature of gender work, particularly in Islamic culture, and the importance of working with both women and men. We discussed the challenges of empowering women in ways which are culturally and socially acceptable, and how successful community engagement can enable sustained project outcomes.

We considered the possibilities of undertaking research in Cote D’Ivoire as well as Ghana, and also the relevance of previous work between 2016-2020 with Naturama colleagues in Burkina Faso. An opportunity to follow up and evaluate the perceived impacts by men and women, of farmer led interventions for nature restoration in Burkina Faso, would have been ideal. Sadly, regional insecurity and broken Diplomatic ties between Burkina and Europe, underpins Foreign Office advice not to travel, making this field work option challenging to insure. As such, for now the focus is on Ghana.

I set up meetings with the Ghana partners to discuss my community-based research in the Mole buffer zone. I wanted to assess the lie of the land, including ongoing and envisaged work, selection of research communities (location and number), and identify a research assistant, community ‘gatekeeper’, and access officer to help with translation. Physical infrastructure is limited in places to dirt roads, necessitating 4×4 vehicular access, and best avoided during the rainy season (June – September). We talked about the possibility of undertaking research in April, between Ramadan finishing and the rains beginning from mid May. Helpfully I was able to visit 5 communities in total and speak with some of the community women who are involved in shea production.

Communities in the Mole National Park (MNP) buffer zone have community resource management plans (CREMAS) which are developed and implemented with the support of Ghana Wildlife Society. Mole was established in 1956 and is the first and largest National Park in Ghana, covering 4577 km2, located in the Guinea savanna vegetation zone. A variety of mammals, including elephants, birds and tree species, attract international tourists. A history of conflict exists between local communities and MNP, tracing back to enforced eviction and involuntary relocation, at the time of protected area gazetting. The establishment of MNP resulted in the loss of hunting grounds, farmland, and sacred sites, with notable impact on women through reduced access to traditional harvesting sites for important non timber forest products (NTFPs), including shea. Cultural norms which alienate women from accessing land and making decisions relating to natural resources, reinforce inequalities and exacerbate the impact of protected area conflicts on women: “Land issues are men’s issues—we women have little say in matters of land” (Soliku, 2024). Wildlife laws prohibiting local people from hunting and accessing other resources in the park, as well as ongoing human wildlife conflict around elephants and crops, further aggravates the relationships between local communities, chiefs, park and government officials. Households in the region are predominantly male headed (90%), with sociocultural norms determining women’s access to productive resources, participation in decision-making, and expected caregiving roles (Nyarko, 2002). Male economic migration to the South of Ghana continues, leaving behind wives (and children) who assume dual roles as caregivers and breadwinners.

I spoke with community women and men in all 5 communities, around shea production and the importance of the landscape in meeting wider livelihood needs, from fuelwood and water, to food and income. Women consistently reported unreliable rains resulting in drought last year and lost harvests. The importance of shea in terms of helping with ‘income smoothing’ for households is significant, as were observations that the availability and abundance of nuts is declining. “ Before, ten years back, we used to collect all that we needed and there were still so many nuts left on the ground. Now we struggle to find what we need….” Local women attributed this shortage to unpredictable rains and a changing climate, but previous research in neighbouring Burkina confirming that shea is insect pollinated, also identified pollination limitation across shea sample plots, and this was greatest where plant diversity was lowest and least able to support healthy pollinator populations (Delaney et al., 2020).

Reflecting on methodological approach and research questions:

  • The wider project partnership recognises the importance of working with men and women, sharing valuable insight around the importance of respect for cultural practices in interventions which seek to empower women. Many ongoing projects have elements of gender mainstreaming incorporated.
  • There are partner limitations in capacity and personnel, but I met with 2 excellent local staff whom I hope to engage full time to work with during the next field work visit.
  • I will use the FPE (feminist political ecology) framework to provide an approach for evaluating gendered perceptions of landscape management, risk, resilience, benefit sharing, decision-making, and changes over time, etc.. The scoping visit has been enlightening as to what elements of different lived experiences the case study communities are best able to talk about, and what areas might provide most insight around gendered community dynamics.
  • Interventions to increase food security through vegetable gardens and bee keeping are underway, and restoration activities are being established in the communities, with community tree nurseries leading the way following consultation around species selection.
  • The data collection will be a mixed methods approach collecting both qualitative and quantitative data using: surveys, semi structured interviews with key informants; focal groups with both men and women; my observations and journal notes; and time use maps. All communities have women who collect, process and sell shea (as members of a producer group), and these women will provide my targeted sample across 3 different communities, Male key informants will be identified from each community, and additional perspectives gleaned from male and female focus groups. 
  • Deliberately parking the language of ‘gender equality’, to enable a more nuanced exploration of ‘gendered perceptions around wider community resilience and livelihood strategies’, when working in the field.

Using a gender lens to identify and explore how people interact with their natural environment:

  • Gender roles in income generation, farming and food production, and natural resource management? What are the gendered priorities, opportunities, challenges?
    • What does a typical day look like? Who does what, where, and why?
      • What decisions are made and how and who makes them? And how has all of this changed over time? Observing any areas of tension or conflict.

Thematic areas for discussion include: access to resources and land; restoration and sustainable land management; labour and care burdens; livelihoods and income (agricultural, shea, other NTFPs etc).

And finally, we were lucky and enjoyed a couple of safaris around MNP near to our lodge, early morning and evening, and a special opportunity to walk to the watering hole. We saw elephants, wart hogs, crocodiles, antelopes, monkeys, and huge bird diversity, from fly catchers, to kingfishers, to martial eagles and vultures, and on an evening drive, some very cute bush babies!  

Delaney, A., Dembele, A., Nombré, I., Gnane Lirasse, F., Marshall, E., Nana, A., Vickery, J., Tayleur, C., Stout, J.C., 2020. Local‐scale tree and shrub diversity improves pollination services to shea trees in tropical West African parklands. Journal of Applied Ecology 57, 1504–1513. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13640

Nyarko, P., 2002. Navrongo DSS, Ghana,. Population and Health in Developing Countries in vol. 1, Population, Health, and Survival at INDEPTH Sites 247–256. https://www.indepth-network.org/Resource%20Kit/INDEPTH%20DSS%20Resource%20Kit/LinkedDocuments/INDEPTH%20Monograph%20I%20Ch1-7%20Introduction,%20Methods%20&%20Life%20Tables.pdf.

