Reforms to overcome bureaucracy in the planning system are generally welcomed but there are concerns, such as ensuring local communities and councils do not lose their voice in the process and if the changes simply accelerate development at the expense of nature – sometime referred to as “growth-washing”.
The new Planning and Infrastructure Bill sets out the technical details of the government’s previously announced Nature Restoration Fund (NRF), which will be managed by Natural England. Where developers were required to identify and mitigate environmental impacts at an individual project level for planning permission, with the NRF, they will instead be able pay into the fund upfront as a way to address certain environmental obligations. The proceeds will then be used by Natural England to invest in large-scale nature protection and restoration projects.
There are concerns that even though this approach could lead to the creation of new nature reserves, it does little to protect or reinstate local ecosystems in the very areas where the biodiversity was lost. Urban areas are progressively devoid of nature. Small patches of woodland, wetlands, or community gardens foster a vital connection to the environment for the wellbeing of communities.
The Landscape Institute (LI), the chartered body for landscape professionals, welcomes the government’s proposed Planning & Infrastructure Bill, but stated that there is a critical need for landscape considerations to be integral to any built and natural environment decision-making and ideally right from the outset. The LI has said to be concerned that changes to the Nature Restoration Fund could allow developers to opt out of on-site mitigation obligations which could lead to biodiversity loss and a reduction in people’s access to nature.
Instead the LI advocates clear safeguards that retain and strengthen on-site mitigation and robust biodiversity net gain requirements for any size of development to contribute to. “It’s essential that the regulatory framework fosters sustainable development and ensures that nature, landscape and the wider environment is enhanced through the development process, delivering benefits to people, place and nature. On-site mitigation is crucial for genuine, long-term benefits for people, place and nature. We urge the government to engage closely with landscape professionals to ensure sustainable, resilient natural environments that support the wellbeing of communities”, said Carolin Gohler FLI, President of the Landscape Institute.
Also voicing concern, Robert Oates, CEO of the ecology consultants Arbtech, said: “A single, one-time payment into an abstract mechanism to streamline the planning process does not compensate for the immediate and very real biodiversity loss. Nor does it guarantee that conservation or restoration projects will unfold in or near the communities impacted by the development activity.”
The success of the Nature Restoration Fund will rely on long term, transparent monitoring, enforcement and governance. There are concerns that Natural England will end up as both the delivery body and regulator, hence potentially blurring accountability.