The importance of biodiversity as part of local authority climate change strategies

In climate change there is often a tendency to focus heavily on the energy elements (energy use, energy efficiency and renewable energy) but true sustainability goes much wider, write Steve Gummer and Steve Cirell.

Indeed, it is now recognised that the triumvirate of climate change, biodiversity, and air quality are all inextricably linked. This is important in policy terms, as it is vital that action in one area does not denigrate the position in another (such as climate change remedial action worsening air quality).

Biodiversity has also been recognised as a key element of this trinity, both on a national and international scale. The Worldwide Fund for Nature defines biodiversity as follows:

“Biodiversity is all the different kinds of life you’ll find in one area–the variety of animals, plants, fungi, and even micro – organisms like bacteria that make up our natural world. Each of these species and organisms work together in ecosystems, like an intricate web, to maintain balance and support life.”

Biodiversity is rising up the public’s consciousness in a very similar manner to climate change itself. In the perfect storm of climate change, biodiversity and air quality, it is considered that a target of ‘nature positive’ is the equivalent for biodiversity of net zero for climate change.

The National Position on Biodiversity

The National Planning Policy Framework 2021 (NPPF) includes several policies relating to biodiversity. For example:

Biodiversity has therefore long been part of the planning regime and its importance has not gone unseen. However, it is only recently that legislation has put BNG at the very heart of decisions and solidified its importance, continuing a theme that we’ve seen replicated across the planning world with environmental considerations being given more and more importance.

The Government has passed legislation on this area in the form of the Environment Act 2021.

Part 6 of the 2021 Act includes the power to introduce mandatory BNG in England for planning permissions. This will be achieved by way of a condition which will attach to all relevant planning permission requiring that if the development results in loss or degradation of habitat it must have a minimum 10% net gain in biodiversity secured for a minimum of 30 years. Regulations will come into force later this year and the requirements are set out below.

BNG is a strategy to allow the development of land whilst also contributing to the recovery of nature. It is a method of carrying out development in such a way so that the impact on the environment is a positive one, leaving wildlife habitats in a better state than before the development took place. Importantly, the requirement for BNG does not affect existing legal protections for important habitats or wildlife species. The statutory requirement will also be mandatory and (unlike other policy requirements set out in the NPPF or local plans) cannot be amended or reduced based on viability grounds.

In support of the 2021 Act are a range of policy papers, such as the 25 Year Environment Plan published in 2018 and the newly published Environmental Improvement Plan under the 2021 Act.

There are also important policy papers on this area, such as the Dasgupta Review. This was an independent, global review on the Economics of Biodiversity led by Cambridge Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta. The Review was commissioned in 2019 by HM Treasury and calls for changes in how we think, act and measure economic success to protect and enhance our prosperity and the natural world. The proposed new framework presented by the Review set out how we should account for Nature in economics and decision-making. Sir David Attenborough said: “This comprehensive and immensely important report shows us how by bringing economics and ecology face to face, we can help to save the natural world and in doing so save ourselves.”

Under the new policy area set down by the Government in the Environmental Improvement Plan it has pledged to create or restore at least 500,000 hectares of new wildlife habitats, including 70 new projects and 25 new or expanded National Nature Reserves. Under these measures, 70% of the countryside will be impacted, including new management schemes to be introduced to incentivise farmers to adopt nature friendly approaches. In concept, these changes are significant. However, the practice may not reflect the intention.

This is clear from the published views of the Office for Environmental Protection (the watchdog created under the Environment Act mentioned above). Edie reported in February 2023 that the OEP had: “warned that the nation is on course to miss every key nature and environmental policy target” currently set. This illustrates that there is a very long way to go in relation to achieving the necessary action in this country.

The International Position

At the international level, there is a corresponding body to the intergovernmental conferences on climate change (the COP series) on biodiversity. The biodiversity COP 15 conference was co-hosted by Canada and China late last year and 200 countries signed up to the Kunming-Montreal Treaty to put humanity on a path to living in harmony with nature by the middle of the century.