Soliku, O., 2024. Living around Mole National Park: Grassroots Perspectives on Gendered Experiences of Protected Area Conflicts and Peacebuilding Strategies.

Natural Capital Accounting | Accounting for the Crossroads of Human Nature

stoutj123

Written by Owen Small, researcher on the For-ES project in the School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin

Dramatisation of the headline aside, Natural Capital Accounting (NCA) is a trending framework for ascribing value to ecosystems, that – in the eyes of this particular researcher – has a wide disparity in the potential outcomes it may lead to.

On one hand, we have a means to reshape our current economic systems in a manner that prioritises nature like the essential driving force of life it is. On the other, we have a streamlined methodology for powerful private interests to further commodify the natural world, widening existing wealth gaps and propagating the exploitation of developing countries. Standing at this crossroads, the scientists, economists, conservationists and humanists that recognise the powerful tool NCA might be, must face it for what it could be bastardised into.

“Concern for man himself and his fate must always constitute the chief objective of all technological endeavors… in order that the creations of our mind shall be a blessing and not a curse to mankind. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations.”
                                                                                    – Albert Einstein.

Einstein uttered these words at a speech at the California Institute of Technology on 16 February 1931. Despite Einstein’s words, there still sometimes seems to exist a lack of consideration for externalities during the rigors of research. It’s of course a folly of a system that demands constant advancement and output, otherwise experts face redundancy, but still a flaw in the process none the less. The point I’m overexplaining is we must move cautiously and deliberately with frameworks connecting the living, natural world to monetary values.

Three paragraphs in, perhaps it’s a decent time to define NCA, and the specific ecological-based aspects I’m referring to. Natural capital is simply all that comes from nature; soil, water, animals, plants, etc. The accounting bit refers to measuring the change in extent and condition of this natural capital, the stock as it’s called. In a more particular context, we have ‘Ecosystem Accounting’ which measures and tracks this stock over time, as well as how humans use it, or the flow of ‘ecosystem services.’ These services again are how humans use the ecosystems they exist in or adjacent to. Generally, they’re divided into four types: provisioning (food, timber), regulating (flood control, carbon sequestration), cultural (recreation areas, sacred sites), and supporting (photosynthesis, the water cycle). Fundamentally, human life and society do not exist without ecosystem services.

Figure from SEEA EA, conceptualising Ecosystem Accounting

At face value, this all sounds great. A system that seeks to monitor and track where ecosystems are, how they’re doing, and what they provide us. The issue lies not in the means or purported ends, but the potential perversion of its goals. Under the System of Environmental Economic Accounting (SEEA), there is an intention to reach a level where monetary values are calculated for ecosystem services and stock, albeit these monetary valuations are not ratified by the UN. The SEEA Implementation Strategy explicitly mentions intended uses for ecosystem accounting (EA) being to drive private and public investment for nature restoration, inform policy, and support current reporting requirements.

Figures from Mascolo et al. (2025) showing Natural Capital Accounts for Italy in 2021. (left) Net carbon sequestered by ecosystems. (right) Wood provisioning provided by forested areas.

This all sounds excellent, and there have been successful pilot projects and ongoing uses of SEEA EA. At a national scale in Italy, spatially explicit valuation of ecosystem services has improved the allocation of EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidies, directing restoration funding to areas indicated for high returns (European Union, 2024; Mascolo et al., 2025). A multi-national SEEA EA pilot initiative helped quantify where forest degradation was avoided in Central and South America, as well as Southeast Asia, and even saw reform of forest repayment schemes in Mexico through the Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services Project (NCAVES) (United Nations Statistics Division & United Nations Environment Programme, n.d.). Some studies even claim that the principles of NCA adopted in green accounting with private corporations have demonstrated improved financial performance (Tjandrakirana et al., 2024). It’s that last example, however, where the cause for concern can arise.

Accusations of politicising a discussion can be brought up when critiques of capitalism, and its impacts on the environment, are contended. Personally – as an independent individual whose views are my own and not any group or institution’s – I see enough categorical and empirical evidence supporting the statement that traditional capitalist systems, and the inherent growth dependency and profit maximization, are contradictory to current climate and biodiversity goals. While it’s encouraging to see organisations willfully partaking in more sustainable practices, it begs the question of whether these goals and practices are maintainable for profit-driven sectors.

Now, credit where credit’s due, that is in a sense the point of NCA and ecosystem accounting. Realign the priorities of financial systems so that profit is not the sole goal, but overall environmental health and human equity is an aim. In a vacuum, monetary systems are not destructive to ecology. Just as there’s exchanges of energy in a rich and dynamic trophic web, humans exchange currency in equally complex economies. That said, I’d safely assume most researchers in the field of NCA would all agree that the relationship between humanity, our economy, and nature needs to be overhauled in order to meet critical ecological goals. Where my previous sentiment was drawing alarms are the various stakeholders that would not view ecosystem accounting as means to change a system, but rather to further perpetuate their own economic power.

Image of common ‘Greenwashing’ terms from How to tell if a company is greenwashing – spunout

‘Greenwashing’ as it’s called is the new buzzword that really captures where a lot of my worries would lie. Thanks in part to ineffectual policy, or enforcement of existing legislation, countless companies in the developed world sell products labelled as “green” or “sustainable” with no true data to support it. Often the products are actually significantly damaging the environment. The easiest example, which the veil has been pulled back a little, is plastics and recycling. It’s very well documented that only a fraction of plastic products are truly recycled, and even the process of recycling them has its impacts, yet many companies still push “100% recyclable container” or “packaged made of 50% recycled plastic.” It’s predatory marketing practices harvesting a premium from environmentally conscious consumers.

