First Report - Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust?

We recommend that the UK Government play a leadership role in addressing global biodiversity loss by demonstrating what ‘transformative action’ to address biodiversity loss in an advanced industrialised economy looks like. This should entail the production of credible plans, which … Read more We recommend that the UK Government play a leadership role in addressing global biodiversity loss by demonstrating what ‘transformative action’ to address biodiversity loss in an advanced industrialised economy looks like. This should entail the production of credible plans, which include measures to phase out economic incentives which threaten conservation and restoration, with a view to meeting the 2030 Biodiversity Framework, once agreed, and the development of robust means to ensure that these plans are owned and implemented across Government. Assessments of the potential impact of Government actions on biodiversity loss must be introduced for all Government departments. Show less

View Details →

We recommend that the Government introduce, preferably via the Environment Bill currently before Parliament, a mechanism for statutory interim targets to ensure that its proposed species abundance target is met to halt the decline of nature by 2030. We further … Read more We recommend that the Government introduce, preferably via the Environment Bill currently before Parliament, a mechanism for statutory interim targets to ensure that its proposed species abundance target is met to halt the decline of nature by 2030. We further recommend that the scope of the proposed 2030 target be extended to encompass legally binding outcome measures on species distribution, extinction risk, habitat extent and condition: it must also reinstate the expired target for Sites of Special Scientific Interest. (Paragraph 61) Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? 115 Show less

View Details →

We recommend that the Government introduce mechanisms to ensure that each Government department and non-departmental public body is required, by their policies and actions, to contribute to reaching the targets set out above. The Office for Environmental Protection should be … Read more We recommend that the Government introduce mechanisms to ensure that each Government department and non-departmental public body is required, by their policies and actions, to contribute to reaching the targets set out above. The Office for Environmental Protection should be responsible for ensuring their enforcement. Show less

View Details →

We recommend that Ministers make a material increase in levels of investment in training and skills for chartered ecology and associated disciplines. This ought to form an element of the Government’s promised investment in Green Jobs.

View Details →

We recommend a formal mechanism be established to review and act on the information provided in the Environmental Accounts.

View Details →

The Government’s new species abundance target for 2030 provides a potential mechanism for the measurement of progress on addressing biodiversity loss, and a driver for consequent actions. We recommend that once the target is established, regular, formal reviews of progress … Read more The Government’s new species abundance target for 2030 provides a potential mechanism for the measurement of progress on addressing biodiversity loss, and a driver for consequent actions. We recommend that once the target is established, regular, formal reviews of progress against the target should be required to be made, to feed into decision-making at senior levels in all Government departments. Ministers 116 Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? should also report regularly to Parliament on projected and current performance against the target and associated biodiversity outcome measurements on species distribution, extinction risk, habitat extent and condition. Show less

View Details →

We recommend that the Government implement a preferred approach to data management and monitoring, to strengthen a consistent evidence base on the UK’s natural capital. The Government should also make greater use of earth observation data as a cost-effective means … Read more We recommend that the Government implement a preferred approach to data management and monitoring, to strengthen a consistent evidence base on the UK’s natural capital. The Government should also make greater use of earth observation data as a cost-effective means of filling gaps in the data obtained from terrestrial monitoring. Show less

View Details →

We reiterate the conclusions and recommendations of our predecessor Committee’s 2019 inquiry into Sustainable Seas. (Paragraph 97) • Ministers must urgently set out a timetable to put management plans and monitoring in place for all MPAs. • Different categories of … Read more We reiterate the conclusions and recommendations of our predecessor Committee’s 2019 inquiry into Sustainable Seas. (Paragraph 97) • Ministers must urgently set out a timetable to put management plans and monitoring in place for all MPAs. • Different categories of destructive bottom trawling should be banned or restricted in all MPAs, and more MPAs should be established as ‘no-take’ zones with benefits for the local fishing industry and for marine biodiversity. • MPAs established by the Blue Belt programme need to meet international best practice guideless, set by the International Union for Conservation of Nature for designation. • MPAs need to be monitored to deter illegal activity and to establish if species and habitats are recovering, to inform future designations and adaptive management decisions. • The Government should make better use of data from automatic identification systems installed in vessels operating in MPAs to understand the activity in these areas; the operators of vessels with these systems installed ought to be under an obligation to keep the systems active when in areas requiring monitoring. • The Government should establish a fully integrated monitoring and surveillance regime for satellite tracking of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in UK territorial waters. Show less

