Lack of transparency in England’s biodiversity net gain (BNG) scheme is threatening the policy’s ability to demonstrate benefits for nature, a government advisory group said in an open letter.
Two changes to the register for BNG sites could address the shortcomings of the policy, said government agency Natural England’s BNG Evaluation Advisory Group and other experts in the letter.
They request that developers are required to provide more detailed mapping information on the location of BNG schemes and that onsite developer gains are included in the register for better overall transparency.
“We are deeply concerned by the lack of an adequate requirement for transparency in BNG reporting. Half a century of experience with biodiversity markets tells us [their] success depends fundamentally on transparency and accountability,” they said.
“It is deeply disappointing to develop a new biodiversity market in 2024 that does not have these principles at its core,” they said.
BNG has required developers to submit plans to improve biodiversity by 10% since February.
Natalie Duffus, PhD student at University of Oxford, led the six signatories of the letter, which was also signed by Sophus zu Ermgassen, ecological economist at the same institution.
“As BNG ramps up, it is vital there is transparency on where these habitats are being delivered, to ensure accountability and to enable monitoring of the policy outcomes,” Duffus told Carbon Pulse.
The lack of a requirement for developers to submit verifiable information on the location, and spatial extent, of BNG marked a “serious impediment” to scrutiny, the letter said.
Last week, the Green Finance Institute (GFI) said BNG has 40 challenges across demand, supply, governance, and its metric, including transparency issues.
A lack of transparency in the programme is frustrating conservation scheme managers, with some information deliberately withheld, an industry insider said.
In response to the letter, a spokesperson for the UK’s environmental department told Carbon Pulse: “We are committed to working closely with the sector to make BNG work effectively … without weakening environmental protections.”
“Our new towns and housing will have nature at their heart,” they said.
REGISTER “WILL FAIL”
Shortfalls in the BNG register mean “as currently designed it will fail to deliver”, the letter said. The register lists units from conservation initiatives that developers can buy as offsets.
Minor adjustments in reporting requirements would facilitate more thorough monitoring of BNG outcomes, the letter said. The group flagged two issues:
- On-site [developer] gains are not included on the register, leaving them untraceable and making it impossible to evaluate overall outcomes.
- The use of static maps, rather than Geographic Information System (GIS) shapefiles for reporting the location of gain sites.
“GIS shapefiles would provide a much more detailed picture of the habitat changes occurring and streamline the process of monitoring and evaluating the policy’s outcomes,” Duffus said.
The register of BNG sites has listed just nine entries totalling less than 300 hectares, contrasting with the government’s 2019 forecast of creating over 5,000 ha annually, GFI said last week.
Offset systems in other regions have effectively adopted similar practices, such as Western Australia’s Environmental Offset Register, the letter said.
“Public accountability and oversight has been proven to be time and time again one of the most critical factors behind improving the effectiveness of nature markets over time,” said Zu Ermgassen in a post on the topic on LinkedIn.
Despite the transparency issues, the BNG advent marked a significant step forward in tackling the impacts of development on nature while supporting sustainable development, the letter said.
“BNG also has the potential to support broader nature recovery targets by providing a measurable benefit to biodiversity through the enhancement and creation of habitats, as well as supporting health and wellbeing through access to nature and provision of ecosystem services.”
By Thomas Cox – t.cox@carbon-pulse.com
*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***
