The Royal Society yesterday published ‘People and the Planet‘, a report which marks the end of nearly two years of work by a group including both the British Ecological Society’s current President, Professor Georgina Mace FRS and a past-President of the Society, Professor Alastair Fitter FRS. Speaking to the Radio 4 ‘Today’ programme yesterday morning, Professor Mace warned that we are eroding the earth’s vital support systems through over-consumption and unfettered economic growth and that as a consequence we are not doing a very poor job of ‘gardening the planet’.

The study examines the links between global population and consumption and the implications for our finite planet. The aim of the report is to provide policy guidance to decision makers and to inform interested members of the public. Yesterday’s publication led to very interesting coverage on the Guardian’s environment blog, with members of the working group, including the group’s chair, Nobel Prize-winning geneticist Sir John Sulston FRS, commentators and others offering their views on the content. Some of those commenting contended that the scientists were too negative in their assessment and that economic growth should not always be viewed as having negative consequences for the environment. One suggestion was that economic growth means that natural resources such as timber could be replaced with man-made materials for development purposes, so reducing environmental degradation. Another was that economic growth means technological and scientific advances, with humanity thereby innovating our way out of a crisis.

Aside from any external comment on the project’s conclusions, the overriding message of the study is that we must examine population growth and consumption patterns together and that it is the combination of these two factors that has an effect on the planet. The human population is set to reach 10 billion people, from the current seven billion, by the middle of this century. Over 1.3 billion people currently live in abject poverty, on less than $1.25 per day. It is clearly not desirable to see a world in which both the population increases and inequalities are exacerbated. Inequality must be addressed, people must be lifted out of poverty, but as their wealth and living standards increase, so too will the consumption of resources. Reducing consumption whilst also reducing inequalities and ensuring that those in poverty achieve an adequate living standard is a dilemma, and one which seems intractable.

Yet, speaking to the Today Programme yesterday morning, Sir John Sulston described tackling these pressures on the planet, what he characterised as ‘planning to flourish’, as ‘very simple’. Echoing the conclusions of the report he stated that we need to ‘dematerialise’ our economy, for example by investing in zero carbon forms of energy and by moving beyond GDP as a measure of economic growth to price in natural capital. In addition, tackling population growth will require countries to work together constructively, rather than the developed somehow lecturing the developing world in how to address birth rates. Contraception should be made available to those who want it in Africa, where two thirds of the anticipated growth in population is projected to occur, for example, but representatives of some African nations, such as Kenya, are requesting this, rather than this being imposed from outside.

Top priority is afforded to lifting people out of poverty, in the report’s conclusions. The international community is urged to address inequality through investment in education, family planning and economic development. The other recommendations are (to paraphrase):

- Most developed and developing economies must stabilise and reduce material consumption levels (de-coupling economic growth from environmental impacts and improving the efficiency of resource use, for example);
- Reproductive health and voluntary family planning programmes should be supported by political leadership and financial commitments;
- Population and the environment should not be considered separately. Demographic changes should be factored in to Rio +20 negotiations, for example;
- Governments should invest appropriately in urbanisation, for example supporting waste collection, which has the potential to reduce environmental impacts through allowing resource efficiencies;
- High quality primary and secondary education should be available for all young people;
- Governments should accelerate the development of a comprehensive wealth measure, including improving national natural asset accounting;
- Governments should collaborate to develop socio-economic systems and institutions not dependent on continued material consumption.

Natural and social scientists have an important role to play. The seventh recommendation calls for scientists to increase their research into the interactions between consumption, demographic changes and environmental impacts, providing policy-makers with the information they require in order to ensure that both the planet and the human population under pressure can continue not only to survive but also to thrive.

Voting in two resolutions last week, MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) called for the European Commission to introduce a Seventh Environmental Action Programme and for higher political priority to go to preserving and restoring damaged ecosystems.

The Seventh Environmental Action Programme (7th EAP) will be Europe’s next flagship environmental policy. The sixth EAP is due to expire in July this year. MEPs have called for the 7th EAP to mainstream climate change and other environmental objectives across all policy areas, whilst also reflecting the need for binding targets for greater energy efficiency. The EAP should also lead to an overall reduction in waste generation, along with ambitious prevention, re-use and recycling targets for waste.