Lets imagine greenwashing, but on a systemic scale rather than just the marketing and retail level. Weaponising NCA methods, companies whose industrial practice, regardless of any adjustments they can make, damage the environment (fossil fuels, strip-mining) could use ecosystem accounting to minimise and mask their impacts. One objective critique of NCA is, while there are standards in place, the operationalising of SEEA EA is largely site/stakeholder dependent. Accounts must be developed with goals in mind and vary region by region. Now, if a fossil-fuel company wipes out a protected habitat, there is not much data manipulation to be done to mask that, but what could be done is active minimisation of the wider impact. Ensuring condition and ecosystem service accounts downplay what this ecosystem provided, and perhaps even upscaling what other land the company may own has.

Yes, I’m jumping several steps ahead and making very large and brash assumptions, but that was precisely my point with the Einstein quote. His work, however indirect, contributed to the atomic bomb, and he even signed a letter with others warning the U.S. government of Germany’s atomic potential, a decision he would later voice regrets on learning more about how far they were. Despite that, America’s advancements in the 1930s/40s led the world to a nuclear era with unforeseen risks and consequences. Could physicists have treaded more carefully and brought us instead into an age of safe, nuclear energy? Similar questions, not quite as heavy questions could be asked when developing valuations for ecosystems. How do we, as NCA researchers, avoid a similar mistake and prevent for-profit private enterprises from misusing the principles of ecosystem accounting?

I’ve worked in the field for less than a year, so obviously have no answers myself. Moreover, there are countless distinguished experts in the NCA landscape who have had these same worries and asked the same questions. This is just the outward reflections of someone that has dove in and been inundated with a fascinating new perspective on quantifying and understanding humanity and our relationship with nature. Frankly, I worry it is too anthropocentric, plain and simple. It takes something that should be inherent, care for nature, and frames it in a transactional manner: nature good = humans good. If used as intended and responsibly, could NCA still contribute to our separation from nature? We frame it as capital – nature is an asset. I disagree; nature is us. We are innately part of the formula, not one side of an equation: nature good + humans good = Earth good.

Science Communication cartoon by Tom Dunne

But, as a realist rather than idealist, ecosystem accounting is a practical solution regarding an already degraded relationship. Perhaps as it becomes mainstream, develops and improves, that inherent sense of caring for nature will be restored. In many ways, natural capital serves to speak on protecting biodiversity and improving sustainability in terms the people with significant impact understand. It’s the language of policymakers that fret about GDP, and the vernacular of corporations that cause the larger scale impacts. An ecologist’s understanding of something means little if it can’t be communicated to people making decisions. Creating ecosystem accounts is a form of communicating info many experts already know. On a macro-scale, it’s “laymen’s terms” for describing ecosystems, how they’re doing, and how important they are.

As we continue advancing Natural Capital Accounting, especially those of us developing new methods to quantify ecosystem services and their valuations, the responsibility is not abstract. I work on experimental recreation-related services accounts using relatively novel methods and a dataset with inherent bias. They offer an interesting perspective into understanding how people feel about and use an ecosystem. In the wrong hands, the accounts could easily be used to misrepresent the true sentiment of a community for a natural area. That’s a powerful tool that should be handled properly.

“The creations of our mind shall be a blessing and not a curse to mankind,” Einstein said. It’s not the ecosystem accounts alone that determine which contrivance of humanity it shall be; it’s the structures and systems that use it that decide. We can communicate nature as an asset but must make it clear that nature’s value is irrespective of its ability to serve people. Nature is valuable to humans. When we restore those last two words, we turn our relationship with nature into a transaction.

A photo of something ‘valuable’, from a walk in Co. Wicklow, Ireland

References

European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/3024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 amending Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 as regards introducing new environmental economic account modules (SEEA EA). Official Journal of the European Union, L 3024. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3024/oj/ 

Mascolo, R. A., et al. (2025). Towards National Ecosystem Accounts: A First Application of EU Regulation 2024/3024 in Italy. One Ecosystem. https://oneecosystem.pensoft.net/article/161992/

United Nations Statistics Division & United Nations Environment Programme. (n.d.). Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services Project (NCAVES). SEEA UN Project Portal. https://seea.un.org/home/Natural-Capital-Accounting-Project

Tjandrakirana, R. D. P., Ermadiani, E., & Aspahani, A. (2024). The impact of environmental performance, green accounting, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) on financial performance. International Journal of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS), 4(3). https://doi.org/10.55227/ijhess.v4i3.1335

Women for farming, food, nature and love

stoutj123

Written by Fernanda Azevedo, whose PhD work focuses on how farmers feel about pollinator conservation in Ireland

After a stretch of very little sun in Dublin, on a lovely afternoon, the day after Valentine’s Day, we went to the Smock Alley to watch a love story. No ordinary story, but one carrying the weight of the Irish women who chose to be farmers, in what is a very male-dominated profession in Ireland. The love they have for their farms, their animals and the responsibility to the environment and the food they produce.

According to the CSO (Central Statistics Office) in 2023, only 13.2% of farms are owned by women.

We had the opportunity to get to know and celebrate the story of three generations of women farmers, and we were able to taste a little piece of their farms in beautiful bites that represented their stories. 

That afternoon felt like stepping into three living, breathing farms and into the lives of the women who sustain them. Through their stories and the flavours they shared, we experienced agriculture as something deeply personal, rooted in family, resilience, community and care.

Sophie’s story reminded us of the determination required to challenge gender bias and build confidence in spaces that are not always welcoming. Carina’s journey highlighted the power of diversification, community bonds and generational strength, showing how farming is sustained not only by land but by people who show up for one another. Ailbhe’s path revealed the courage it takes to reimagine farming, to centre nature, education and biodiversity while navigating economic and social tensions and the power of being part of a community to a farmer.

Together, their voices carried a common thread: farming is not just production; it is stewardship, memory, responsibility, community and hope. It is early mornings in harsh weather, unseen labour, difficult decisions, and unwavering commitment. It is also sweetness, like yoghurt, smoked cheese and honey, created through collaboration, persistence and care.

