Tag Archives: community

Invaders in plant-pollinator communities Updated for 2026

The introduction of a new species to an ecological community can initiate a chain of events that results in a significant change to the community’s composition. For instance, the introduction of a pollinator species can facilitate the colonization of new plants that rely on the new pollinator for reproduction. Conversely, a pollinator species may drive down the population levels of certain species—e.g., if it aggressively robs a plant of its nectar without pollinating it.

How do communities respond to these invasions, and what lessons can be learned about the underlying properties of ecological communities in response to such invasions? In “Plant-pollinator community network response to species invasions depends on both invader and community characteristics,” the authors investigate the relationships between invasive species and community characteristics in shaping a plant-pollinator community’s response to an invasion.

Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) on invasive plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides). Photo credit: Laura Russo

Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) on invasive plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides). Photo credit: Laura Russo

The study makes use of a computational model that was originally used to investigate the process by which stable plant-pollinator communities form. The use of such models is attractive for two main reasons. First, a model that recapitulates real-world behavior offers insight into the mechanisms that operate in nature; second, computational models allow rapid and widespread exploration that would be time-consuming, costly, and in some cases impractical to perform in nature. As such, computational models are well-positioned to speed up the process of scientific discovery by providing novel and informative predictions and insights into the properties of the systems being modeled.

The model itself is used to generate simulated plant-pollinator communities with properties drawn from the empirical literature. Interactions may be true mutualisms (beneficial to both species) or detrimental to one species and beneficial to another (e.g., insects that visit flowers for nectar without pollinating the plant and plants that trick pollinators without providing them with nectar rewards). Colonization or maintenance of a species in the community is possible if its beneficial interactions outweigh its detrimental interactions; otherwise, the species goes extinct.

The model predicts that invasive species with properties that are very different from the native species in the region (e.g., supergeneralists that benefit the species with which they interact) are more likely to drive significant changes in the number of species colonizing the community. When an invasive species increases the species richness of the invaded community, there is a corresponding increase in the community’s nestedness and a decrease in the community’s connectance. Nestedness is a measure that accounts for the tendency of the community to be composed of (1) generalist species that interact with many species and (2) specialist species that interact with a subset of generalists. Connectance is the number of observed interactions relative to the number of possible interactions. This predicted divergence in nestedness and connectance is in agreement

with recent empirical work, and stands in contrast to the correlation of these two measures when considering the process by which communities stabilize.

This finding is relevant to the active discussion among researchers concerning the relationship between nestedness and connectance. By investigating the differing behavior of these properties in the context of species invasion, this paper supports the argument that nestedness and connectance are complementary properties that provide a more accurate picture of a community together than either measure provides alone. These findings are most strongly supported in the context of invaders that increase the number of species colonizing the community. As these invaders tend to participate in many species-species interactions, this paper also highlights the important role of generalist species in shaping the structure and dynamics of ecological communities.

Dash to frack is an insult to democracy Updated for 2026





There is not one square inch of our beautiful land that is desolate. We are all entitled to love the place we live in, and our love for our home and our community is worth just as much whether we live in the north of our country or the south.

Shame on those who say, don’t spoil my back garden – but do whatever you like in places far away, where people count for less!

Now I have a confession to make. I’ve never spoken before at a public rally. I’ve never even been to a public rally, this is my very first time.

But I’m proud to stand with you today because whether we frack for oil and gas up and down our country really matters. Because those with the power to decide are on the verge of dragging us down the wrong path. Because only your voices, our voices, can stop them.

For six years, I was Britain’s diplomatic envoy for climate change. Believe me, you can’t be in favour of fracking in Britain and in favour of dealing with climate change at the same time. It’s an either / or choice. Those who say it’s not are being ignorant, or deceitful, or deceiving themselves. It’s that simple.

Sometimes in politics you come to a crossroads and you have to choose. If you pretend you don’t, that’s a choice too, and not an honourable one, it’s a covert choice to stick with the status quo. This is such a crossroad.