View Details →

Healthy soils are essential to biodiversity; and yet the data and indicators to measure soil health do not exist to the degree required to ensure effective monitoring. Without credible arrangements for monitoring and measuring soil health, the Biodiversity in the … Read more Healthy soils are essential to biodiversity; and yet the data and indicators to measure soil health do not exist to the degree required to ensure effective monitoring. Without credible arrangements for monitoring and measuring soil health, the Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? 117 Government will not meet the soil health commitments made in its own 25 Year Environment Plan. The Government must therefore urgently address this large data gap. Show less

View Details →

We recommend that the Government urgently review the funding allocated to bodies with responsibility for monitoring, protecting and increasing levels of biodiversity in England, consistent with its goals for nature recovery under the 25 Year Environment Plan. In the next … Read more We recommend that the Government urgently review the funding allocated to bodies with responsibility for monitoring, protecting and increasing levels of biodiversity in England, consistent with its goals for nature recovery under the 25 Year Environment Plan. In the next Spending Review the Chancellor of the Exchequer must back the Government’s ambition for nature recovery with a funding settlement for Natural England which properly reflects its statutory responsibilities and the tasks it is expected to perform. Show less

View Details →

We support the recommendations of the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office made in their work on Achieving government’s long-term environmental goals. The Government must provide a comprehensive, consistent, and time-bound record of funding for the 25 Year … Read more We support the recommendations of the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office made in their work on Achieving government’s long-term environmental goals. The Government must provide a comprehensive, consistent, and time-bound record of funding for the 25 Year Environment Plan. In its response to this report, the Government must set out in detail the funding committed to biodiversity since the announcement of the 25 Year Environment Plan; how much has been announced or otherwise promised to date; and how much has in fact been spent. Show less

View Details →

In the next multi-annual spending review, we recommend that Natural England receive a materially greater contribution in annual funding, in line with its 2020 Comprehensive Spending Review bid.

View Details →

We recommend the Government commission a review of the operation of ‘perverse subsidies’ in the UK economy. This must entail the identification, assessment and tracking of public expenditure harmful to biodiversity, and the publication of data on the extent of … Read more We recommend the Government commission a review of the operation of ‘perverse subsidies’ in the UK economy. This must entail the identification, assessment and tracking of public expenditure harmful to biodiversity, and the publication of data on the extent of such subsidies. Once such subsidies have been identified, Ministers must act to readdress the balance, removing harmful subsidies and re-directing money to nature conservation and recovery. (Paragraph 135) Domestic biodiversity policy and legislation Show less

View Details →

The Government must urgently establish a baseline for the Outcome Indicator Framework. Defra’s planned Natural Capital and Ecosystem Assessment pilot, and any subsequent baseline exercise, must focus on measuring a clear set of representative natural capital assets across England. The … Read more The Government must urgently establish a baseline for the Outcome Indicator Framework. Defra’s planned Natural Capital and Ecosystem Assessment pilot, and any subsequent baseline exercise, must focus on measuring a clear set of representative natural capital assets across England. The Treasury should ensure the baseline assessment is properly funded at the next Spending Review. Show less

View Details →

In all future progress reports on the 25 Year Environment Plan, information provided should relate to the Plan’s ten goals. Priority actions must be assessed year on year, as must local delivery of the plan through arm’s length bodies. From … Read more In all future progress reports on the 25 Year Environment Plan, information provided should relate to the Plan’s ten goals. Priority actions must be assessed year on year, as must local delivery of the plan through arm’s length bodies. From 2022 onwards the Government should set out indicators for how the Environmental Land Management Scheme and Local Nature Recovery Strategies will be assessed to measure how these policies are delivering the aims of the Plan. Show less

View Details →

The Government must address how it will set long-term objectives for all ten of the Plan’s goals. As agreed to in 2018, the Government must publish how these goals and objectives relate to pre-existing national and international environmental targets. We … Read more The Government must address how it will set long-term objectives for all ten of the Plan’s goals. As agreed to in 2018, the Government must publish how these goals and objectives relate to pre-existing national and international environmental targets. We reiterate our recommendation that the Office for Environmental Protection’s powers, budget and staffing reflect its responsibility to monitor the Government’s delivery of the 25 Year Environment Plan and its enforcement of environmental law. Show less

View Details →

The Government should not count its wins early: protected areas should only be reckoned to contribute to the 30 by 30 pledge if they are effectively managed and improved. We recommend the Treasury ensure that all bodies involved in the … Read more The Government should not count its wins early: protected areas should only be reckoned to contribute to the 30 by 30 pledge if they are effectively managed and improved. We recommend the Treasury ensure that all bodies involved in the monitoring of 30 per cent of the UK’s land and seas receive funding allocations sufficient to allow comprehensive monitoring to be undertaken. We note it is far less expensive to conserve nature than to restore damaged or degraded resources and the costs involved are small compared to the financial and wider health and well-being benefits. Show less

View Details →

The Government should provide a full response to the Glover Review before the 2021 summer recess.