Leaving the theatre, it was impossible not to feel a deeper appreciation for the food on our plates and for the women who, despite representing only a small percentage of farm owners in Ireland, are shaping the future of agriculture. Their stories invite us to slow down, to question the systems behind our food, and to recognise that farming can be many things: innovative, community-driven, nature-centred and profoundly human.

Sophie Bell

The first to tell her story was Sophie Bell. She is a young farmer from Co. Cavan who farms 57 acres while also working full-time off farm as a social media advocate for agriculture and young women farmers. Originally, it was a dairy farm with her grandad and gradually became a beef farm with her dad. In 2022, Sophie entered a partnership with her father and started contract rearing dairy heifers. Not by coincidence, the bite that represented her farm was a whipped yoghurt with milk curd, lemon and dill. A very light yoghurt with a gentle acidity from the lemon and the surprise of dill on a slightly crunchy base.

She tells how, in her teenage years, she became interested in the farm and got more involved in the farm duties. Sophie recognises the role of women in her life in inspiring, encouraging and believing in her abilities. Her mother was her inspiration as she balanced a full-time job, family care and farm work. Sophie highlights that this work, typical of many women in agriculture, is often unseen and uncelebrated.

Sophie says that at school she did not feel very confident, but her agricultural science teacher believed in her and encouraged her to apply to Harper Adams University, helping her secure a place and pursue a degree in agriculture.

Another woman farmer was also essential in building Sophie’s career. This dairy farmer, besides having to take care of the farm with a large number of animals, had three young children. But she believed in Sophie and in her competence, work ethic and interest in learning. Sophie recognises that without this woman, she probably would not have her social media account.

Her page now has almost 100k followers, and it is a platform for advocating for agriculture and women farmers. Through this platform, she has built a community and inspired young girls to consider farming careers. Sophie proudly shares about a girl who told her, “When I’m older, I want to be just like you”.

Sophie also reflects on the subtle but persistent and mentally exhausting gender bias she faced in agriculture, from exclusionary language (e.g., an event where they kept saying “who is a dairy man”, “who is a beef man”) to assumptions about gender roles (a planning letter addressed to her, however, the letter said “dear sir”).

Carina Roseingrave

Carina Roseingrave is a full-time farmer at her family-run Burren View Farm outside Crusheen, County Clare, where she farms alongside her brother on 350 acres.

Burren View Farm had always been a suckler farm, for generations, until 2017, when Carina and her brother decided to diversify to make the farm sustainable for them to work full-time. Besides the pedigree Charolais and Limousin herd, they tried dairy farming due to some experience her brother gained while travelling abroad. Despite having no prior experience with dairy farming, Carina now takes pride in and enjoys her mornings seeing the sunrise (and the sunset), bringing the cows for milking. To honour her farm, using milk from her cows and eggs from her hens, she brought to us a smoked egg mousse with aged Charleville cheddar and chive. The taste was glorious: the smooth cheese, the creamy texture of the egg and a hint of chives wrapped in a light but firm crust.

Burren View Farm is now a milk supplier to Kerry Dairy Ireland. With this company, they learned quickly how to be dairy farmers, but something that drove them was their dad’s motto: “If you are going to do something, do it right”, and of course, their concern to keep food and nature connected, producing high-quality milk, beef and eggs.

Carina had her mother and grandmother as examples. Since her dad passed away in 2002, her mam had to take care of five children while working a full-time job. Her grandma lived with them and took care of the children. Carina speaks with emotion about her grandma’s garden, where she grew many different vegetables and kept a few hens, so from a young age, she knew where food comes from.

She praised the care that farmers have for the food they produce, as every day, regardless of the weather (which means a lot in a country like Ireland), they get up to milk their cows, take care of their crops, collect eggs and look after their animals. She then drew attention to how lucky we are to have these products easily available in the supermarket.

Community is very important to her. In 2020, after her mam recovered from cancer, they ran a charity event where they raffled their prized Charolais heifer, Snowdrop. They raised over €6000 for charity to give back to the community. The winner of Snowdrop, a farmer in Donegal, kept in contact with them, sharing information on her wellbeing, her calf and everything, forming a lasting friendship that reflects the strong bonds within agriculture. This experience encouraged them to further develop their pedigree herd.

Carina emphasises the importance of diversification, sustainability and community in modern Irish farming. She is passionate about showing cattle at local agricultural shows and takes pride in seeing her young daughters participate, passing on farming skills to the next generation. Inspired by the strong women in her life, she hopes to continue promoting appreciation for where food comes from and to support the future of Irish agriculture.

Ailbhe Gerrard

Ailbhe farms organically over 80 acres outside Nenagh, Co. Tipperary, on a beautiful lakeside farm along Lough Derg. She describes her land with pride and admiration; she talks about the hills, the fields, hedges, the shores of Lough Derg and her curious and courageous sheep. She farms organic oats (for our porridge) and organic barley (for our whiskey and beer), and she could not leave out beekeeping, which she highlighted as very important to her.

She remembers that this piece of land is very dear to her because it is part of her childhood memories. She grew up very close to where she farms now, where her big family used to grow vegetables, had a few hens, turn hay by hand, and overall lived a very outdoorsy lifestyle. She acknowledges the role of having horses and hens in learning the land and how to grow food. She became a farmer later in life. She moved to the city and became a project manager for construction, but the memories of the Shannon were something she couldn’t ignore. So she moved back to where she grew up and decided that a little piece of land would be enough for her. She asked the owners of that piece of land that she remembered from childhood if they would sell it to her; they agreed, and now it is Brookfield Farm.

The land wasn’t always organic. After decades of the land being used for intensive barley production for animal feed, Ailbhe converted it to organic production and made it much more diverse. She introduced sheep, broadleaf woodlands, orchards, and, obviously, as a beekeeper, she brought the Native Irish Black Bee (Apis mellifera mellifera). Which brings us to the food that represents her farm: a beautiful panna cotta on a bed of chocolate, which seemed to me to be slightly bitter. Of course, the sweetness of the dessert was the highlight: honey, together with thyme and hazelnuts on top to bring a crunchiness to it. A perfect dessert to represent the energy Ailbhe brings.