No community in Britain will ever benefit from fracking. If a few individuals or businesses do well, it will be at the expense of their communities. Fracking at scale is intrusive, disruptive, noisy, and unhealthy. It really does turn communities upside down. Look at what’s happened in the United States.

Gold-plated promises – worth their weight in hot air

We’re told we will have gold-plated regulation to protect our communities from all those harms. It’s a hollow promise. Actually it’s a lie. It’s a lie because our regulators just don’t have the budgets, the skills, or the people to enforce it properly. It relies entirely on self-policing by the companies concerned.

We tried self-policing with the banks over there in the City. What could possibly go wrong with that?

Sometimes the interests of a community have to come second to the national interest. But there is no national interest in fracking.

Germany is showing beyond doubt that you can have clean energy, you can have energy efficiency, and you can give control over energy back to communities all at the same time without wrecking the economy.

By getting ahead of us on clean energy, our main European competitor is actually widening its lead over us. It’s time for Britain to catch up.

Let’s hear it for Repower Balcombe, showing the way, and all the other pioneers of community energy up and down Britain.

Fracking on an industrial scale won’t build us a future worth having, it would take us backwards, it would lock us further into fossil dependency. It would also turn our country into a global climate pariah.

Democracy in free fall

And this isn’t just about our climate and our energy. It’s about our democracy. What’s been happening on fracking is not democracy in action. It’s democracy in free fall.

Take the Infrastructure Bill. This odious, antidemocratic Bill would trample on rights and protections, including the ancient law of trespass, woven carefully over centuries into the fabric of our Constitution.

It would put corporate interests above the public interest. Wherever you live it would make your voice the last one to be listened to in any decision about the land and the community around you.

99% of consultees don’t want trespass watered down? I know, let’s ignore them!

An unrestricted right to dump wastes of all kinds under people’s land and houses? That’s not going to be popular! Let’s try and sneak it in at the last minute when nobody’s looking, and if people still object, I know, let’s ignore them!

People say they don’t want profits for developers fracking companies to come before their health and their environment. I know, lets ignore them! Let’s make it a legal requirement to maximize the economic recovery of oil and gas!

When I joined the Civil Service 35 years ago, ministers and officials would have resigned rather than connive at such abuses of our democratic system

In Britain today we have the forms but not the substance of democracy, and what’s happening on fracking is a symptom of that sickness. So a victory in the struggle to stop fracking will also be a victory, a crucial victory in the longer struggle to renew our democracy in Britain.

Suddenly, the tectonic plates are shifting

Most of the time in politics things are stuck. The tectonic plates don’t move very much. You may gain a few inches here and there but progress is incremental. But every now and again the plates start to slip and anything is possible. This is such a moment. It may be the only such moment we get.

The plates are slipping on fracking. Suddenly it is dawning on our representatives that the political cost of forcing it through is going to be higher than they thought.

More and more of them are taking the trouble to listen to their constituents, and to get their heads round what’s involved. They are working out for themselves what a bad idea this really is.

That’s what the members of the Environmental Audit Committee have done with their Environmental risks of frackingreport and their call for a fracking moratorium. They have shown real courage, defying their Party machines. Let’s now show them the thanks they deserve!

But too many MPs still think it’s more important to do the bidding of those Party machines and of their corporate friends than it is to listen to the people who put them in our Parliament.

The friends of fracking, in the Coalition parties and the Labour Party, including Tom Greatrex on Twitter, are trying a bit harder to look as if they are listening. But what they are really trying to do is lock the tectonic plates back in place before they slip too far, before they make it impossible for the drilling to start.

We must keep up our fight for a fracking maratorium

So now, just as we finally see some progress, now we must push even harder. And here’s what we should push for.

Let’s stop the headlong rush, with a full moratorium now, as demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, followed by a proper national debate. No ifs not buts, and no more opportunistic spin from those who aspire to run our energy policy after May.

While we close the front door let’s stop the Bill from forcing open the back door, with its anti-democratic provisions on trespass and householder permission and so-called economic recovery.

And let’s take off the table right now, once and for all, any possibility of self-policing by companies whose main interest is in minimizing red tape not protecting the well being of communities.