View Details →

To allow the biodiversity net gain policy to fulfil its transformative potential within the UK’s built environment we recommend that: • The Government should explain how and when it will move to embedding environmental net gain in the planning system, … Read more To allow the biodiversity net gain policy to fulfil its transformative potential within the UK’s built environment we recommend that: • The Government should explain how and when it will move to embedding environmental net gain in the planning system, with clear actions and milestones provided to achieve this goal. • Mandatory gains should endure, rather than only being maintained for the stated 30 year minimum. • The Government should strengthen local authority capacity and enforcement mechanisms to deliver biodiversity net gain and developers should demonstrate their environmental performance and implementation of mitigation measures as part of good Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance. • The National Planning Policy Framework should be reviewed to ensure reforms strengthen biodiversity restoration and protection and any proposals which undermine biodiversity be addressed. Show less

View Details →

To address these concerns we recommend that: a) Defra updates its Nature Recovery Network Policy Paper by the end of the year, explaining how LNRS will be co-ordinated into a national Nature Recovery Network and how local authorities should link … Read more To address these concerns we recommend that: a) Defra updates its Nature Recovery Network Policy Paper by the end of the year, explaining how LNRS will be co-ordinated into a national Nature Recovery Network and how local authorities should link LNRS to the NRN. b) Government should establish a Nature Recovery Zone category which would enable local authorities to choose to designate areas where planning permission would in principle be granted for environmental investments and discourage new hard infrastructure at scale. LNRS should designate these zones to be incorporated into local plans. c) LNRS should be used as the spatial planning tool to join up biodiversity net gain, ELMS and the planning system. LNRS could provide information for the planning system’s new land zoning proposal and provide the basis for prioritising the delivery of funds from ELMS and net gain. d) The Nature Strategy should set out specifically how the Government proposes to link environmental and planning policies into one coherent policy approach designed to realise the 25 Year Environment Plan’s goal to improve the environment within a generation. e) Amid concerns that some local authorities do not have the capacity to deliver Biodiversity Net Gain and Local Nature Recovery Strategies, we recommend that the Government makes a formal assessment of capacity of local authorities to undertake this work, with a view to ensuring that all local authorities have the capacity to meet these important obligations. Show less

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s Trees Action Plan, and the intention to focus on planting broadleaf native species. The Government must not try to meet its tree planting target solely through commercial timber plantations using non- native species. A balance of … Read more We welcome the Government’s Trees Action Plan, and the intention to focus on planting broadleaf native species. The Government must not try to meet its tree planting target solely through commercial timber plantations using non- native species. A balance of tree planting is required to allow increased domestic commercial timber production to reduce reliance on imports. The appropriate mix of tree species will depend on site conditions. Creating woods with more native broadleaf tree species will provide greater biodiversity benefits, carbon stocks, more improved water quality and reduce soil erosion. These benefits can be scaled up through greater public and private investment in NbS. Show less

View Details →

To realise the benefits of nature-based solutions to climate change, we recommend that: a) The UK adopt a clear definition of NbS and consider using the IUCN definition alongside the IUCN Global Standard for NbS. b) The Government prioritise protection … Read more To realise the benefits of nature-based solutions to climate change, we recommend that: a) The UK adopt a clear definition of NbS and consider using the IUCN definition alongside the IUCN Global Standard for NbS. b) The Government prioritise protection and maintenance of the ecosystems we already have over the creation of new ecosystems. This must include greater efforts to preserve ecosystems found outside of protected areas. c) The proposed ban on the production and sale of horticultural peat be brought forward, as soon as possible before 2023. d) Tree planting should not occur on peat soils and floodplains would be better used for restoring floodplain meadows rather than afforestation projects. e) Tax incentives be given to investors in NbS schemes who have ambitious and credible net zero plans and are working to remove biodiversity loss from their supply chains. (Paragraph 260) Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? 123 The economics of biodiversity Show less

