Public Document Pack Melksham Town Council
Town Hall, Melksham, Wiltshire, SN12 6ES Tel: (01225) 704187
Town Clerk and RFO Linda Roberts BA(Hons) PGCAP, FHEA, FLSCC
To: Councillor J Hubbard (Chair) Councillor V Fiorelli (Vice-Chair) Councillor T Watts Councillor K Iles Councillor M Pain Councillor S Brown Councillor G Mitcham Councillor P Aves Councillor M Sankey
29 July 2019
Dear Councillors
In accordance with the Local Government Act (LGA) 1972, Sch 12, paras 10 (2)(b) you are invited to attend the Asset Management Meeting of the Melksham Town Council. The meeting will be held at the Town Hall on Monday 5th August 2019 commencing at 7.00 pm. A period of public participation will take place in accordance with Standing Order 3(F) prior to the formal opening of the meeting. The Press and Public are welcome to attend this meeting.
Yours sincerely
Mrs L A Roberts BA(Hons), PGCAP, FHEA, FSLCC Town Clerk and RFO
Email: [email protected] Web: www.melkshamtown.co.uk Facebook: facebook.com/melksham.town
Asset Management Melksham Town Council
Monday 5 August 2019
Public Participation – To receive questions from members of the public.
In the exercise of Council functions. Members are reminded that the Council has a general duty to consider Crime & Disorder, Health & Safety, Human Rights and the need to conserve biodiversity. The Council also has a duty to tackle discrimination, provide equality of opportunity for all and foster good relations in the course of developing policies and delivery services under the public sector Equality Duty and Equality 2010.
AGENDA
1. APOLOGIES
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST To receive any Declarations of Interest in respect of items on this agenda as required by the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council.
Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest or other registrable interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. Members may however, also decide, in the interests of clarity and transparency, to declare at this point in the meeting, any such disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared on the Register, as well as any other registrable or other interests.
3. MINUTES (Pages 1 - 4) To approve the Minutes of the Asset Management Committee Meeting held on 17 June 2019.
4. KING GEORGE V PARK (Pages 5 - 10) To note update/progress report from the Community Development Officer on the KGV Masterplan Project, including a breakdown of finances associated with the splashpad installation.
5. OFFICE SPACE Given the new staffing structure, Members are asked to approve the use of the Committee Room for additional office space. Attached is information on the financial implications with regard to loss of room hire income. Members to note that quotes are
Email: [email protected] Web: www.melkshamtown.co.uk Facebook: facebook.com/melksham.town
being sourced to convert the Committee Room into office space.
6. GRASS CUTTING OF VERGE EAST OF MELKSHAM (Pages 11 - 16) Following communication from a local resident regarding verges being allowed to grow to encourage wildlife, to consider Wiltshire Council’s response on local priorities for grass cutting, balanced with areas to be left fallow for wildlife.
7. WILDFLOWER PLANTING In light of Wiltshire Council seeking nominations for sites for wildlflower planting. Members are asked to consider potential wildflower planting areas within the town.
8. GREEN SPACES/GREEN SPACE POLICY (Pages 17 - 262) To approve and adopt a Green Spaces/Green Space Policy. (Report to follow).
9. PLAY AREAS UPDATE
9.1 To advise Members of the costs associated with replacing the toddler swings: King George V Park x 2 £549.00 Dunch Lane x 1 £274.75
9.2 Dorset Crescent Swings need complete replacement. Quotes are around £5,500.
An update from the Town Clerk following the Asset Management meeting on 25 March 2019 where it was agreed to seek permission from Wiltshire Council to extend the area on lease at Primrose Drive, to link the individual play equipment with the fenced play area. This would allow for more cohesive play areas to be created at Primrose Drive and Dorset Crescent due to their proximity.
10. SHURNHOLD FIELDS (Pages 263 - 270) To note Minutes of Shurnhold Fields Working Group Meetings held on 17 April and 27 June 2019.
11. FINANCIAL REPORTS
11.1 Income & Expenditure Report - Assembly Hall (Pages 271 - 272) To note the Income & Expenditure Report as at 31 July 2019 for the Assembly Hall.
Email: [email protected] Web: www.melkshamtown.co.uk Facebook: facebook.com/melksham.town
11.2 Asset Management Budget (Pages 273 - 276) To note Income & Expenditure budget as at 31 July 2017 with regard to Asset Management cost centres 201-220.