David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband, Jenny Mein and the County Council you lead in Preston: please listen: moratorium now, stop the Bill, no more self-policing. Otherwise you will be betraying the people who put you where you are, and they will not easily forgive you.

Friends, over there, in Victoria Tower Gardens, is a statue of Emmeline Pankhurst. Every struggle that has made our country better has been a struggle to make Britain a country for all the people not just a privileged few.

We are struggling to give the people a voice on energy. Mrs Pankhurst struggled to give women a voice in politics. We are following in her footsteps. We can be so proud of that.

So far, those who want to frack our country into an even deeper political stupor have been able to make progress by bullying and stealth. But now at last, thanks to your courage and determination, our opponents have been forced into the open and there is a real democratic choice to be made.

Our representatives will only make the right choice if they can hear our voice. Are we today going to make our voice heard, not just here on the street but inside the thick walls of that Palace over there?

Let’s make the biggest noise, every one of us, let’s make the biggest noise we’ve ever made in our lives.

 


 

John Ashton is one of the world’s leading climate diplomats, an independent commentator and adviser on the politics of climate change, and a founder of 3EG. From 2006-12 he served as Special Representative for Climate Change to three successive UK Foreign Secretaries, spanning the current Coalition and the previous Labour Government.

This text is an edited version of a speech given by John Ashton, the UK’s Special Representative for Climate Change between 2006-2012, made on 26 January at a public rally outiside Parliament, Westminster, London. It is based on an edited transcript originally published by Responding to Climate Change.

 

 




389674

Editor’s Choice December

DriesThe last issue from 2014 is online.

We selected the meta-analysis by Kulmatisk et al on the impact of soil foodwebs on plant growth  and the forum on the relative importance of neutral stochasticity in community ecology by Vellend et al. as editor’s choice. These two papers create synthesis in community ecology. The first by pointing the first widespread support for the presence of trophic cascades in soils, the second one by providing conceptual clarity on the main prevailing stochastic processes in community dynamics.

 

Kulmatisk and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis based on 1526 experiments that measured plant growth responses to additions or removals of soil organisms to test how different soil trophic levels affect plant growth. They demonstrate the top down control by predators and parasites on belowground herbivory and estimate the impact of belowground biota on plant growth overall positive and strong. Omnivory in the soil food web generally increases plant productivity by (i) pest reduction and (ii) increasing nutrient cycling.

 

Vellend and colleagues continue to set the scene of community ecology. They address several profound philosophical, theoretical and empirical challenges on the relative importance of stochasticity in community dynamics. They clearly clarify differences between ‘stochastic’ or ‘neutral’ processes by synthesizing their importance in different community processes. They subsequently provide a guide how different observational and experimental approaches will forward the field by allowing a thorough understanding of the role of neutral stochasticity in community ecology.

 

Enjoy!

Dries Bonte, Editor in Chief

How do different herbivores affect plant communities? Updated for 2026

Walk through a grassland at the peak of summer and you will quickly become aware of how many grasshoppers inhabit the area. But what effect do these grasshoppers and other insect herbivores have on the plant community you are walking through? How does the effect of invertebrate herbivores compare to that of less visible, but also ever present small mammal herbivores? And do these effects depend on the availability of resources? In our study, “Invertebrate, not small vertebrate, herbivory interacts with nutrient availability to impact tallgrass prairie community composition and forb biomass”, now on Early View in Oikos, we aimed to address these questions through an experimental study within a tallgrass prairie ecosystem in eastern Kansas. We factorially manipulated the presence of both invertebrate and small vertebrate herbivores and the availability of soil nutrients and observed changes in plant community composition and productivity over five years.

We found that removing invertebrate herbivores had a profound effect on plant community composition after a few years of treatment. Forb species increased in abundance in the absence of invertebrate herbivores, while grass species decreased. This effect was particularly strong under conditions of elevated nutrient availability. Surprisingly, small vertebrate herbivore removals had no detectable effect on grassland plant community composition or aboveground biomass.