View Details →

We recommend the Government start the process of setting an environmental footprint target by launching a consultation ahead of COP15 on how to model the overseas environmental impact of UK consumption. This could feed into Defra’s work on international indicators … Read more We recommend the Government start the process of setting an environmental footprint target by launching a consultation ahead of COP15 on how to model the overseas environmental impact of UK consumption. This could feed into Defra’s work on international indicators within the Outcome Indicator Framework. Show less

View Details →

In response to this report, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office should set out the extent to which the announced cuts to the UK’s aid budget will affect overseas development assistance for family planning and reproductive healthcare. We recommend that … Read more In response to this report, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office should set out the extent to which the announced cuts to the UK’s aid budget will affect overseas development assistance for family planning and reproductive healthcare. We recommend that ODA for family planning and reproductive healthcare be protected: at the very least the percentage allocated to both these areas should be equal or higher than 2019 levels. Show less

View Details →

The Government should detail how it intends to move beyond GDP as the primary measure of economic activity, towards a concept of inclusive wealth, which includes consideration of the UK’s produced, human, and natural capital.

View Details →

We support the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee that the Treasury’s next Comprehensive Spending Review should set out how the full value of environmental impacts has been taken into account, and the impact of spending decisions on meeting government’s … Read more We support the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee that the Treasury’s next Comprehensive Spending Review should set out how the full value of environmental impacts has been taken into account, and the impact of spending decisions on meeting government’s long-term environmental goals. To achieve this, every department needs to account for the costs and benefits to nature when appraising projects and policies. We reiterate the recommendation of the 2017–19 Committee that general taxation and spending should not be exempt from the Environmental Principles. Show less

View Details →

The Government should include a Net Zero test of the 2021 Budget in its Net Zero Review. Net Zero tests should be refined for future fiscal events to assess the climate impacts of taxation, spending and resource decisions. The Government … Read more The Government should include a Net Zero test of the 2021 Budget in its Net Zero Review. Net Zero tests should be refined for future fiscal events to assess the climate impacts of taxation, spending and resource decisions. The Government should develop nature tests to ensure spending packages are aligned with the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework. A new fiscal rule should be added to the fiscal framework which focuses on balancing our demands on nature with nature’s supply. Show less

View Details →

To provide the signals needed for the financial system to manage biodiversity risks, we recommend that: a) The Government commit to legislate for mandatory disclosure of nature-related financial risks once the TNFD framework is ready. b) The Government explore how … Read more To provide the signals needed for the financial system to manage biodiversity risks, we recommend that: a) The Government commit to legislate for mandatory disclosure of nature-related financial risks once the TNFD framework is ready. b) The Government explore how a corporate natural capital accounting system could be set-up to require organisations to measure the impact of operations on natural capital. c) The Bank of England conduct an exploratory exercise into stress testing biodiversity loss. d) The Government should also ensure the National Infrastructure Bank has a mandate for net zero and includes a focus on nature and biodiversity for investment in its objectives. e) The Government commission a review into the Law Commission’s 2014 report on the Fiduciary Duties of Investment Intermediaries, given the developments in the understanding of climate and nature-related risks since the report’s publication. (Paragraph 329) Education and biodiversity Show less

View Details →

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services’ call for transformative change provides a yardstick against which action to address biodiversity loss should be measured. The global response to biodiversity loss has so far been inadequate. Piecemeal conservation efforts, and increases in the efficiency of production, cannot tackle the …

View Details →

The UK has established a sophisticated public policy mechanism to tackle the effects of climate change by driving sustained long-term reductions in harmful emissions. This comprises legally binding interim and long-term targets authorised by Parliament, and an independent Climate Change Committee to advise Parliament and Ministers on the actions required …

View Details →

No such system yet exists to restore the UK’s greatly depleted natural environment. It is thus unsurprising that the UK failed to achieve at least 14 of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, and the Government is not on track to achieve its goal to provide the next generation with a better …

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s announcement of a ‘State of Nature’ target on species abundance for 2030. This goes some way in providing a legal mechanism to achieve nature goals, but for this to translate into urgent, transformative action, the target must capture other aspects of biodiversity and include interim targets.

View Details →

Invasive species contribute significantly to the decline in biodiversity levels in Great Britain. By its own admission, the Government has failed to prevent the arrival and continued spread of damaging invasive species. None of our predecessors’ recommendations on tackling invasive species—on funding, setting up an inspectorate, and creating a ‘nature …

View Details →

Invasive species continue to cost the economy £1.8 billion per year. It is significantly cheaper to prevent invasive species from establishing, rather than tackling them once they are established.