Email: [email protected] Web: www.melkshamtown.co.uk Facebook: facebook.com/melksham.town
Agenda Item 3
MELKSHAM TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF THE ASSET MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 17 JUNE 2019 IN THE TOWN HALL AT 7.45PM
Present: Councillor J Hubbard, Town Mayor (Chair) Councillor S Brown Councillor K Iles Councillor G Mitcham Councillor M Pain Councillor M Sankey Councillor T Watts Councillor A Westbrook
Officer: Mrs L A Roberts, Town Clerk Mrs L A McRandle – Acting Deputy Town Clerk
One member of the press was present.
Public Participation
No member of public wished to speak.
2019/
186. APOLOGIES
Apologies were received from Councillor Aves substituted by Councillor Westbrook and Councillor Fiorelli.
187. DECLRATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
188. MINUTES
The minutes of the Asset Management Committee Meeting held on Monday, 1 April 2019, having previously been circulated were signed as a correct record.
189. ADOPTION OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE COMMITTEE
The Terms of Reference having been adopted by the Town Council at the Extra- Ordinary Town Council meeting on 23 April 2019 were circulated with the agenda pack for Members approval following the amendments approved at the Extra Ordinary Full Council meeting.
Page 1 of 4 Page 1
It was proposed by Councillor Hubbard, seconded by Councillor Westbrook, and
RESOLVED to adopt the Terms of Reference of the Asset Management Committee.
190. ASSET TRANSFER
The timetable for Wiltshire Council’s Asset Transfer programme had been circulated with the agenda pack for Members information.
It was noted Melksham’s Asset Transfer programme was due to start in January 2020. Members were informed this would mean discussions with Wiltshire Council about what assets the Town Council were prepared to take on. The Town Clerk suggested it would be sensible to setup a Task & Finish Group to deal with it.
191. GRASS CUTTING
191.1 To consider what options can be taken given the lack of grass cutting undertaken by Wiltshire Council’s contractors within the town
The Deputy Town Clerk had produced a report which was circulated with the agenda pack for Members information.
Concern had been raised previously by some Members at the lack of grass cutting undertaken by Idverde, particularly in King George V Park. Upon investigation into this, it was
It was proposed by Councillor Westbrook, seconded by Councillor Sankey and
UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the Town Clerk discuss with Wiltshire Council the grass cutting contract for King George V Park particulary and the possibility of the Town Council taking over responsibility for grass cutting in the park.
If Wiltshire Council are not willing to negotiate on the once a month cut, that the Clerk investigate alternative arrangements within the grass cutting budget.
191.2 Grass Cutting Contract for the following areas: Methuen Play Area and Foresters Park Play Area
Within the report produced by the Deputy Town Clerk, it was asked that Members consider the way forward in relation to prospective contracts and associated tender exercises regarding grass cutting within the town.
Page 2 of 4 Page 2 It was noted that contracts were not issued in 2017 for a 3 year contract, as the scope of the grass cutting arrangements were due to change within this period, therefore an extension and amendments were made to the contract in place at the time to cut Methuen Play Area and Foresters Park Play Area only.
It was proposed by Councillor Hubbard, seconded by Councillor Westbrook, and
RESOLVED that the Town Clerk put together a business case for grass cutting provision going forward and to keep the current contractor arrangement in place in the meantime.
To discuss with the caretaking team whether there is capacity to take on these areas in-house and to look at any equipment and storage requirements.
192. FLORAL CONTRACT
Members were informed a contract had been issued by the Town Council in 2016 for a three year contract from 2017-2019 to provide Summer and Winter Planting.
Members were asked if they wished to look at the current floral planting/contract arrangements.
It was proposed by Councillor Hubbard, seconded by Councillor Iles, and
RESOLVED to set-up a Task and Finish Group, liaising with the Melksham in Bloom and Caretaking Team to investigate floral planting provision within the Town Centre and bring back recommendations to a future meeting prior to going out to tender.
193. BATH ROAD TOILETS
At a previous Asset Meeting on 1 April 2019 it was resolved to allocate £30,000 to re- open one toilet cubicle at Bath Road toilets. However, it was noted that the report submitted at that meeting omitted evidence that the existing equipment was unfit for re-use, therefore the Clerk was asked to investigate this and confirm that the existing equipment could not be used.
A report of the Community Engagement Officer had been circulated with the agenda papers for Members information which stated a second inspection of the toilets had taken place which confirmed the lack of replacement parts for the current Interpublic Toilets, as well as parts being missing, meaning the integrated units needed replacing. It had also been noted that if all 3 cubicles were to open repairs were needed to the roof. In the report it also stated additional costs associated with reinstating the electrics and water were still outstanding.