In addition, MEPs have called for the 7th EAP to incorporate targets to ensure the sustainable use of land and to address emerging threats to human and animal health, such as nanomaterials, endocrine disruptors and the combined effects of chemicals in the environment. MEPs also urge Member States to implement fully and effectively existing rules on water. MEPs also used the resolution to encourage the European Commission to introduce sustainability criteria for biofuels and biomass.

MEPs sitting on the Environment Committee of the European Parliament voted on a second resolution to call for more ambitious targets to restore damaged and degraded ecosystems, whilst also highlighting the economic damage caused by biodiversity loss. The loss of biodiversity, they stated, ‘leads to devastating economic costs to society which until now have not been sufficiently integrated into economic and other policies’. Reforms to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Common Fisheries Policy, along with reforms to the Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF) – the EU budget from 2014-2020- are necessary to tackle this, they state.

For example, payments under the CAP should be underpinned by cross-compliance measures that contribute to the preservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. In addition, at least 1% of the total MFF should be devoted to environmental protection. The Common Fisheries Policy should guarantee an ecosystem approach to fisheries management.

The Environment Committee calls for the target to restore at least 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020, agreed at the UN’s 10th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Nagoya, in 2010, to be seen only as a ‘minimum’, with the EU going beyond this to tackle environmental degradation. In addition, the MEPs call for detailed EU and national level plans to be developed to phase out all environmentally harmful subsidies by 2020.

The Chancellor George Osborne yesterday announced the UK’s new budget for 2012. With the Government’s election pledge to be ‘the greenest government ever’, environmental groups were anxious to see whether the proposed financial measures for the coming year would reflect this rhetoric.

In the statement, the Chancellor detailed measures for energy, transport and planning, outlining support for gas as the UK’s primary source of power in the coming years and a review of the carbon reduction commitments placed on business. Renewable energy technologies were identified as ‘a crucial part’ of Britain’s energy mix but Mr Osborne cautioned that he would ‘always be alert to the costs we’re asking families and business to bear’ and no new funds for green energy were allocated. In aviation, the budget statement delivered on increasing air passenger duty (APD) – an environmental tax on flights – but the Chancellor’s statement that ‘we must confront the lack of airport capacity in south-east England’ suggests a possible change in the Government’s stance on airport expansion. No details were revealed of the content of the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), due to be published next Tuesday 27th March, except that it will feature a ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ and ‘new growth-friendly planning laws’ designed to boost Britain’s competiveness and economic prosperity.

Press releases published in response to the announcement express environmental groups’ concerns that the new budget demonstrates a perpetuation of the view that measures for environmental protection present a barrier to economic growth and prosperity, rather than the promised commitment to developing a green economy.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) called Osborne’s statement ‘misguided’, saying that the budget would ‘put sustainable economic growth at risk’. Wildlife and Countryside Link seconded this view, saying that the budget statement ‘suggest(s) that the government will focus on economic growth at the cost of genuinely sustainable development’. The RPSB too called for an economic plan for growth which ‘puts the environment at the heart of decision making’, saying that it is crucial to recognise that Chancellor Osborne’s assertion that ‘environmentally sustainable has to be fiscally sustainable’ works both ways, something they point out was recognised in the opening paragraph of the Government’s Natural Environment White Paper published last year, which stated that ‘a healthy, properly functioning natural environment is the foundation of sustained economic growth’.

Planning
Groups raised concerns over apparent developments in relation to the new National Planning Policy Framework. The National Trust say they are ‘not much wiser on the content’ of the new NPPF and will only know when the Framework is published next week whether issues they raised in their consultation responses have been included. A point of contention is the Chancellor’s stated ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ which CPRE, for example, fears could lead to large areas of countryside being ‘placed at the mercy of developers’. The National Trust and the WWF both stressed a pressing need for a clear definition of sustainable development before it is pursued, to ensure it is not just a rebranding of traditional economic growth at the expense of the environment. Further concerns have been voiced over indications that the Framework may not contain provisions to allow Local Authorities and communities the time and resources to adjust their existing local plans to meet requirements of the new framework, which the CPRE says ‘could leave more than one third of areas that don’t currently have a plan exposed [to development]’. However, the National Trust say there may be ‘tentatively good news’ on this area, provided that the phrase “appropriate implementation arrangements for local authorities in local plans” , included in the full budget document yesterday, will address this.