In his introduction to that event, the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, pulled no punches. He said:

“Without nature, we are nothing. Nature is our life support system. It is the source and sustainer of the air we breathe, the food we eat, the energy we use, the jobs and economic activity we count on, the species that enrich human life, and the landscapes and waterscapes we call home.”

“And yet humanity seems hellbent on destruction. We are waging war on nature.”

There is a range of international bodies involved in this area, such as the Intergovernmental Panel for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). This has stated that around 25% of the world’s species are now at threat of extinction due to habitat loss and the effects of climate change.

Fortunately, local authorities are in a good position to do something about this.

How can the BNG condition be satisfied?

The purpose of the mandatory BNG condition is to ensure that the biodiversity value of development exceeds predevelopment biodiversity value of the on-site habitat by at least 10%. The condition can therefore be satisfied by combining the value of post-development on-site habitat, registered off-site habitat allocated to the development, and the value of any biodiversity credits. The preference is for on-site gains which will be incentivized (although we don’t yet have information about how this will be done).

Any habitat enhancement must be maintained for at least 30 years from completion of the development; this will need to be secured through conditions, obligations, or a conservation covenant.

How is biodiversity value proposed to be measured?

Biodiversity value is to be calculated in biodiversity units using the statutory biodiversity metric. The metric uses habitats as a proxy for biodiversity value. Developers will be responsible for applying the metric to their site and proposed development and Local Planning Authorities will be responsible for assessing its application and confirming the biodiversity value. Developers and local planning authorities should be familiarizing themselves with the current version of the biodiversity metric as soon as possible to minimise delays in application and assessment when the requirement comes into force.

A development achieves biodiversity net gain if it has a higher biodiversity score after development (considering the value of any enhanced or newly created habitats) than before development.

Pre-development biodiversity value of onsite habitat is used as the baseline in calculating the 10% increase in biodiversity value required. It is usually calculated as at the date of a planning application but can be set at an earlier date and steps taken to deliberately reduce the biodiversity value of a site before development can be accounted for. The post-development biodiversity value of onsite habitat is the projected value of the onsite habitat when the development is completed. In practice, the post-development biodiversity value of habitats on the development site will be determined by applying the metric to the developer’s plan for the development site as detailed in the biodiversity gain plan.

Biodiversity gain plans

Alongside affected planning applications, developers will have to submit certain information, probably in the form of a draft biodiversity gain plan, though it is yet unclear exactly how much detail will be required at the determination stage. It is likely that, at the very least, general information assessing the type(s) of habitat affected, the baseline habitats, design options for the site, and proposed approach to enhancing biodiversity off-site will be required.

The full biodiversity gain plan will need to be approved prior to commencement of any development. This will need to contain full detailed information building on that submitted at application stage. The plan will, for example, need to demonstrate how steps have been taken to minimize adverse effects on habitats as well as using on-site options to mitigate the effects. It will also need to cover monitoring of the BNG. It will be for the LPA to determine whether information provided is acceptable, to sign off on the full biodiversity gain plan prior to commencement, and to be satisfied that the metric has been applied correctly. The government is proposing to publish a template biodiversity gain plan for use by developers which should help ensure a consistent and standardized approach, speed up the process, and remove some of the need for expert input.

However, at least in the short term, developers should expect that affected applications may take longer to determine and plans longer to be signed off – this will need to be factored into project timescales. Planning authorities should expect to be put under pressure to sign off plans without delay and at this stage should be considering how this new responsibility will be resourced.

National biodiversity gain sites register

The BNG register will record the allocation of off-site biodiversity gains to developments, providing an up-to-date record of biodiversity gains across the country and information on the delivery and monitoring of habitat sites. Natural England will be the Biodiversity Gain Site Register Operator and be responsible for establishing and maintaining the register. The register will record allocations, but will not be a marketplace for buying credits and nor will it assess the ecological suitability of any proposals. In this sense it is simply a snapshot of the position on offsite biodiversity gains and is intended to provide clarity and transparency to ensure gains are allocated to a single development.

