Research data for paper: People, Nature and Large Herbivores in a shared landscape: a mixed-method study of the ecological and social outcomes from agriculture and conservation.

<b>Data for paper appearing in People and Nature 2021</b><br><b><br></b><b>Data description</b>At 24 locations (four locations at six sites) in Sussex, UK we placed (<i>i</i>) a SMII recorder with ultrasonic (for bats) and acoustic microphone (for bird and human activity) for a period of 96h; (<i>ii</i>) three pan traps for a period of 24 hours; and, (<i>iii</i>) four camera traps for a period of 96h. Species identification was achieved using morphological traits (pan traps specimens), acoustic recognition (bird calls), visual recognition (camera trap footage) and spectrogram analysis (bat echolocation calls). This dataset reports the species recorded from this data collection effort.<b><br></b><br><b>Abstract</b>1. In this exploratory study, we employ an interdisciplinary approach to explore potential synergies and trade-offs between the needs of people and nature in the context of agro-ecological farming and nature conservation.2. Ecological field studies and management surveys from six sites were combined with a participatory-deliberative appraisal exercise using the Multi-Criteria Mapping (MCM) method. All six study sites and all four land use options in the appraisal were characterised by the use of large herbivores for agricultural and/or conservation purposes, to varying degrees, and were located in South-East England.3. MCM participants identified habitat and species diversity, soil health, food production, provision of education, and recreational access, as the principal benefits associated with successful management of such sites. Taken overall, their appraisals indicated that a combination of land uses may be best suited to delivering these diverse benefits, but with agroecological[1] farming being perceived as a particularly effective multi-purpose option. 4. Five of the six sites were used for recreational purposes and in total we recorded five times more humans than wild mammals. Ecological data from the sites indicated that the most conservation-oriented sites performed best in terms of species richness and activity (birds, mammals, bats and invertebrates) and number of species of conservation concern. However, beta diversity metrics indicated important variation in the species assemblages recorded within and between sites. Whereas both agro-ecological farms in our study produced the greatest weight of saleable meat per unit area, the site that produced the most meat also demonstrated consistently strong performance across many biodiversity metrics. 7. Overall, expert perspectives and the performance of our study sites suggests that combinations of diverse approaches to the management of large herbivores, within a ‘wildlife-friendly’ envelope, is consistent with providing for the diverse needs of people and nature within shared landscapes.<br>[1] Whilst organic and biodynamic agriculture are subject to legal definition, agroecology offers a more flexible approach and can be viewed as “a development pathway from input-intensive industrial systems through to highly sustainable, ecological systems” – see Laughton, R. (2017) ‘A Matter of Scale’, Land Workers Alliance and Centre for Agroecology, Coventry University

<b>《人与自然》（2021年）期刊论文数据集</b><br><b><br></b><b>数据描述</b>在英国萨塞克斯郡的24个点位（6个研究点各设4个点位），我们布设了：（<i>i</i>）SMII记录仪（配备超声波麦克风用于蝙蝠监测，声学麦克风用于鸟类及人类活动监测），持续96小时；（<i>ii</i>）3个盘式诱捕器，持续24小时；（<i>iii</i>）4个相机陷阱，持续96小时。物种鉴定通过以下方式完成：利用形态特征（盘式诱捕器样本）、声学识别（鸟类鸣叫）、视觉识别（相机陷阱影像）及频谱分析（蝙蝠回声定位叫声）。本数据集记录了此次数据采集工作中识别出的物种。<br><br><b>摘要</b>1. 本探索性研究采用跨学科方法，探讨农业生态种植与自然保护背景下人类需求与自然需求之间的潜在协同效应与权衡关系。2. 我们将6个研究点的生态实地研究、管理调查数据与采用多准则映射法（Multi-Criteria Mapping, MCM）的参与式协商评估结果相结合。评估涉及的6个研究点及4种土地利用方案均具有不同程度利用大型草食动物开展农业和/或保护工作的特征，且均位于英格兰东南部。3. MCM评估参与者将栖息地与物种多样性、土壤健康、粮食生产、教育供给及休闲可达性确定为这类场地成功管理的核心效益。总体而言，评估显示多种土地利用方式组合最适合实现多样化效益，但农业生态[1]种植被认为是特别有效的多用途选择。4. 6个研究点中有5个用于休闲目的，记录到的人类数量为野生哺乳动物的5倍。生态数据表明，最注重保护的研究点在物种丰富度与活跃度（鸟类、哺乳动物、蝙蝠及无脊椎动物）、受保护物种数量方面表现最优。然而β多样性指标显示，研究点内部及之间的物种组合存在显著差异。本研究中的两个农业生态农场单位面积可销售肉类产量最高，其中产量最高的农场在多项生物多样性指标上也持续表现优异。7. 总体而言，专家观点及研究点表现表明：在“野生动物友好型”框架内，结合多种大型草食动物管理方式，与在共享景观中满足人类和自然的多样化需求具有一致性。<br>[1] 尽管有机农业和生物动力农业受法律定义约束，但农业生态学提供了更灵活的路径，可被视为“从投入密集型工业系统向高度可持续生态系统过渡的发展通道”——参见Laughton, R.（2017）《规模问题》，土地工作者联盟与考文垂大学农业生态中心。