From the beginning, Ailbhe wanted to bring people into her refuge, inspired by the bees and their sense of community: “the ultimate collaborators and community builders”. She wanted to show people how food is produced, to be an agroecological, creative and educational hub. Ailbhe highlights that there is a tension between caring for the farm, in the sense of creating space for insects and other wild animals, but also making a livelihood. This kind of tension is very difficult for many farmers because, according to Ailbhe, economically, farmers are not doing very well due to the commodity-driven export model that we have.

She reported tensions with her neighbours for choosing to follow the organic path. She faced very strong opposition, including a planning permission that was invalidated, and had to prove that the road that accesses her farm is public and not private, as others were claiming. A more intimidating challenge was the illegal snaring of badgers on her property. She believes that someone invaded the farm and set up the snares.

Despite the challenges, Ailbhe did not give up and continued with her plans. She says it was very costly financially but also in energy, and what helped her were her friends. If it were not for her family, who were very supportive, her friends, and the communities and networks she is part of, the path would have been much more difficult, and the outcome could have been very different.

She then closed her talk with an invitation to visit her thriving farm to see how farming can be, a different kind of farming, a nature-centred one. She also gave a small shout-out to her upcoming book, so keep your eyes peeled – I know I will!

If you missed the event, don’t worry! Their stories will be premiered this March, 2026, in a documentary called: Irish Farmers: A Love Story, directed by Haven Worley. 

Many thanks to Dr. Sarah Larragy and Moya Owens for the editing contributions.

If you are a farmer, and want to contribute to Fernanda’s research, please complete her survey via this link or the QR code below

Irish Pollinator Research Network meeting 2026

stoutj123

By Moya Owens, Research Assistant with the ANTENNA Project, Trinity College Dublin

Pollinator researchers descended onto UCD campus this year for the 9th annual Irish Pollinator Research Network (IPRN) meeting, hosted by Dr. Dara Stanley and Dr. Julia Jones. Researchers from eight universities and research institutions presented their research to the group, with approximately 40 members in attendance. This year’s meeting was one of the largest, showing that while pollinators are in decline, there is a large group of dedicated people working hard to reverse this.

Figure 1 This year’s attendants at IPRN 2026!

There were a whopping 27 talks given, covering a wide range of topics including updates from the Farmer Moth Monitoring Programme, the relationship between soil and soil-dwelling pollinators, the use of technology in pollinator monitoring, solitary bee hotels, farmer behaviours surrounding pollinator conservation, and how solitary Andrena bees are responding to environmental changes. Presentations were given by researchers at all stages, including students (undergraduates to PhD candidates!), research assistants, post-docs and PI’s. In addition to this, three new PhD projects were introduced; Beth Bryan (Teagasc/University College Dublin) introduced her research, which is assessing the effects of agroecology on pollinator diversity, which forms part of the SAFER project. Another new PhD project includes Ponds for Pollinators, which was introduced to us by Clémentine Sitoleux (Teagasc/Trinity College Dublin). Her research will investigate how farm ponds support pollinators and biodiversity on Irish farmlands. We were also introduced to research being carried out by Lena Deck (University College Dublin), who will be looking at the impacts of pesticide residues in soil on soil-dependent pollinators. Some very interesting new research being carried out over the next few years – watch this space!

Figure 2 The schedule for the day.

Research themes
The one-day meeting was jam-packed with a wide range of presentations. Pollinator research is well and truly thriving in Ireland, with a wide variety of research taking place. Below is a quick summary of the themes of research spoken about at the meeting – shout out to all the speakers this year!

Theme Speaker
Bee gut microbiomeMarcela Diaz
Julia Jones
Honeybee healthEgehan Onar Öfzen
Managed vs wild pollinatorsGrace McCormack
Dara Stanley
Land management and pollinatorsClémentine Sitoleux
Fidelma Butler
Sarah Larragy
Fernanda Azevedo
Paula O’Mahony
Niall Walshe
Beth Bryan
Rosie Mangan
Soil and pollinatorsTirza Moerman
Lena Deck
Tara Dirilgen
Solitary bees Megan Reilly
Colm O’Leary
Niamh Kennedy
Pollinator monitoringMichelle Larkin
Tim Butter
Databases and collectionsKatie Gahan
Nick Balfour
Darren O’Connell
Technology for monitoring pollinatorsMoya Owens
Technical workClaudia Barry

Table 1 A list of research themes and speakers at this year’s IPRN meeting.

Some highlights from the day
Katie Gahan (UCD) presented work on her undergraduate thesis, where she spent the summer digitising the bumblebee collection at the National Museum of Ireland. She emphasised the importance of depositing lab specimens to the museum, along with all information relevant to the sample. This prompted a discussion amongst the group about the importance of depositing samples once research is complete – an area that many attendants felt we could improve! Another fascinating talk was given by Niamh Kennedy, a PhD student at UCD, who presented updates on her research assessing how solitary Andrena bees are responding to environmental changes. Niamh has chosen the Netherlands as her case study area, due to its dramatic change in land use. She is looking at how historical and contemporary Andrena flavipes differ, and whether land use impacts this.

Figure 3 Katie Gahan’s undergraduate thesis research (left); Niamh Kennedy’s PhD research (right).

After a quick tea break and some delicious pastries, Nick Balfour from the University of Sussex informed us of DoPI, an open-access pollinator-plant interaction database which contains over 400,000 records detailing 800,000 interactions from 395 publications! Dr. Sarah Larragy (TCD) then gave us insight into the EU-funded RestPoll project, which has reached its halfway point. She updated us on the Irish 2025 field work season (you can read our field work blog here) and the success of RestPoll’s second Irish Living Lab workshop, which you can read more about here. Sarah also emphasised the importance of continuous engagement within the IPRN group and how increased collaboration would not only benefit the pollinators, but the researchers too!

Figure 4 Dr. Sarah Larragy providing updates on the RestPoll project.