Biodiversity gain sites can be created where a landowner enters a planning obligation or conservation covenant to secure works for the purpose of habitat enhancement which will be maintained for at least 30 years from completion. The land can be made available to be allocated to developments which require off-site mitigation. Such habitats can be allocated biodiversity units which can be sold to affected developers. There will not be a centralised trading platform, although there will initially be a government-run statutory credit scheme which developers will be able to access as a last resort. These will be sold by Natural England, but the aim is to phase these out once the biodiversity unit market matures.

Habitats created or enhanced after 30 January 2020 will be eligible for registration and sale of associated gains – there is no intention to set a limit on how long units can be banked before they are allocated to a development so this will just depend on the market.

The Position in Local Government

Local authorities are organised in accordance with functional areas. Many of these will have a clear relevance to biodiversity. This is not just the grounds maintenance or other direct functions, but catering, cleaning, leisure centre management and development control are all closely linked.

Councils can be urban and rural. Perhaps the relevance is clearer with those in rural areas, but action is certainly not limited to them. Street and highway trees are a good example of urban action, as is better public transport and active travel.

Some rural authorities also own huge tracts of land, such as the county estates under the ownership and control of the County Councils. Much can be done with land management in this context, such as special planning designations for conservation or green belt, or the securing of land as a biodiversity gain site.

In short, the preservation and enhancement of biodiversity is every Council’s responsibility and much good work is ongoing around the country.

Specific Areas of Potential Action on Biodiversity

The following is a non-exhaustive list of what might be undertaken in this area:

Policy and strategy

Not all local authorities that have declared a climate emergency or who have published a Climate Change Strategy of some sort, have included biodiversity in that strategy. Others, such as West Devon Borough Council have published a joint Climate Change and Biodiversity Strategy and action plan.

This approach ensures that biodiversity (or ecology as it is sometimes termed) is fully included in any work in this area.

Authorities should also look at adopting a strategic approach to BNG and considering site allocations which may be used to achieve nature recovery. The relationship between BNG and other plans and strategies should also be considered. While there will be no requirement to have a local BNG policy (because it is a statutory requirement), doing so can ensure that the policy takes account of local factors and other strategic objectives that are particular and relevant to the local area.

Trees

Moving to more specific actions, for many people, biodiversity is characterised by tree planting. Trees are probably the best-known form of combating climate change and supporting nature.

The reason that trees and other plants are such an important part of the carbon cycle is that they accumulate carbon as part of the growing process. As every child learns in school, plants rely on a process called photosynthesis to use the energy from light in order to convert carbon dioxide and water into carbohydrates (which are needed as building blocks for plant growth) and oxygen (as a waste product). Trees literally suck in CO2 and breathe out oxygen. The soil under forest trees is also a good carbon sink, with leaves and other woody material decomposing.

Afforestation will therefore help to reduce climate change, particularly in the longer term, although there are a number of factors that will determine its impact. It is not simply a case of ‘plant more trees’: they need to be the right trees, planted in the right area in the right way. Expert help will be needed to get this right.

An unlikely example of poor practice would be to plant trees in an area of peatland, which would actually make the position worse and reduce the impact of the (otherwise excellent) peat as a carbon sink.

In Green Steves paper 6 on carbon offsetting the Woodland Carbon Code was mentioned. The Code is the quality assurance standard for woodland creation projects in the UK and generates independently verified carbon units that can be used for offsetting (see below). The Woodland Carbon Code is internationally recognised for high standards of sustainable forest management and carbon management and is internationally endorsed. Such projects are irrefutably contributing to combating climate change.

Closely linked to forestation is the issue of peatland recovery and a range of other similar nature-based projects. A useful example is the work being undertaken by environmentalist Jeremy Leggett on his Bunliot Estate in Scotland. The estate in Inverness-shire is being used as part of a rewilding programme, which will see the baseline of the estate measured for carbon and biodiversity with interventions then being characterised to boost carbon sequestration and grow biodiversity, whilst measuring the gains on a regular basis.