Page 3 of 4 Page 3
Advice was sought from the Community Engagement Officer on the figures quoted.
The Community Engagement Officer clarified the cost of opening one block without undertaking the repair of the roof against undertaking the repair work and opening three cubicles.
It was proposed by Councillor Hubbard, seconded by Councillor Sankey, and
UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED to seek further advice on options, prior to going out to tender for other quotes.
To delegate authority to the Clerk to spend up to £40,000 to reinstate the whole toilet block and reinstate the CCTV so it is integrate with the town centre system and repairs to the roof.
194. SPEED INDICATOR DEVICE
A report by the Deputy Town Clerk was circulated with the agenda pack for Members information.
It was proposed by Councillor Hubbard, seconded by Councillor Sankey and
UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED: to purchase a new Speed Indicator Device, preferably solar and seek match funding from the Area Board.
To formalise the current agreement with Melksham Without Parish Council and Atworth Parish Council with regard to charges levied for the services of the Town Council caretaking team for erecting the devices in their parishes.
Signed:………………………………………………………… Date:………………………………………… Councillor Jon Hubbard, Town Mayor (Chair) Asset Management Committee
Page 4 of 4 Page 4 Agenda Item 4
Asset Management 30th July 2019
KGV Update
Report of the Community Development Officer
1. Purpose of the report
To highlight to council the current status of the KGV Development programme and project spend.
2. Background
Council have agreed to approve the Masterplan for the King George V Playing Fields and allocated a sum to the whole project. Of this amount a budget of £459,500 has been allocated to officers to deliver the phase 1 works consisting of the Splashpad, improvements to the front of the pavilion, a new pathway with services for events & lighting, the sensory garden and outdoor gym equipment.
3. Current Situation
3.1 Splashpad:
The Splashpad is in the final testing stages and the outdoor team have received training to run the facility and plant room for this year.
There have been a number of issues highlighted at the latter stages including the amount of man hours we are spending on site to maintain and run the facilities. During the investigations into the recirculating system it was reported that the running of the splashpad would take an estimated 3hrs a day, we are finding this has increased. There has also been a fault with the dosing machine which has also led to more hours on site by our grounds team supporting the contractors to get this right.
The works to the splashpad are now completed, with a play area inspection having taken place, and snagging works being undertaken. The only delay on handover currently is correcting the fault with the dosing machine and getting the chemical levels correct. This was not an issue that could have been foreseen.
3.1.1 Staffing
Currently, the staffing requirement at the Splashpad is to have 2 grounds team present for 2hrs prior to opening, and for 2hrs at closing. In addition, throughout the day we have staff completing testing, this is done every 2 hours on site. Over the trial weekend, 2 ground staff were present all weekend, which enabled them to ensure that people were using the facility properly. They were highlighting people not using the correct nappies and signposting them to the supply we had available at cost. In addition, they were able to respond quickly to events on site, which reduced shut down times and increased public safety.
Page 5 This should be operated for this year on the basis of 1 member of staff present for the full opening hours to monitor usage and complete 2hourly water tests. An additional member of staff will be required at opening and closing (4hrs per day). Staffing levels should be reviewed at the end of the season ready for next year.
All additional hours are being paid in line with ‘Green Book’ which is the National Joint Council for Local Government Services National Agreement on Pay and Conditions of Service to which we are subscribed.
Costs for overtime equate to: Opening/ Closing 2x Ground team x 8hrs per day x 7 days per week = £4,811.52 (excl. Employers Contributions) Saturday Cover x1 person x 7hrs x 6 weeks = £601.44 (excl. Employers’ Contributions) Sunday Cover x 1-person x 7 hrs x 6 weeks = £802.20 (excl. Employers Contributions) Total excl. employers’ contributions = £6,215.16 Total Including Employers contributions @20% = £7,458.19
The overtime costs of £7,500 has been allocated in the current financial update.
3.1.2 Operational Hours and Season
Operational hours for the trial opening were 10:30am until 5:30pm in line with the café opening times. Current overtime calculations are also worked out on this basis. Council are asked to confirm they wish to continue with these hours or amend them.
A decision is needed from council on the date for closing the Splashpad for the current season. Overtime rates have been calculated based on a closure of Sunday 8th September, which is the weekend after the schools have returned.
Dependant on weather, council may wish to consider opening the splashpad for longer and seeking permission to run a pop-up café on weekends, with the pavilion opened all week to allow for toilet & baby change facilities.