PhD candidate Fernanda Azevedo (TCD) presented updates on her project Ask a Farmer, which focuses on the socio-ecological factors affecting pollinator conservation in agricultural landscapes. Fernanda developed a behavioural framework to identify motivations/limitations to the adoption of pollinator conservation and restoration practices by farmers. She presented preliminary results from her work surrounding this, highlighting that feeling part of a community is important to farmers, while their appreciation for nature is a definite motivator in the adoption of pollinator-friendly practices. In contrast, she found that the administrative burden from engaging in payment schemes can discourage farmers from taking up pollinator conservation measures. She then discussed her next steps, which involves conducting individual interviews with farmers this year. Engaging with and listening to farmers is such an important aspect in many areas of pollinator research, and it was great to hear of research directly involving them and hearing their thoughts on what potentially encourages vs discourages farmers from tackling pollinator declines.

Figure 5 Fernanda Azevedo presenting her research Ask a Farmer.

After a wonderful lunch and chats at the Pi Café in the O’Brien Science Centre, members returned for the afternoon sessions. Paula O’Mahony (UCC) kicked off the session detailing her masters thesis titled ‘Bláth in the city: urban transformation for pollinators’. The aim of her project is to investigate the impact of the no-mow policy on plant-pollinator dynamics. You can find more information on Paula’s research here. Dr. Dara Stanley (UCD) gave a talk on the impact of managed honeybee colonies on foraging bumblebees, with research showing that beekeeping in the heathlands does impact bumblebee behaviour. Research found behavioural changes among bumblebees in areas with high honeybee activity. She highlighted that more research is needed in this area to truly understand the changes in bumblebee behaviour and whether this will have knock-on effects for their colonies. Tim Butter (NBDC) provided us with updates on the Farmer Moth Monitoring Programme, which is a farmer-led monitoring scheme that engages farmers in citizen science for pollinators. In 2025, he had 61 farmers sign up to the programme, with 59 sending data to him over the field season – a huge success, likely a result of the admin-free involvement and very frequent and informative correspondence with Tim!

Figure 6 Paula O’Mahony (left) presenting her work from her masters thesis; Dr. Dara Stanley (right) explaining the consequences managed honeybees have on foraging bumblebees in heather habitats.

After a stroll around the UCD campus, we were back for the final session of the day. We heard from PhD student Colm O’Leary (UCD) on the optimisation of bee hotels for solitary bees, where he discussed the effects of height, cavity diameter and nest orientation on cavity nesting bees. We were also introduced to the ProPoll Soil project by Dr. Tirza Moerman (UCD), which aims to understand the relationship between soil and soil-dependent pollinators. To close out the day, Professor Jane Stout (TCD) spoke about Phase Three of the All Ireland Pollinator Plan (AIPP), which is due to launch in the Spring of 2026. This phase is structured around different modules, highlighting farmers, communities, businesses and public bodies. Jane focused on the Research Module at this year’s meeting, with discussion emphasising how important it is to engage with practitioners and the public in the research we are conducting. The aim of the research module is to lead the way in pollinator research and to contribute to solutions for policy and practice in Ireland and elsewhere. There was an agreement amongst the group on improving communication between researchers, with the aim of a more collaborative approach to research.

Figure 7 Professor Jane Stout with the final talk of the day, focusing on phase 3 of the AIPP.

Overall, the meeting this year really emphasised the importance of a collective effort in pollinator research. Pollinator research depends on collaboration as much as it does on data. By engaging and collaborating with each other, we can strengthen the impact of our research and work more effectively towards our shared goal of reversing the decline of our essential pollinators.

Many thanks to Sarah Larragy and Fernanda Azevedo for their editing contributions!

Second Irish RestPoll Living Lab workshop

stoutj123

Written by Dr Sarah Larragy, Postdoctoral researcher in Botany, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, working on the EU-funded RestPoll project

On the 3rd November 2025, we hosted our second RestPoll Living Lab workshop on Derrymullen Farm, Allenwood, Co. Kildare. Our host, Willie Mulhall, is an organic beef farmer who has recently become one of Farming for Nature’s newest ambassadors (Fig. 1; read about all Willie does on his farm for nature here)!

We set up shop for the day in Willie’s cattle shed – which had been transformed into the cosiest of rustic living rooms for our workshop (Fig. 2). Participants were treated to a full spread of pastries and hot drinks for breakfast, kindly provided by the aptly named Queen Bee coffee, and many more baked goods provided by researchers Moya Owens and Fernanda Azevedo (which were – we learned later – the fruits of ‘stress-baking’ in the days leading up to the workshop!). Considering the grey and gloomy November weather, we had great attendance from researchers and farmers, and also were lucky to have representatives from both local and national government, Teagasc Signpost advisory service and agribusiness (Kepak group). Researchers included four individuals from the RestPoll project (Sarah Larragy, Fernanda Azevedo, Mariia Fedoriak, Zehra Başaran), Saorla Kavanagh (Research Officer for Farmland Biodiversity in Teagasc, FarmBioNet, SAFER project), Aisling Moffat and Beth Bryan (SAFER project, UCD, Teagasc), Moya Owens (TCD, Antenna project), Clementine Sitouleux (TCD, Teagasc), Sirus Rasti (Erasmus plus student based at TCD), and Sarah Browne (previous TCD RestPoll field assistant).

Figure 1 Our host, Willie Mulhall, manages an organic, “home bred and home fed” beef farm in Derrymullen, Co. Kildare. Willie was involved in the Protecting Farmland Pollinators project, in which he doubled his pollinator points by taking on actions to support biodiversity, and has recently become a Farming for Nature ambassador (congratulations Willie!).

Figure 2 Pictures from the second annual Living Lab workshop in the Irish Case Study Area of Co. Kildare.

A massive thank you to our host Willie, and to all our enthusiastic and generous participants for attending and bringing so much positivity to the day.