Kim

A caterpillar chows down on a whorled milkweed (Asclepias verticillata), a plant species that greatly increases in abundance when invertebrate herbivores are removed from tallgrass prairie

 

Perhaps most interestingly, dispersion in community composition among plots where both invertebrate herbivores were removed and nutrient availability was elevated increased compared to the control plots. That is, different forb species came to dominate the replicate treatment plots, likely dependent on initial community composition. Overall, our research points to the important, and often overlooked, role that invertebrate herbivores play in structuring grassland communities. Future research aimed at continued investigation of the effects of invertebrate herbivory on plant communities would be worthwhile.

 

Community renewable energy in the UK needs co-ops! Updated for 2026





The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has been giving the UK’s small but fast-growing community energy sector a serious headache.

For years a cooperative ownership structure had proved highly popular for small scale, community based renewable energy projects, and a valuable alternative to standard companies limited by shares.

But last summer the Financial Conduct Authority suddenly – and without warning or prior consultation – ceased to register new energy coops.

The surprise move appeared to be no change of government policy, but rather the financial regulator itself applying existing rules more strictly than it had before.

Not surprisingly the move created significant political controversy, and before long Labour’s energy minister Tom Greatrex stepped into the fray with a letter to the FCA complaining that “future energy co-ops are being put at risk” by the change of approach.

“This sudden change threatens a model that combines the twin goods of decarbonisation and community involvement in energy”, he continued. “The FCA must urgently reconsider their approach – and Ed Davey needs to wake up and get a grip to prevent lasting damage to the prospects of more community energy projects in the UK.”

Consultation launched

The upshot was that the FCA launched a consultation on the topic – and tomorrow, 28th November, is the deadline for putting in comments. So please try to get your comments in!

Energy4All – a ‘co-operative of co-operatives’ in the renewable energy sector (and my employer) – also launched a 38 degrees petition aimed at the FCA: “Allow the creation of Renewable Energy Co-op’s with the Financial Conduct Authority.”

At the heart of the issue is the question of whether energy co-operative members participate enough in the co-op. To register a co-op, FCA rules require it to “show participation” by “buying from or selling to the society”, “using the services or amenities provided by it” and “supplying services to carry out its business”.

But unlike a co-op shop, which can sell direct to its members, energy co-ops are too small to apply for the public energy supply licenses that would allow them to sell electricity from their solar panels or wind turbines direct to members. Instead, they tend to sell their power into the local power network. Profits are divided among co-op members based on the size of their investment.

And there is no requirement in the ‘seven principles‘ of the International Co-operative Alliance that co-ops have to trade with their members. We believe the FCA should register any co-op that complies with the international principles without imposing additional constraints.

Co-ops have the potential to become a significant alternative to the big energy companies, but the growth of the sector – which is Government policy and backed by all parties – is at risk unless the FCA backs down.

What’s so good about co-ops?

Co-ops are open democratic structures (one member, one vote) with a social rather than a commercial ethos and would appear to be the natural way for like minded people to come together to make a renewable energy project work. The ‘seven principles’ are, in full:

  1. Voluntary and Open Membership – there is usually a public share offer to raise funds to build the project;
  2. Democratic Member Control – each member will have one vote no matter how much they have contributed to the capital of the co-op;
  3. Member Economic Participation – the members contribute equitably to and democratically control the capital of their co-operative;
  4. Autonomy and Independence – renewable energy co-ops are self help organisations controlled by their members;
  5. Education, Training and Information – renewable energy co-ops provide education and training for their members, and inform the public about the benefits of co-operation and of renewable energy;
  6. Co-operation among Co-operatives – renewable energy co-ops help other co-ops;
  7. Concern for Community – renewable energy co-ops spend part of their profits on community projects, especially those related to energy efficiency and education.

It’s not hard to see how an organisation set up and operated on these principles is not the same as any old limited company or PLC, and makes an ideal vehicle for locally-based energy projects for the mutual benefit of members and the wider community.