Sometimes it is not obvious what needs to be done. Here, the proposal is to fell the conifer plantations sitting atop the peat (which should never have been planted), letting the compressed bogs breathe again. This promotes healthy moss growing and drawing CO2 down into the wetland, whilst the estate is planting broadleaf trees elsewhere to compensate for the carbon stock loss in the plantations.

It is therefore in the interests of every Council to plant trees, both to improve biodiversity but also to gain valuable carbon credits that can be offset against its carbon footprint. Used in this way, this will make a good contribution towards targets of reaching a position of net zero carbon. Moreover, a range of grants and other financial assistance is available to help fund such work.

Hedges

A related area is hedgerows. There are similar financial benefits for coppicing and renewal of hedgerows which have a strong biodiversity impact. Here, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is the Government The department that will provide grant funding of 70% – 80% of the costs of such work.

Flora and fauna

There has been a particular focus recently on pollinators such as bumble bees and the reduction in numbers of these vital insects. Certain flora and fauna can be used to attract pollinators and promote nature.

As solar farm developments need the benefit of planning consent, it is often the case in planning applications that developers agree to plant certain types of flora and fauna in association with such developments to promote biodiversity gains.

By planting indigenous species, such work is assisting the land to recover to its original natural state. There has been criticism (specifically in relation to tree planting) that profit driven and ill thought-out projects are not helping. In this context it is industrial plantations of single species such as pine, instead of recreating the original forest environment where a wider natural landscape and species variety can develop.

Wildflower meadows and rewilding

This is another area that has received considerable publicity recently. Mentioned above are solar farm applications which also often include a promise to seed a wildflower meadow under the panels. Wildflower meadows have a number of advantages, including lower maintenance and better encouragement of pollinators and other insects.

Rewilding, on the other hand, is much more radical and is really about letting nature take the land back to its original state. In the book that supports the Earthshot prize (‘Earthshot: how to save our planet’), Sir David Attenborough provides the example of the Knepp Estate in the South of England. He says:

“Fifteen years ago their land was a typical modern arable and dairy farm, with field after field of crops fed with fertilizers and sprayed with pesticides. Much of the wild had gone.

“But then the owners made the decision to change their approach to managing the land. They decided to work with nature, rather than against it. They stopped the spraying and fertilising, they took down the fences between the fields, they stocked the land with a mix of livestock that resembled the animals that once roamed wild in this part of the world. In short, they gave the natural world the chance to rebuild.

“And rebuild it did – from the ground up. With the return of the insects, the wildflowers and weeds and the more natural ruminant animals, the soil itself changed for the better. And the soil fed those plants and crops better, and the insects that ate them fed the larger animals that came back to the area. The foundation of all life starts with the little things, things so small we need a microscope to see them. It is now one of the most diverse patches of land in the South of England. Given half a chance, nature found its way back, and it did so quickly.”

This is probably too radical an approach for many rural land owning Councils, but maybe not with county farm estates that might be considered for such action? Either way, everyone could learn from the mantra of deciding to work with nature, rather than against it.

Animals, birds and insects

Insects were mentioned above and provide an important role in local biodiversity. Pollinators are required as part of the chain that delivers most of the UK’s food. Furthermore, funding can arise in unexpected places.

As Environment Journal reported in December 2022, a new project by conservation charity Buglife, which will restore 57 hectares of lowland heath and grassland across Shropshire, has won Lottery Funding. This is to support a wider aim to provide insect pathways through countryside and towns. This involved planting wildflower meadows enabling pollinators and other wildlife to move through landscapes to feed, nest and hibernate.

Animals and birds should also come into consideration. Each has its own impact on biodiversity. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds will offer help and assistance in relation to attracting birds, including providing bird houses and other measures to do so.

Use of pesticides and fertilisers

This is a more controversial area, with an obvious tension between grounds maintenance and use of chemicals. On the one hand green purists will say that no chemicals should be used on any land. However, the Council will need to keep its farms, parks and gardens in good order for a variety of reasons. Can there be a balance between the two? It is suggested that there can.

