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

The government acknowledges the need to address biodiversity loss and references its response to the Dasgupta Review, actions under the Environment Bill including a legally binding 2030 species target, and the forthcoming Nature Strategy for England.

The government has amended the Environment Bill to include a legally binding target to halt species decline by 2030, with details to be set by October 2022, and outlines a statutory cycle for monitoring and reporting on environmental improvement plans.

The government acknowledges its commitment to cross-departmental action on targets, stating that the duty to achieve targets rests with central government and that the Office for Environmental Protection will enforce environmental law duties, with further details on Greening Government Commitments to be set out shortly.

The government details ongoing and planned actions, including scoping an inspectorate and allocating funding for invasive non-native species, awarding contracts for biocontrol methods, and initiatives from the England Trees Action Plan. It also notes an upcoming GB Plant Biosecurity Strategy by 2022, all contributing to biosecurity and biodiversity but not explicitly a new overarching system for environmental restoration.

The government's response details efforts to invest in green skills and jobs, assess capacity needs for environmental policies, and strengthen government capabilities in environmental issues. It does not address the committee's specific recommendation regarding the scope and interim targets for the 'State of Nature' target on species abundance.

The government describes the statutory cycle of monitoring, planning, and reporting under the Environment Bill, including the Outcome Indicator Framework, but does not commit to statutory interim targets or explicitly extending the legally binding scope of the 2030 target as recommended.

The government states that the Environment Bill already places an explicit duty on government to meet species abundance and other environmental targets, and that the Office for Environmental Protection will provide regular scrutiny to ensure accountability.

The government's response describes the 25 Year Environment Plan Outcome Indicator Framework, the use of earth observation technology, and funding for natural capital estimates. This response does not address the committee's conclusion regarding the failure to prevent the spread of invasive species.

The government's response focuses on marine protection, Marine Protected Areas, and managing fishing activities, but does not specifically address the committee's conclusion regarding the economic cost of invasive species or the importance of preventing their establishment.

The government's response discusses healthy soil, sustainable farming practices, and soil health monitoring, but it does not address the recommendation to review and implement previous proposals on invasive species or to increase biosecurity funding.

The government states that Natural England has already received a 47% increase in its Grant in Aid budget and has increased external income by over 90% since 2013 to support biodiversity monitoring. It also highlights existing bodies responsible for monitoring.

The government acknowledges the importance of monitoring costs and spend, referencing existing funding and measures to leverage private finance for biodiversity. However, it does not specifically commit to increasing investment in training and skills for chartered ecology.

The government refers to recommendation 11 and states that spending plans beyond 2021-22 have not been set, with future plans to be agreed as part of SR21. This response does not address the committee's recommendation about strengthening the link between environmental monitoring and remedial action or how biodiversity data will inform decision-making more substantially.

The government's response focuses on efforts to eliminate harmful subsidies, support international agreements, and ensure sustainable practices through legislation like the Fisheries Act and Subsidy Control Bill, but does not address the recommendation to establish a formal mechanism to review and act on Environmental Accounts.

The government acknowledges the need for progress measurement through its Outcome Indicator Framework, which is under development with reviews planned at a minimum every five years, and has invested in the Natural Capital and Ecosystem Assessment. However, it does not specifically commit to regular formal reviews feeding into all departmental decision-making or ministerial reporting to Parliament.

The government details its plans for monitoring progress through the Environment Bill and an Outcome Indicator Framework, which is under development with an aim to finalise all indicators by 2024, but does not address the committee's observation regarding the difficulty caused by the variety of data systems.

The government's response outlines its 25 Year Environment Plan, the Environment Bill's provisions for environmental improvement plans and targets, and the establishment of the Office for Environmental Protection, but does not specifically address the recommendation for a preferred data management approach or greater use of earth observation data.

The government acknowledges the need for effectively managed protected areas and notes existing initiatives like new designations and funding for landscapes. It has committed to piloting Highly Protected Marine Areas and will publish a Nature Recovery Green Paper later this year.

The government's response references a Written Ministerial Statement on the Landscapes Review and protected landscapes. This response does not address any of the committee's specific recommendations concerning Marine Protected Areas, bottom trawling, or marine monitoring and surveillance.

The government's response discusses gigabit broadband connectivity and the Sustainable Farming Incentive scheme, which is entirely unrelated to the recommendation on addressing the soil health data gap.

The government accepts the recommendations, stating it is developing new soil health indicators, investing £8.8m in research, plans to launch a new soil health standard in 2023, and is committed to setting a legally binding target for soil health as soon as data allows. Healthy soils are a key priority for ELM schemes.

The government's response outlines commitments to establishing a Nature Recovery Network and Local Nature Recovery Strategies, which will guide funding from schemes like the future farming programme, but it does not directly address the committee's conclusion regarding past budget cuts hindering environmental efforts or commit to increasing overall biodiversity expenditure.

The government's response discusses nature-based solutions and various environmental initiatives but does not specifically address the recommendation to urgently review funding for bodies monitoring biodiversity or to provide a proper funding settlement for Natural England in the next Spending Review.