View Details →

We strongly recommend that Ministers urgently review the recommendations of the Committee’s report on Invasive Species made in October 2019 and implement them without further delay. This includes increasing the proportion of biosecurity funding directed at countering invasive species to at least £3 million a year. (Paragraph 69) Measuring biodiversity

View Details →

Public expenditure on measures to promote biodiversity has been cut in real terms over recent years. As a result, levels of monitoring have been scaled back, and the capacity for assessing the state of protected areas and vulnerable species nationally has been reduced. Government bodies do not have enough skilled …

View Details →

The relationship between environmental monitoring and remedial action is far too weak. This must change. Data on biodiversity levels must inform decision-making in Government far more substantially than at present.

View Details →

The efficient management of data relevant to assessing levels of biodiversity is made difficult due to the sheer variety of data systems used to monitor UK biodiversity.

View Details →

If Marine Protected Areas continue to be poorly managed and monitored, with little enforcement of their protected status, there is a risk that the Government will have established a network of ‘paper parks’. According to monitoring data, the condition of MPAs is much the same as our predecessors observed in …

View Details →

We support the recommendations of the Natural Capital Committee that the development of soil indicators should be fast-tracked; that a shadow target for soil health should be established urgently; and that a legally-binding target for soil health ought to be established as soon as monitoring data allows. Healthy soils should …

View Details →

To deliver the Government’s environmental vision to improve the environment within a generation, arm’s length bodies and departments need to have the funding to do so. Budget cuts to biodiversity expenditure over the last decade have hindered this.

View Details →

As the Public Accounts Committee has recently observed, there is no single point of responsibility within government for monitoring overall expenditure on environmental goals, and the Government does not have a good understanding of the total costs required to deliver its environmental goals. It is difficult to determine how much …

View Details →

Between 2013–14 to 2019–20 Natural England’s baseline funding reduced by 49 per cent. The body considers that it can no longer deliver its statutory duties to a good standard as a direct consequence of these cuts. The cuts have fallen disproportionately on Natural England’s budget for monitoring and information provision.

View Details →

The Government increased Natural England’s baseline funding by £11.3 million in in 2020–21 and has committed to increasing this by a further £75 million. Whilst 118 Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? the funding increase is welcome, it does little to provide the consistent multi-year investment required for Natural …

View Details →

We welcome the funding announcements and increased public expenditure on international biodiversity, however international conservation funding is still greatly outstripped by subsidies which cheapen the exploitation of the natural environment. The Government cannot spend more exploiting the natural environment than conserving it if climate change and biodiversity are to be …

View Details →

The Government is not on track to achieve its objective of improving the environment within a generation, and its 25 Year Environment Plan does not provide sufficient direction to change this. Despite repeated calls in the last five years by this Committee, the National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee …

View Details →

At present there is no strategy to tie the reporting framework for the 25 Year Environment Plan to the ten 25 Year Environment Plan goals. Nor does the plan explain how it will be delivered by local government and arm’s length bodies or how key environmental policies, like the Environmental …

View Details →

The 25 Year Environment Plan is not yet supported by clear, ambitious, quantified statutory targets and milestones. The Environment Bill will provide a statutory underpinning for five of the goals in the Plan, but government has not set long-term objectives for the other five plan areas or how its goals …

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s pledge to protect 30 per cent of the UK’s land and seas by 2030, but simply designating areas as protected is not enough. The UK’s protected areas are poorly managed. More focus must be given to preserving and enhancing the quality of protected areas. There are …

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s efforts to secure biodiversity gains in development: but the biodiversity net gain policy, in its current form, does not go far enough in contributing to the transformative change necessary to address biodiversity loss in the UK. A series of deficiencies with the policy have been identified …

View Details →

The Government has failed to define what it means by net environmental gain as set out in the 25 Year Environment Plan, as its ambition for future development. The 120 Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? failure to move towards a system of net environmental gain risks undermining the …

View Details →

We welcome the extension of the biodiversity net gain policy to include Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. We received overwhelming evidence in support of this and note the potential the policy now has to contribute to nature’s recovery. We will be examining the implementation of the policy change as it progresses.

View Details →

Nature recovery does not happen overnight and must be maintained and built upon for generations. The proposed 30 year minimum to maintain biodiversity net gains will achieve little in terms of delivering long-lasting nature recovery.