Energy
Environmental groups also responded to the Chancellor’s emphasis on pursuing gas as the UK’s primary source of electricity generation and his reticent support of renewable energy. The RSPB said that new tax breaks for oil and gas exploration off the Shetland Islands is ‘a cause for concern for both the climate and the wildlife in that region’ and stated that if oil and gas remain a central part of the UK’s energy strategy, it will only be acceptable ‘if matched with robust environmental safeguards’.

Transport
The WWF applauded the Government’s commitment to raising air passenger duty (APD) by 8% this year, rising to 50% by 2016. However, reservations were expressed in relation to what is feared to be an apparent u-turn in the government’s stance on airport expansion, with CPRE and others urging the Government to maintain its opposition to the creation of further runways at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, suggesting instead the use of ‘smart-hubbing’ – through better allocation of runway slots – to provide additional passenger capacity without the need for further development.

Wildlife regulations
The outcome of the government’s ‘Red Tape Challenge’, in which environmental regulations are to be simplified in an effort to save businesses £1billion, was announced today and can be viewed at Defra’s website.

Overall, there is notable concern amongst environmental groups that the new budget will not deliver a truly green economy; the stance of most organisations seem to echo a statement by the RSPB who ‘agree that development is necessary if the UK is to remain competitive…[and] to enable all of us to prosper’ but stress that this must be ‘compatible with the green economy we have been promised…by this Government’ and ‘not at the cost of our environment’.

The Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP) is recruiting for a permanent, full-time Biodiversity Policy Analyst, to be based in the Institute’s office in Brussels. The post-holder will work as part of a small team to inform the development of biodiversity policy and related matters by the European Commission, including the development of an ecosystem approach to policy-making.

Key tasks will include:

- Drafting reports led by yourself or others, which typically will focus on policy issues, at a European or national level;- Undertaking literature reviews, the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, interviews, workshops and case studies;
-Assisting with, and in some cases leading the preparation of tenders and funding proposals;
-Playing a role in project development, management and administration;
-Providing regular briefing notes on developments in EU biodiversity policy and their implications;
-Working with colleagues to develop robust policy positions on behalf of the Institute;
-Promoting policy messages to wider audiences, beyond immediate client groups or sponsors, inter alia through contributing to the Institute’s communication, outreach and training activities. This will involve presentations to conferences and workshops;

For more about the role and for details of how to apply (closing date Monday 5th March) see the IEEP website.

The Welsh government is seeking opinions on two major new proposals for the future of Wales’ environmental policy.

Following the announcement of Welsh Environment Minister John Griffiths in November last year proposing the development of a single body to replace the Countryside Council for Wales, the Environment Agency Wales, and the Forestry Commission for Wales, a consultation was launched earlier this month. The intention in creating a single body is to ensure more effective and sustainable management of Wales’ natural resources whilst minimising costs. The consultation will focus on issues including the legal change needed to establish a new body and definition of its overall purpose. Interested parties have the opportunity to submit their reactions to the proposal until May 2nd.

Simultaneously, a consultation is underway into a recently published Green Paper entitled ‘Sustaining a Living Wales’. The paper is a follow up to the government’s strategy ‘A Living Wales’ developed in 2010 and proposes a change in the governance and delivery of environmental management and regulation to an ecosystem-based approach. The consultation, launched at the end of January this year, is designed to assess the degree of support for such a radical change and whether the tools the government proposes are seen to be the right ones.

Do you know someone who’s campaigned tirelessly to protect a patch of green space?

Have you got a favourite teacher who’s inspired you to do something for nature?

Is there a famous person you admire who’s challenging the system?

If so, they could be a candidate for an Octavia Hill award, organised by the National Trust in partnership with Countryfile Magazine. The deadline for nominations is 31 January 2012.

As part of the Government’s plan to reduce the regulatory burden to business, the so-called ‘Red Tape Challenge‘, the spotlight this month falls on the environment. Until the end of September comments are invited on all current environmental regulations (although comments have been welcome since the process began in April). Following the close of the spotlight period, Secretary of State Caroline Spelman and her ministerial team at Defra have three months to make a decision on which regulations should be kept and which scrapped. The presumption is that ‘burdensome’ regulations will go unless the Department can make a good case for why they should be retained.

A Defra press release, released earlier this month, makes it clear that businesses are the focus for the RTC exercise – but anyone can have their say on the RTC website and the BES encourages our members to do so.