Every Council needs to commit to keeping the use of chemicals under review and using only where necessary. In the eyes of most people, good biodiversity and land management elsewhere should outweigh this factor, where a Council with a strong focus on wider biodiversity is concerned.

Designation of land as biodiversity gain site

Local authorities can use their own land to offer biodiversity units and can also act as a third-party broker. Whilst authorities will not be able to mandate the use of their own credits, they can make their land available at a reasonable and competitive price; prices will need to be sufficient to cover the costs of creating or enhancing the habitat and maintaining it for 30 years and the local authority would need to satisfy the requirements for land to be registered on the register. Local Authorities, like any other landowner, will need to be familiar with the biodiversity metric, calculate appropriate biodiversity unit prices, and ensure appropriate registration and allocation.

Action Plans

The most focussed action is to have a specific strategy for biodiversity, or to include this in the wider climate change policy, including a biodiversity evidence base. This would then enable targets to be set for biodiversity net gain (potentially above the statutory minimum of 10%). If the figures for loss of biodiversity over the past 50 years are to be believed, this is merely ensuring the position does not deteriorate further.

Action plans will differ, depending on the type of local authority concerned. There is a huge range of different scenarios that could be included, from flood risks, managing periods of drought, farm management (including use of pesticides), planning regulatory control (insisting on play areas and parks nearby), active transport solutions and so on.

Planning

Planning is probably worthy of special mention as this is a powerful local tool. There is abundant evidence that people who live within a short distance of a park or open space enjoy better wellbeing than those that do not. So ensuring that urban parcels of land are not crammed with housing or buildings but include areas for nature is vitally important.

With regards to mandatory BNG, the responsibility for enforcement will lie with LPAs; they will be responsible for setting suitable requirements as part of planning conditions and obligations and monitoring compliance with the same. This will involve assessing biodiversity gain plans upon submission (and prior to commencement), checking calculations made using the biodiversity metric, and monitoring ongoing compliance. Authorities will also need to report on BNG delivery and plans in their area. All of this will put incredible pressure on local authority planning departments and will require significant resources and expertise to implement. The good news is that the government has committed to funding this burden and is working with DLUHC on that. As of yet, however, there is no clarity on what this will look like or what form this will take.

Authorities will need to be ‘day-1 ready’ and that involves fronting the workload. Some steps that could be taken so as to ease the burden include:

• Consider setting up a pre-application advice service to help speed up decision-making.
• Ensure there is access to in-house or external natural environment and ecology skills and expertise,as well as more general planning expertise.
• Ensure proper data management.
• Ensure familiarity with the biodiversity metric, precedent biodiversity gain plans (once published), and draft
  conditions/planning obligations.

Offsetting

As mentioned above, offsetting was dealt with in Green Steves paper 6. However, for these purposes, a carbon credit (such as one obtainable from planting new trees) can be offset against the Council’s carbon footprint and used in annual reporting. In Cornwall Council’s ‘Forest for Cornwall’ strategy it is presented in an interesting way:

• CO2 emissions – 3,735,527 tonnes of CO2 (e)
• Amount of our emissions reabsorbed by nature in 2019 – 5.7%
• Nine times more needs to be sequestered to get to net zero.

This recognises that it is not just new projects that deliver new biodiversity gains (or offsetting benefits), but existing grasslands, peatlands, forests, flora and fauna also provide a continuing carboN benefit, by continuing to absorb greenhouse gas emissions on an ongoing basis.

Conclusions

Biodiversity is a key area of the climate change agenda and one where every Council needs to show an awareness and knowledge of the issues, have made a strong commitment to action and be able to demonstrate progress.

It seems inevitable that over time local authorities will be measured more and more on progress in this area.

Free feasibility support:

Get your Green Project off the ground with 10 hours free local legal advice.

We are committed to helping local authorities to meet their green goals and achieve their Net Zero targets.

As part of this commitment, we are offering 10 hours of pro bono legal advice to one local authority each quarter on green projects in the feasibility phase.