View Details →

The Government’s Planning White Paper could have implications on the delivery of the biodiversity net gain policy. We believe planning reforms should not weaken or undermine biodiversity protection.

View Details →

Effective Environmental Land Management Schemes will only be possible if farmers and land managers are brought into the process of policy design. This must include reaching out beyond the ‘usual suspects’ of big farming unions and environmental groups.

View Details →

To include harder-to-reach farmers and land managers, rural broadband connectivity must be addressed as a matter of urgency, as recommended by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in 2019. Defra should also make provision for tailored, farm-specific advice, farm visits, demonstration farms, and other knowledge-sharing activities that support the …

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s ambition to create a national Nature Recovery Network but believe far more detail is needed to translate this ambition into transformative action. The Nature Recovery Network (NRN) is contained in the 25 Year Environment Plan, but there are currently no duties or actionable plans in place …

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s focus for COP26 on nature-based solutions (NbS) and the increased investment provided by the Nature for Climate fund. Nature- based solutions could substantially contribute to meeting the UK’s net zero goals 122 Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? but must not be seen as a …

View Details →

Protecting existing ecosystems, be that ancient woodland, peatlands, or kelp forests provides the most cost-effective and significant contribution to NbS in the UK. Given the majority of the UK’s ecosystems lie outside of protected areas, more needs to be done to lock carbon and conserve biodiversity in these spaces.

View Details →

Protection and restoration of peatlands have an important role to play in NbS. The Government’s announced ban on rotational burning of peat in protected areas is welcome, as part of the transformational change necessary to meet biodiversity and net zero targets. We commend the consultation on banning the sale of …

View Details →

Tackling over-consumption of natural resources is essential to meet the Government’s net zero goals and to reverse biodiversity loss. The first step in doing this is recognising the need to reduce the UK’s overall consumption. We welcome indications that Ministers are starting to consider adopting a consumption-based measure of the …

View Details →

Professor Dasgupta has emphasised that family planning and sexual and reproductive healthcare is a neglected feature of public policy. The unmet demand for family planning is huge and addressing human population numbers is also key to reducing our demands on the biosphere. The UK needs to remain a global leader …

View Details →

Economic models that do not value nature and ecosystems cannot address climate change and biodiversity loss. GDP is a well-established measure of economic activity, but as Professor Dasgupta has highlighted, by itself it is not an adequate way to assesses the UK’s economy. GDP does not account for the depreciation …

View Details →

Further work is needed on the natural capital accounting and assessment methodology, but this should not stop the Government and businesses using natural capital accounting now. Accounting for natural capital in some way, is better than ignoring it completely because the system is not yet perfect. As a world leader …

View Details →

The UK should work with countries at COP15, COP26 and through the G7 to construct an internationally agreed way to integrate natural capital accounts into core national 124 Biodiversity in the UK: bloom or bust? accounts. This aligns with two of the Government’s COP26 presidency goals: finance and collaboration. The …

View Details →

The Committee acknowledges that currently natural capital approaches cannot capture intrinsic values of nature, but they do serve as a first stepping-stone to valuing the natural environment in existing economic models.

View Details →

At present, the impact of Government policies and projects on nature is not adequately factored into spending decisions. As a result, the Government is not on track to meet its nature recovery goals. On aggregate, HM Treasury and other departments spending decisions must support not undermine the realisation of the …

View Details →

The Government has the opportunity to create a fiscal framework focused on delivering well-being, sustainability and economic stability. The current fiscal rules focus on managing the budget, public sector investment and debt. There is scope to extend this so balancing our demands on nature with nature’s capacity to meet these …

View Details →

Financial systems need to recognise the value of preserving biodiversity. The transformation the financial system has undergone to integrate climate-related financial risks should be used as a roadmap to do the same for biodiversity. The interconnected, complex, and non-linear nature of biodiversity risks makes it difficult to model. But the …

View Details →

For biodiversity to be protected, it has to be appreciated and valued. But our increasing detachment from nature stops many of us knowing and directly experiencing it. This starts at a young age; children are spending less and less time outdoors. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds and ethnic minorities have particularly …

View Details →

To increase education on biodiversity we: a) Support the establishment of a Natural History GCSE; b) Recommend the Department for Education re-evaluate the opportunities for nature visits and teaching outside, as part of its support to schools recovering from the education impacts of covid-19; c) Recommend the Department for Education …

View Details →