Restpoll updates and future plans
Somehow, the overcast day still let enough light in to cause issues with the projector’s visibility – but once all brightness settings were maximised, Sarah proceeded with the official welcome to participants and gave them all a run-down of progress made so far in the RestPoll project.
To catch everybody up, Sarah reminded the consortium that RestPoll is a Horizon Europe funded project that is all about restoring habitats for pollinators in agricultural settings using a stakeholder-driven approach.
In Ireland, approximately one-third of our bee species are threatened with extinction, with similar worrying trends for butterflies and hoverflies. The key factors of pollinator decline and their links to agricultural practices were outlined (e.g. habitat loss, pesticide use), but it was made very clear that farmers face many challenges that disrupt or impact their capacity to help biodiversity on their farms.
In fact, many of these challenges were discussed at the first Irish RestPoll Workshop in 2024. Sarah was inspired by a recent talk from Sean McCabe (Head of Climate Justice and Sustainability, Bohemian Football Club) to visualise these barriers as the Sisyphus-esque dilemma of pushing a rock – the biodiversity crisis – up a steep hill composed of capacity limiting issues facing farmers in agriculture (Fig. 3). To extend this analogy, RestPoll is a holistic, interdisciplinary project that hopes to address both rock and hill alike.

Figure 3 Farmers face many barriers that can impact their capacity to support biodiversity on their farms.

To meet these objectives, RestPoll has a central ‘living lab’ approach in which stakeholders such as farmers, advisors, policy makers and more are invited to come together for two-way discussions and provide input into the research underway in the project (what we call “co-design”).
Sarah gave updates on the progress of several tasks underway on the RestPoll project.
Field work:
All partnering institutions in RestPoll are tasked with establishing a Case Study Area to test the effectiveness of restoration measures on pollinators. We have now a fully established Case Study Area in Co. Kildare area which includes 21 farms (beef and arable), composed of 10 farms previously involved in the Protecting Farmland Pollinators EIP, and 11 that were not. We are conducting pollinator surveys alongside hedgerows on all of these farms, where we monitor for bees, hoverflies and butterflies (Fig. 4). We have completed one full round of pollinator surveys in the summer of 2025, and will conduct a second round of surveys in the summer of 2026. These results will feed into a larger meta-analysis by the RestPoll team to understand the overall effectiveness of restoration measures for pollinators in agricultural settings.

Figure 4 A highlight reel from our field work last summer!

Pollinator Restoration Toolbox development:
Trinity College is leading a task on developing a RestPoll Pollinator Restoration Toolbox, which will bring together practical tools and resources to support pollinator-friendly management. As part of this, we launched a survey on the use of pollinator tools and combined it with several other ongoing surveys to reduce the time burden on stakeholders. The results are now summarised in a blog post. In the long term, all collected tools will be organised into an easy-to-navigate website where users can filter by theme and quickly find resources that suit their needs (Fig. 5).

Figure 5 Development of the RestPoll Toolbox

RestPoll AGMs (2024, 2025):
Sarah also highlighted participation in two recent RestPoll AGMs—first in Freiburg (Nov, 2024) and then in Barcelona (Oct 2025)—where we met with colleagues, ran workshops, and shared project updates (Fig. 6).

Figure 6 Highlights from the RestPoll AGM 2024 and 2025

Strengthening collaborations:
Sarah spoke about our growing collaborations. Following feedback from last year’s Living Lab workshop, we established a formal partnership with the VALOR project, which proved to be a very positive and productive experience. This collaboration helped inspire the creation of a wider effort by Dr Tom Breeze to review ongoing EU projects and explore opportunities for alignment, shared learning, and joint activities. This will be hugely useful in maintaining the momentum and effective production of outputs from all projects going forward.
Finally, Sarah emphasised how deeply researchers appreciate the commitment, engagement and input farmers bring to these projects, and thanked them for being champions of biodiversity conservation. Sarah shared how RestPoll colleagues have reacted with genuine excitement and admiration on hearing about the enthusiasm of the Irish RestPoll Living Lab network and so encouraged them to keep up the important work. “There is something really special going on here [in this community of Irish farmers], and heads, both in Ireland and abroad, are turning to the important work you are all doing here”, Sarah finished on an encouraging note.

Rapid fire research rounds
Following the presentation of RestPoll updates, we ran a “rapid fire research round” to put names on faces of the many researchers working on the several biodiversity-related projects currently running (Fig. 7). Many of these have similar objectives and themes to the RestPoll project, which provide ample opportunity for cross-project collaboration and synergy. This was useful particularly for PhD students and post-doctoral researchers who have just begun and plan to engage with these stakeholders in the future.

To read more about the researchers or the projects going on at the moment, see the following links:
• FarmBioNet: Farmer-focused Biodiversity and Agricultural Knowledge Network – Dr Saorla Kavanagh (Teagasc)
• SAFER: Strengthening Agricultural landscape multiFunctionality through expansion of agroecological farming in EuRope – Dr Saorla Kavanagh (Teagasc), Dr Dara Stanley (UCD), Dr Aisling Moffat (Teagasc, UCD), Beth Bryan (Teagasc, UCD).
• Ponds for Pollinators PhD project – Clementine Sitoleux (TCD, Teagasc)
• Ask a Farmer PhD project – Fernanda Azevedo (TCD)
• Antenna (bonus blog here) – Moya Owens (TCD)
• And, of course, RestPoll (another bonus blog here):
o Dr Sarah Larragy (Irish LL lead; TCD)
o Zehra Başaran (RestPoll LL coordinator; CIHEAM, France)
o Prof Mariia Fedoriak; Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivski National University)

Figure 7 Some of the researchers who introduced themselves during the Rapid Fire Research Rounds. Top row (L-R): Sarah Larragy, Mariia Fedoriak, Zehra Başaran, Clementine Sitoleux. Bottom row (L-R): Aisling Moffat, Beth Bryan, Sarah Larragy, Fernanda Azevedo, Sirus Rasti.

“The Farmer’s Say” activity (with Fernanda Azevedo)
Fernanda led an activity designed to test her behavioural framework which she has developed in her first year her PhD project (Fig. 8).