Two hundred and eighty seven environmental regulations are up for consultation, including on issues such as waste, emissions and wildlife protection. The RTC “asks whether existing regulations are providing the environmental protection that is intended and therefore should be retained, or if they are unnecessarily burdensome or redundant and should be scrapped.” Suggestions are also welcome on how regulations should be simplified to make them easier to follow and more effective.

The press release suggests that “environmental policies often aim to encourage people to act in certain ways – and overly complex, burdensome regulation may not be the best way to do this.” The overall driver seems however to be one of saving money: “saving businesses millions in unnecessary costs.”

The BES is concerned by the RTC and was a signatory to a letter sent by Wildlife and Countryside Link to Vince Cable, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills in June, questioning the validity of the consultation process underpinning the RTC and suggesting that the RTC is insufficient as the sole public consultation tool which may result in regulation being scrapped. The letter also questioned the emphasis on ‘burden’, challenging the importance given to costs in scrutinising regulation, and not taking into account both costs and benefits.

It is also hard to see how much environmental regulation can be disposed of, given that much of it has been developed in response to European Directives and therefore in removing this regulation the UK would be likely to face legal challenge.

Partly as a result of the letter, a number of organisations (RSPB, Link, National Trust, Wildlife Trusts and others) have been invited to sit on a ‘Sounding Board’, to discuss the RTC with Defra and, the BES believes, to consider the comments received through the public consultation.

The BES encourages all members of the Society, all readers of the blog and Twitter feed to access the RTC and to emphasise the importance of regulation to achieve environmental protection. As Link emphasised in its letter “environmental legislation is fundamental to a proportionate and necessary approach to environmental protection“, whilst “most of our current regulations and legal protections have been hard-won and subject to the requisite democratic processes, including public debate, multiple consultation processes, and close parliamentary scrutiny“.

Have your say on environmental regulations through the RTC website.

Yesterday the BES policy team attended the IEEM summer conference on biodiversity and the Big Society. The conference was centred around four main themes;
- What will localism mean for the environment and biodiversity?
- How will measures to protect the environment be funded?
- How can we reconnect people with the environment and encourage volunteering?
- What will our landscape look like in the future?

Richard Benyon, Minister for Natural Environment and Fisheries, opened the conference speaking about the recent Natural Environment White Paper, the Government’s vision for the future of our landscapes, and how localism fits in with this vision. Whilst localism may be able to help deliver some of the visions of the recent White Paper it is clear that many questions remain, and that there are funding and communication barriers which need to be overcome. These barriers were discussed in detail by Mike Oxford and Adam Wallace who identified the key challenges facing ecologists.

Past experience has shown that financial support and good infrastructure is vital for the Big Society approach to work. However government departments, local authorities and communities are increasingly being asked to do more with less, and dramatic cuts to the budgets of environmental projects in government have instigated debate around how environmental projects might be funded now, and in the future.

Nick Perks from the Environmental Funders Network reviewed the relative role of government funding and philanthropy in sponsoring environmental projects, suggesting that it is unrealistic to assume philanthropic funding can fill the gaps left by the cuts, as government funding is so important for environmental projects. Polluter pays schemes are one suggestion for attracting more money towards environmental projects, however Nick indicated that this is likely to be unpopular with business and developers and therefore politically unfeasible.

In local authorities cuts to the budget of biodiversity teams have been more severe than in other areas. Ensuring that Ecology is better recognised as a profession was the main theme of Penny Anderson’s (IEEM President) talk, in order to protect the role of professional ecologists within local authorities and to ensure the importance of preserving the natural environment is recognised.

Reconnecting local people with nature is one of the key messages of the recent Natural Environment White Paper, and one area in which there already appears to be a great deal of success. Matt Davies from Greenspace Information for Greater London gave an interesting talk about engaging local people in biodiversity data recording through Bioblitz initiatives, an intensive session of biodiversity data recording over a 24 hour period designed to reconnect people with nature and encourage dialogue between local people and experts. The Alexandra Palace Bioblitz attracted over 8000 volunteers and was featured on the BBC programme Springwatch demonstrating the level of public enthusiasm that exists.

Catherine Chatters from Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust also reported a great deal of success in engaging volunteers from a variety of backgrounds including local schools and businesses in the New Forest non native plants project. Volunteers were able to make a significant contribution to the health of their local rivers and marshes through coordinated action to efficiently remove and prevent the spread of a range of invasive species including Giant Hogweed and Himalayan Balsam. However she stressed the importance of adequate funding for the success of the project, emphasising that professional leadership is vital for supporting and enthusing volunteers in their work and to gain cooperation from local landowners and retailers which stock the invasive plants.