FCA proposal not good enough

The FCA says that using a Society for the Benefit of the Community (a ‘BenCom’) is more appropriate for community energy. However the consultation looks at making the raising of capital by a BenCom very restrictive. The result is that larger projects, the ones that generate most power per pound of investment, will be more difficult to finance.

It does seem odd that an individual can take advantage of the Feed in Tariff by putting solar panels on their roof, whereas other less fortunate people – say those with less cash, living in flats, or just with wrongly positioned roofs – are not to be allowed to come together in a co-operative which can often achieve a better result in terms of renewable energy output and social benefits.

Most people think renewable energy co-ops are a force for good and should be encouraged. Elswhere in Europe the co-operative is the main form for community energy ownership, and in countries where community ownership is much more established than in the UK, such as Denmark, co-ops have been instrumental in driving the expansion of the sector.

Wider use of the co-operative model in the UK can make an important contribution to changes in energy production and consumption which will help democratise the ownership of energy, reduce energy prices, support communities and increase the production of renewable energy which is such a vital tool in the fight against climate change.

It seems a pity that the UK, where the co-op was invented in the 19th century, cannot see its way to permitting its wider usage.

Would the Rochdale Pioneers have used a co-op to generate energy if they could? Surely the answer is a resounding ‘YES!’ Co-operative enterprise has a long and proud history and we must, in the spirit of the early co-operative pioneers, oppose needless restrictions on the sector.

 


 

Petition: Allow the creation of Renewable Energy Co-op’s with the Financial Conduct Authority.

Consultation document: CP14/22 Guidance on the FCA’s registration function under the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014. The consultation closes tomorrow,
Friday 28 November 2014.

If you want to see more renewable energy co-operatives running community projects in the UK please participate in this consultation and make sure your views are heard!

Energy4All was formed in 2002 to expand community ownership of renewable energy. We now have 15 projects in the Energy4All family with 10,000+ members, £37m capital raised – enabling many more communities to benefit from renewable energy. We are ourselves a co-operative, owned by the co-ops that we serve.

Tammy Calvert is office manager at Energy4All.

 




387510

Putting community energy at the heart of our renewables revolution Updated for 2026





Big energy companies can behave like a law unto themselves, levying inflation-busting price hikes with impunity and apparent indifference to political criticism and energy consumers’ wallets.

There is, however, a realistic solution. One that will provide more sustainable, and potentially cheaper energy for everybody while making Britain less reliant on imported energy – and it’s within our power – ordinary consumers – to make it happen.

Community energy refers to renewable energy sources that are owned, operated or funded by energy consumers and communities, should not be underestimated.

It could even mean communities selling electricity to energy companies at a discounted wholesale rate in order to buy it back at a lower retail price than is usually offered via standard tariffs. So lowering carbon and lowering costs.

Such agreements could connect supply and demand in a healthy and transparent way, since communities can see how much they are charging for their power and also how much they are paying. The profits and savings made by all parties are clear for everybody to see, not hidden in some complex tariff structure.

Taking a stake in local renewable power projects

There are already 5,000 community-owned energy plants in the UK, and it looks like a good many more may be on the way, at least projects in which local communities have a stake.

Under the ‘Shared Ownership Taskforce’ strategy launched this week by energy secretary Ed Davey, local people can become part-owners of large (costing more than £2.5 million) renewable energy projects connected to public electricity networks. Depending on the size of the project, they may take from 5% to 25% of the project, with the minimum stake set as low as £5 to encourage participation.

This initiative is currently voluntary but has support across the industry, and applies to any projects entering the planning system from this week. It’s also important because it recognises the huge potential of the community ownership model, and could help push it further along the track.

Savvy solar and wind developers will also recognise the marketing opportunity beyond the administrative burden of setting up such community ownership schemes.

And it may be that local people now opposing wind turbines or field-scale solar farms may feel differently if they stand to benefit from the projects – as is already the rule in Demark, Germany and other countries where renewables have taken off in a big way.

But we should all be able to benefit

But while the changes are to be welcomed, it’s not enough. Only those lucky enough to live close to the natural resources can currently benefit. Also millions of homes are unsuitable for solar panels, and people in the middle of cities cannot easily set up wind projects.