The government has commissioned the Joint Nature Conservation Committee to develop a global environmental footprint indicator as part of the 25 Year Environment Plan. However, this response does not address the committee's concern about the lack of a single point of responsibility for monitoring environmental expenditure or understanding total costs.

The government's response discusses international aid spending on family planning and reproductive health, which it links to global biodiversity, but does not address the recommendation to provide a detailed, time-bound record of UK funding for the 25 Year Environment Plan or domestic biodiversity.

The government's response discusses GDP limitations, the Bean Review, and funding for the ONS to improve natural capital estimates, but does not address the conclusion regarding Natural England's reduced funding and its impact on statutory duties.

The government's response discusses global leadership in natural capital and international accounting standards. It does not address the committee's specific concern about Natural England's funding and the need for consistent multi-year investment.

The government's response explains that spending reviews assess costs and benefits using the Green Book, which is being improved to include environmental impacts, but it does not address the specific recommendation for Natural England to receive materially greater funding.

The government states it is reviewing how to better support environmental objectives, including embedding net zero into policy decisions, improving natural capital estimates, and participating in green budgeting initiatives, but does not commit to addressing the imbalance between conservation funding and harmful subsidies or providing information on the extent of such subsidies.

The government defers action, stating it will work with the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and review their recommendations and potential policy/regulatory responses when they are available, rather than commissioning its own review of perverse subsidies.

The government's response discusses exploring a new GCSE in Natural History and the benefits of outdoor learning, then details commitments related to nature-related financial disclosures, a Green Taxonomy, and the Green Finance Institute. However, it does not directly address the committee's core conclusion regarding the 25 Year Environment Plan's lack of sufficient direction, the failure to establish baselines for measuring environmental progress, or the continuing deterioration of natural capital assets.

The government response describes the existing Outcome Indicator Framework but does not explicitly commit to urgently establishing a baseline for it, address funding, or detail Defra's pilot as requested.

The government states that the Outcome Indicator Framework already provides a method for reporting on the progress of the 25 Year Environment Plan and its goals, drawing together measures to describe environmental change.

The government response describes the existing Outcome Indicator Framework but does not address how future progress reports will relate to the ten goals, how priority actions will be assessed, or how ELM/LNRS will be assessed from 2022 onwards.

In response to concerns about a lack of clear statutory targets, the government states it has amended the Environment Bill to require a new legally binding target to halt the decline in species abundance by 2030, with details to be set by October 2022. It also outlines a robust statutory cycle of monitoring, planning, and reporting to ensure targets are met.

The government acknowledges its commitment to cross-departmental action on targets and states the OEP's remit will include long-term targets, promising to set out further detail shortly on other government departments' actions.

The government acknowledges the need to improve protected area management and is developing a Nature Recovery Green Paper to address its 30x30 commitment and improve management, with a response to the Glover Review to be published later in the year.

The government acknowledges the importance of well-managed protected areas and states it is developing a Nature Recovery Green Paper, to be published later this year, which will set out its approach to achieving the 30x30 commitment and improving management of protected areas.

The government states it is carefully considering the Glover Review recommendations in the context of a wider Nature Recovery Green Paper, and its response will be published later this year, implying it will not meet the requested pre-summer recess deadline.

The government reiterates that the Environment Bill will ensure new developments deliver a minimum 10% Biodiversity Net Gain and commits to continuing to work with stakeholders to ensure the policy is fit for purpose, but does not detail how it will address the identified deficiencies.

The government's response focuses on the Biodiversity Net Gain policy and the Environment Bill's provisions for a 10% gain, without addressing the committee's concern about the lack of definition for a broader 'net environmental gain' or the risk of habitat fragmentation.

The government reiterates that the Environment Bill will ensure new developments enhance biodiversity and deliver measurable 'Biodiversity Net Gain' but does not specifically address the committee's welcome of the policy's extension to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.

The government's response describes the general Biodiversity Net Gain policy under the Environment Bill, but fails to address the committee's specific concern that the proposed 30-year minimum for maintaining gains is insufficient for long-lasting nature recovery.

The government's response describes the general Biodiversity Net Gain policy under the Environment Bill, but fails to address the committee's specific concern about the potential for the Planning White Paper to weaken or undermine biodiversity protection.

The government's response outlines the existing Biodiversity Net Gain policy via the Environment Bill, ensuring a minimum 10% gain, but does not address the specific recommendations regarding embedding environmental net gain, extending mandatory gains beyond 30 years, strengthening local authority capacity, or reviewing the National Planning Policy Framework.

The government accepts the recommendation, detailing how it is already involving over 3,000 farmers in co-designing and testing ELM schemes through the Test and Trials programme, and plans further engagement workshops this Autumn.

The government accepts the recommendation, outlining its Agricultural Transition Plan and new Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes (Sustainable Farming Incentive, Local Nature Recovery, Landscape Recovery). It commits to developing these schemes with farmers, providing tailored advice and support, and ongoing engagement to achieve biodiversity goals.

The government plans to publish a Nature Recovery Green Paper later this year, which will outline its vision and initial policy proposals for public consultation, to inform future tangible changes.