Local Authorities are also taking greater interests in the needs of local people and the Beam Parklands case study presented by Paul Johnson, Director of Environmental Consulting at Arup, showed that through effective consultation with local communities a landscape can be created that delivers multiple benefits including biodiversity conservation and enhancement, educational opportunities for young people, and recreational space. Local people were involved in every stage of the project which transformed neglected wetlands into a valuable community space, teeming with wildlife.

The final talk of the day by the Landscape Architect Merrick Denton-Thompson OBE presented a vision of the future land use, extrapolating current trends to 2050, and examining challenges and opportunities for the environment. In the controversial talk, which initiated debate in the audience Merrick suggested that food shortages will play the key role in shaping landscapes of the future, and as the wealth of other countries increases the UK will have to become self sufficient. He also indicated that all landscapes will have to deliver multiple benefits (food production, carbon sequestration, energy, biodiversity conservation), and there would be strict penalties for non-compliance.

Overall the conference was an interesting and useful experience, with lively debate over localism, the funding challenge and communication.

‘Landscapes of the Future’ the new Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology POSTnote written by the current BES POST fellow Eleanor Kean was launched today. ‘Landscapes of the Future’ focuses on the benefits that we derive from our landscapes, and the increasing pressures facing continued delivery of these benefits.

It has been widely established, following the release of the National Ecosystem Assessment, that we gain a variety of benefits and services from the environment including food, clean water, recreation and protection from natural disaster. However these benefits are threatened by the way in which we use land, often exploiting landscapes for a single purpose, without considering the wider detrimental effects.

Demographic change is increasing the pressure we place on land to provide the ecosystem services on which we rely. This coupled with environmental and climate change, societal attitudes and the policy environment will change the way in which we use land over the coming years. It is important to manage the challenges facing the natural environment through existing policies, and also through innovation and novel techniques.

Eleanor identifies opportunities for future landscape planning to adapt to these pressures, and provide multifunctional landscapes that ease competition between different land uses. Many opportunities have arisen as a result of proposed reforms of the planning system, abolition of regional spatial strategies, and introduction of a new National Planning Policy Framework. The establishment of Ecological Restoration Zones as recommended by the Lawton review ‘Making Space for Nature’ are also likely to play a key part in securing ecosystem services for future generations.

Localism may be expected to affect the way landscapes are managed, and the POSTnote emphasises the importance of allowing communities to access good information about the environment, facilitating local people to make good decisions. Green Infrastructure also has great potential to deliver environmental, social and economic benefits. An integrated approach to land use planning is another key message of the POSTnote which recommends that Government departments work together to achieve desirable environmental, social and economic outcomes.

Vince Cable yesterday announced more detailed plans for the green investment bank, including some indication of the type of projects that will be financed. The bank will be the first of its kind in the world, specifically designed to fund the new low carbon green economy. The announcement, and publication of a progress report by the department of business innovation and skills, follows a speech given by Nick Clegg at an event hosted by Climate Change Capital.

The deputy Prime Minister emphasised the need to consider the reasons for investing, including preserving the environment on which we rely for the next generation. He also mentioned the economic incentive to make the UK the world leaders in producing green technology, suggesting that many companies could set up manufacturing plants in the UK.

In an oral statement to the House of Commons Vince Cable focussed on the legally binding commitment made by the government to reduce carbon emissions 50% by 2050, and the need to revolutionise our energy and transport sectors, and invest in green infrastructure to achieve this target. He also noted the requirement for stable long term green policies to encourage investment in green infrastructure, which will flow through the green investment bank. £3 billion will initially be invested in the bank.

The progress report published by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills picks out the Water Framework Directive and Air Quality Standards Regulations as other key legislation to be supported by the green investment bank. Money will be invested in waste water management and improving flood defences replacing loss of funding due to Defra budget cuts. Money will also be invested in improving air quality and reducing emissions from vehicles.

Both Nick Clegg and Vince Cable noted the economic benefits of investment in green infrastructure in terms of saving energy and money, however there was no mention of investment to protect ecosystem services, and biodiversity, or the possible cost of inaction in these areas. Investment in better protection of ecosystem services will be vital for protecting the environment for the next generation.