For community energy to be truly democratic, everyone should be able to own a stake in solar and wind farms, no matter where they live. Remember, we all pay for the ‘feed in tariffs’ and other schemes used to subsidise renewable energy, so shouldn’t we all be able to benefit from them?

Community energy should be inclusive, involving the whole population if possible. That way, we will all have a vested interest in the creation of more renewable energy. And MPs in all areas will begin to see it as a relevant issue for their constituents, whether by wanting to help create a project or facilitating investment or access to cheaper tariffs for those unable to set up their own schemes.

This may start with local groups getting projects off the ground, but by providing the means by which anyone can lend or invest even a small sum in community energy projects, crowdfunding sites such as Trillion Fund can give everybody the opportunity to benefit from community energy, either through lower bills or by making a decent financial return.

People don’t even have to believe in global warming – they just need to be motivated to earn a decent return on their savings, and (we hope) like the idea of being involved in renewable electricity generation, rather than just being an energy consumer.

Breaking the grip of Big Power

And, when it reaches scale, local generation can introduce some much needed competition into the energy market, essential if we are to escape the grasp of the Big Six and pay a fair price for our power.

Take the example of Triodos Renewables, who are now crowdfunding their new share offer, with minimum investments of just over £50 – on the same terms as those investing £50,000 for their personal pension plan.

They are raising £5m to continue to grow the UK’s green energy supply to have a meaningful impact, almost 40,000 homes worth of home-grown sustainable energy sources that we be part of our energy mix for twenty years to come.

They are now the UK’s most widely owned renewable energy company with over 5,200 shareholders. Both the volume of energy and the level of engagement (for every one shareholder, there are probably 10 other people who considered it) are meaningful and this is the scale of initiatives.

So let’s be ambitious. Let’s define community energy in broad terms so that we get the financial and political backing we need to have a real impact on our energy market.

Here’s our check-list of the five key tenets of community energy:

  • Fair – profits for the many not the few
  • Inclusive – relevant and beneficial to all in the community, not just investors
  • Engaging – connecting people, educating, rewarding
  • Connects supply and demand – influencing consumption, changing bills
  • Scalable – to have a real impact we have to do this again and again and again.

Cooperatives are great – but not ideal investment vehicles

We don’t think it is a great idea to limit the definition of community energy to cooperatives and community benefit schemes. Those are wonderful things, and more power to them, but they are designed to be by, and for their own communities, and are very definitely not investment vehicles.

Recent moves by the Financial Conduct Authority to clarify what the purpose of an initiative must be, for it to be deemed a cooperative or community benefit scheme have led to some schemes being denied mutual status.

While more schemes being held up in this way might stymie development, more consumer protection – the kind that will reassure cautious investors putting some of their life savings into a community scheme, must be welcomed by the industry, if community-owned energy is to reach the scale required to beat the Big Six.

But equally, that protection must not be so heavy-handed that ordinary individuals can no longer gain access, which is why conversation with the regulator on this issue is so important.

If you have a view that is relevant to the FCA as it considers how to move forward on co-operative definitions, join the consultation before the November 28 deadline.

Making the renewable energy revolution happen!

The switch to zero carbon energy is, in my view the challenge for our generation: we are the ones in a position to make a difference. We have the data that our parents didn’t have, and the time that will run out before our children can take the reins.

We need this to be relevant to as many people as possible. Whether their motivation is environmental or financial. Whether they want to be hands-on or leave it to the professionals. And whether they live near a windy hill or rent a flat in a city centre.

So let’s define our community as the whole country. A network of communities cooperating to reach meaningful scale, and forcing an energy revolution in the UK which will ease the cost of powering our homes for everybody, and give us all a more sustainable future.

 


 

Julia Groves is Chief Executive of Trillion Fund. An experienced founder and director of early-stage digital and renewable energy businesses, she joined Trillion Fund from Engensa, a leading UK domestic solar installer. Prior to Engensa, Julia spent five years building a wind turbine business Quiet Revolution, which designed and built turbines for the Olympic Park.


Key documents

 




386488