The government plans to publish a Nature Recovery Green Paper later this year, which will set out its vision and proposals for nature recovery and allow for public consultation, thereby deferring specific actions until after this process.

The government highlights its investment in nature restoration and nature-based solutions through the £640m Nature for Climate and £80m Green Recovery Challenge funds, aiming to treble tree planting rates and restore 35,000ha of peatland by 2025.

The government highlights its investment in nature restoration and nature-based solutions, including the Nature for Climate and Green Recovery Challenge funds, and the Peatland Grant Scheme for restoring peatland, as its contribution to addressing the need for more action in protecting ecosystems.

The government states it is investing in nature restoration, including a Peatland Grant Scheme to restore approximately 35,000 hectares of peatland by 2025, through existing funds like the £640m Nature for Climate Fund.

The government states it is investing in nature restoration and nature-based solutions through funds like the £640m Nature for Climate Fund, which aims to treble tree planting rates by the end of Parliament and includes a Peatland Grant Scheme.

The government highlights its investment in nature restoration and nature-based solutions, including the Nature for Climate and Green Recovery Challenge funds, and the Peatland Grant Scheme for peatland restoration, but does not address specific recommendations on defining NbS, bringing forward the peat ban, or providing tax incentives.

The government has commissioned the Joint Nature Conservation Committee to develop a global environmental footprint indicator as part of the 25 Year Environment Plan's Outcome Indicators Framework, with the first phase published and further development underway to inform future policy.

The government has commissioned the Joint Nature Conservation Committee to develop a global environmental footprint indicator as part of the Outcome Indicators Framework. While this work is ongoing and will inform future thinking, the government has not yet committed to setting an environmental footprint target or launching a consultation on how to model the overseas environmental impact of UK consumption, as recommended.

The government states it is a proud defender of sexual and reproductive health and rights, highlighting past spending and commitments to use aid and diplomacy to empower women, and confirms it will continue to fund relevant programs despite difficult financial decisions.

The government acknowledges the positive impact of family planning and its commitment to sexual and reproductive health and rights, citing past spending and future global health funding. However, it does not set out the extent to which aid budget cuts will specifically affect family planning and reproductive healthcare, nor does it commit to protecting ODA for these areas at or above 2019 levels.

The government acknowledges GDP limitations and commits to further work with ONS, including providing additional funding, to improve the incorporation of nature into national accounts and natural capital estimates.

The government acknowledges GDP's limitations and details its existing work on Natural Capital Accounts and human capital estimates. It commits to providing further funding to the ONS to improve natural capital estimates and to integrate nature more fully into national accounts, thereby moving towards a broader consideration of inclusive wealth alongside GDP.

The government highlights its existing global leadership in natural capital approaches, referencing G7 agreements, UN guidance development (which it funded and contributed to), and ongoing work with the UN Statistical Division.

The government states the UK is already demonstrating global leadership by securing G7 agreements on natural capital accounting and embedding biodiversity in financial decision-making, and has actively contributed to the UN Statistical Commission's approval of ecosystem accounting guidance.

The government acknowledges the conclusion and commits to further action by working with the ONS and providing additional funding to improve the incorporation of nature into national accounts and natural capital estimates.

The government states that departments are already required to assess environmental impacts using the Green Book, which is continuously improved through revisions and new supplementary guidance on biodiversity valuation.

The government states that departments are already required to assess environmental impacts using the Green Book framework, which has been continuously improved, including revised guidance and new supplementary guidance on biodiversity valuation.

The government acknowledges the importance of integrating environmental considerations into the fiscal framework, pointing to existing Green Book mandates, ongoing reviews within HM Treasury, and future details in the Net Zero Strategy, while also supporting ONS/OBR work on natural capital and participating in international green budgeting initiatives.

The government states the Green Book already requires climate/environmental considerations and HM Treasury is reviewing how to better support environmental objectives, with more detail coming in the Net Zero Strategy. It does not commit to the specific Net Zero or nature tests for fiscal events or a new fiscal rule, but notes ongoing work with ONS/OBR on natural capital and participation in green budgeting initiatives.

The government acknowledges the importance of nature-related financial disclosures, reiterating its support for the TNFD framework and committing to carefully review its recommendations upon launch by the end of 2023. It also highlights its support for global sustainability disclosure standards.

The government commits to working with the TNFD and will carefully review its recommendations and potential policy/regulatory responses once the framework is ready by late 2023, deferring a commitment to legislate for mandatory disclosure of nature-related financial risks. The response also broadly refers to existing efforts on corporate environmental disclosures and a UK green taxonomy, but does not commit to the other specific recommendations.

The government acknowledges the benefits of learning about nature, stating the DfE is exploring a new Natural History GCSE without commitment and highlights efforts to ensure access to outdoor education centers.

The government is exploring a Natural History GCSE but has made no commitment. It recognises the benefits of outdoor learning, but does not explicitly commit to re-evaluating new opportunities, involving children in afforestation, mandatory ecology briefings for civil servants, or establishing a biodiversity education charter.