However, before starting this activity, a farmer in attendance asked for the floor to share their reflections on what makes Ireland a “magic place” for biodiversity conservation in agriculture. First, they said there have been many successful case studies and positive experiences with researchers where farmers have been listened to rather than to be spoken down to, which is often the norm (see BurrenBeo, Protecting Farmland Pollinators, Danú Farming Group). By meeting with researchers and fellow farmers on these projects, they have received permission and confidence to join the conversation and have a voice. It was also highlighted by the farmer that love for nature is embedded in the psyche of Irish farmers.
This set the tone perfectly for Fernanda’s activity, “The Farmer’s Say”. Fernanda’s PhD research delves into the sociological side of pollinator conservation in agriculture. She will investigate the key factors (e.g. beliefs, attitudes, context) that influence farmers to take (or not take) action for biodiversity on their farms.

Figure 8 RestPoll workshop attendees participate in Fernanda’s activity “The Farmer’s Say”

In the activity, attendees were presented with a “Mentimeter” link (or print-out sheets where technology proved unruly). Fernanda then guided participants through several statements and asked that they rate each from 1 to 5 on how strongly they resonated with them. Many of these statements were prompts for discussion, the main points of which are summarised below.
• “Farmers should be happily farming, not worrying about paperwork”: A key point of discussion included the topic of payment schemes to support farmers in taking up biodiversity-friendly farm management practices. Several farmers in attendance felt that the administration burden of these schemes on the farmer actively discourages involvement by farmers. Farmers also expressed concerns about being penalised by scheme auditing or as a result of ineffective or misaligned communication between organisations involved. Words used to describe the ideal payment scheme included low-admin, fair, results-based, bespoke, and choice. However, there were also some fears expressed that being a part of incentive schemes or credit schemes could impact autonomy and ownership over the farm and its resources.
• Need to improve education, training and advice: Farmers and other participants stressed that more effective, ecology-focused education is needed for the next generation of farmers. They felt that if we empower the farmer, then the results will come naturally. One opportunity highlighted was the efficacy of farmer-to-farmer knowledge exchange. Farmers felt that once they had “permission” given to them by their fellow farmers and reassurance that it is “alright” to do a certain action, they would have the confidence to proceed.
• With regards to pollinator or biodiversity-related tools, farmers asked specifically for tools that might provide advice that was either specific to or could be adapted to their own farming situation. The opportunity of satellite imagery to be used for the mapping of habitat and biodiversity actions was also suggested by participants.
• Spread the message “It’s nice to be ugly” – Participants described the pressure to have ‘tidy’ looking farms and suggested the need for a mindset shift towards appreciating ‘scruffy-looking’ biodiversity-friendly measures. There was also the feeling that farmers supporting biodiversity must be appreciated more. It was felt that through empowering farmers with data of the species found on their farms, they can show evidence of the positive impacts of their land management practices.
• ‘Low-hanging fruit’: There are many actions that are beneficial to nature that likely won’t impact the productivity of the land and may even provide productivity benefits e.g. improving populations of natural enemies of pests. Importantly, FarmBioNet is doing work towards identifying these low-cost, high-gain actions.
The results of this activity will help Fernanda strengthen her theoretical framework on the key factors influencing farmer behaviour to move towards more biodiversity-friendly farming practices and will provide the basis for individual interviews with farmers in early 2026 (if you are interested in participating in these interviews, reach out to Fernanda at: deolivef@tcd.ie)


Farm walk
After lunch, we went on a short farm walk between showers of rain, during which we met the resident pigs and horse—an unexpected highlight that everyone seemed to enjoy (Fig. 9). As we moved around the farm, discussions naturally continued, with participants revisiting many of the themes raised in the earlier session.

Figure 9 Workshop participants on a farm walk around Derrymullen Farm, led by Willie Mulhall.

Making a socio-economic model (with Zehra Başaran)
The next activity was led by PhD researcher, Zehra Başaran, who travelled all the way from the International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM) in Montpellier, to attend the Irish Living Lab workshop. Zehra presented her approach to developing a socio-economic model which aims to help predict agricultural outcomes of ecological actions taken to support pollinator conservation. The goal of the activity was, first, to familiarise stakeholders with the concept of modelling (i.e. a simplified version of a real-life situation that helps us understand processes, predict what might happen, and test different situations). Then, Zehra had discussions with farmers on various aspects of this model to ensure that it accurately reflects stakeholders’ specific decision-making needs.
Finally, Zehra invited participants to interact and provide feedback on specific aspects of this model using sticky notes and flipcharts (Fig. 10). Participants learned a lot in this exercise on how models can be developed and applied to farming and biodiversity conservation!

Figure 10 Zehra hosted an activity on creating a socio-economic model during the afternoon.

Horizon scanning (with Mariia Fedoriak)
At the end of the workshop, our colleague, Prof Mariia Fedoriak (from Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivski National University, Ukraine; Fig. 11), carried out short interviews with farmers as part of the RestPoll horizon-scanning task. She is visiting all RestPoll case-study areas to identify the key barriers and opportunities farmers face in restoring and maintaining pollinator habitats. These conversations will help build a clearer picture of emerging challenges, future needs, and the kinds of support that would most effectively enable farmers to enhance pollinator-friendly management across different regions.

Figure 11 Prof Mariia Fedoriak visited the Irish Case Study Area to conduct ‘horizon scanning’ interviews with farmers for the RestPoll project.

Take home messages
Across the sessions, several common themes emerged:
• The importance of practical, bespoke and low-admin supports for farmers,
• The need for effective and clear communication between stakeholder groups (farmers, researchers, policy makers, advisory service and industry),
• The value of nature and biodiversity beyond payments, and
• Concerns about the future of farming for younger generations.
Most importantly, the day highlighted the strength of this community — people from different backgrounds and roles coming together with a shared interest in supporting biodiversity and farming in Ireland.
It was deeply encouraging to see such genuine cross-sector interaction, with industry and environmentally focused farmers exchanging views openly (Fig. 12). This kind of cooperation and dialogue across perspectives felt particularly valuable and was a very exciting aspect of the workshop. We were so grateful for the helpful feedback provided by all participants on our research tasks – your insights will directly shape the next steps of our work!
We hope the workshop felt as positive and worthwhile for you as it did for us, and we look forward to sharing updates and results back with you very soon!

Figure 12 The workshop maintained a highly positive, collaborative atmosphere, with strong engagement among and between the various stakeholder groups contributing to its success.