An adjustment by the UK government to the biodiversity net gain (BNG) legislation, meaning local authorities need to justify increasing their minimum net biodiversity improvement level, undermines nature restoration efforts, a consultant has said.

The unexpected change weakens the ability of local authorities to deliver positive outcomes for biodiversity, said Samuel Sinclair, director of consultancy Biodiversify.

Local authorities have the potential to be a “powerful force for good” by representing nature in the planning system, but they do not have enough support from the government, he told Carbon Pulse.

The government has updated its draft guidance for implementing BNG, removing a line that said planners “may seek a higher percentage” than the minimum of a 10% improvement, an article by Ends Report noted.

As of Feb. 14, the latest government guidance said: “Plan-makers should not seek a higher percentage than the statutory objective of 10% biodiversity net gain, either on an area-wide basis or for specific allocations for development unless justified.”

“To justify such policies, they will need to be evidenced including as to local need for a higher percentage, local opportunities for a higher percentage and any impacts on viability for development,” it said in an update from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities.

Under the BNG rules, development projects in England need to achieve a net biodiversity improvement of at least 10% from Feb. 10.

Sinclair noted how many local authorities have already set their BNG targets at more than 10% BNG.

“The unexpected shift dramatically undermines both their ambitions, and their ability to deliver the best for nature in their area,” he said.

“The unexpected change to the wording means that local authorities now have to justify any increase in the BNG target, however, it is unclear what constitutes sufficient justification – potentially opening them up to expensive, drawn-out legal challenges.”

Alongside around 20 local authorities setting BNG targets for all developments at over 10% across England, two authorities in London – Kingston-upon-Thames and Tower Hamlets – have policies of 30% BNG, a report published by charity coalition Wildlife and Countryside Link (WCL) found earlier this month.

TEST IN PRACTICE

Another consultant stressed that the full implications of the change will not be understood until the legislation is tested in practice.

Tom Butterworth, nature director of UK, India, Middle East, and Africa at consultancy Arup, said the need for increased evidence from authorities looking to target gains over 10% might “not be a bad thing”.

“It is important that we do evidence and justify policies that are put in place in local plans when they differ from the national government guidance. This is important when setting any aspect of the local plan, and biodiversity requirements should be no different,” he told Carbon Pulse.

Sinclair raised concerns that many environmental experts fear that the 10% target is not sufficient to deliver nature recovery.

Butterworth agreed that a 10% increase for nature is not much. Larger percentage gains should be cheaper to deliver for developers, once the baseline of 10% has been achieved and can help to get green spaces into town centres, he said.

“I can see some very strong casers coming forward for higher percentages, for example, in urban areas.”

Observers are keenly watching the progression of the law as it could set a world-leading standard for government nature requirements, while creating a market for statutory biodiversity credits that developers have to buy off-site as a ‘last resort’.

The BNG market is expected to be worth between £135 mln and £274 mln annually, the government said last year.

The complicated legislation has faced numerous issues over the last year, including claims it could incentivise building in nature recovery areas, pose serious risks to ecology, and has fundamental gaps in its market infrastructure.

By Thomas Cox – t.cox@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***