Works to the new pathway are proposed to take place during September, to be completed before the 800th Celebrations at the end of the month. As part of the consideration to extending the season council may wish to consider the impact these works may have on access to the area.
3.2 Front of Pavilion:
Works to the front of the pavilion will be completed by the 31st July, and snagging has taken place on site on 30/07/19.
The new improved access will be better for disabled and pushchair access.
Planting to the new bed will be completed by Richard over the next couple of days. Plants are being sourced locally and the budget for this has been estimated at under £2,000. This has been allocated in the current financial update.
Page 6 3.3 Pathway:
The pathway for the pavilion areas and the splashpad has been completed along with suitable drainage for the area.
Our consultants are completing the tender for the remaining pathway and we are proposing the scheduled build time for this will be the first 3 weeks of September.
The initial costs for the pathway were exceeding the budget allocated at £120K and it is expected that by splitting the works out it will now come in under budget.
3.4 Services:
These have hit multiple issues and have been delayed. Generators were bought in for the PITP as the pavilion services are now not available, and the new services are not yet installed.
The revised route for services has meant a significant cost saving but has also delayed the being able to bring contractors together to install. Every urgency is now being taken to get the services installed prior to the Food & River Festival.
3.5 Sensory Garden:
The Sensory Garden consultation has been done. Quotes are started to be gathered for the hard landscaping and the consultation responses collated. Once the technical detail of the plan is available, we will then be able to confirm if a tender process is needed.
Projected timescales are that the hard landscaping can begin as soon as the main path is finalised (Late Sept/early Oct). It may then be ideal to arrange community planting days for late October and then again in spring.
3.6 Gym Equipment:
The outdoor gym equipment has been ordered, and we were aiming for installation to be underway by now. This has been chased and it has been advised that the items are nearly ready to be dispatched and installed. An install team is ready to go when the items are available.
Page 7 3.7 Financials
A separate spreadsheet has been attached to confirm the full breakdown of expenses for all items in Phase 1 works. The summary is as follows:
Cost Heading Budget Current Spend Over/Under Splashpad £236,000 272,565 £36,565 Pathway & trim Trail £120,000 £44,768.20 £75,232 Hardstanding £48,500 £39,252.55 £9,247 Services £30,000 £8,855.85 £21,144 Sensory Garden £15,000 £1,575 £13,425 Street Furniture £10,000 £7,471.33 £2,529 TOTALS £459,500 £374,487.93 £85,012 Remaining
4. Recommendations
To council to decide if they wish to extend the opening period beyond the 8th September 2019, dependant on weather and if they wish to run a tuck shop for any extension.
Council to decide if they wish to maintain the opening hours at 10:30am - 5:30pm for the Splashpad or if they wish to alter these.
Page 8 Budget Heading Budget Allocated Running Total Budget Area Overspend or Underspend
Splashpad 236,000 272,565 -36,565 Pathway & Trim Trail 120,000 44,768.20 75,232
Hardstanding 48,500 39,252.55 9,247 Services 30,000 8,855.85 21,144
Sensory Garden 15,000 1,575 13,425
Street Furniture 10,000 7,471.33 2,529 0 Total 459,500 374487.93 85,012
Page 9 Comments
Additional costs incurred for moving splashpad and additional drainage requirements. Includes sundry items and staff overtime for first year season Approximately £60K worth of works outstanding for pathways.
Awaiting final costings for plants, but these works are now completed. Works still outstanding, so this is not a final spend figure Figure only represent the intial designs. Quotes now coming in for the hard landscaping.
All provided. Not yet put on bases, so costs for this will be incurred. No decision as yet to the base material and final locations.
Page 10 Agenda Item 6
Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Agenda Item 8
Draft - Green Space Policy
A successful green space strategy should:1
• Support national, regional and local policy objectives; • Contribute to the wider objectives of the council including improvements to the economy, housing, education, health, culture, planning, transport, regeneration, biodiversity, the environment and the public realm; • Be based on a clear assessment of the local community’s current and future needs and opportunities, and of design, management and maintenance processes; • Support preparation of the local development framework by recording the location and characteristics of existing parks and green space, remedying any deficiencies and making strategic links between networks of spaces; • Establish an action plan that sets out design, management and maintenance principles, and an implementation programme that includes monitoring and review procedures; • Identify investment priorities to ensure that capital and revenue funds are allocated to meet performance standards; • Provide the basis for forming partnerships during the preparation of the strategy and as part of the long-term management and maintenance of the parks and green spaces, recognising that there can be no ‘one size fits all’ policy.
A comprehensive green space strategy should therefore include, as appropriate, the following categories of green spaces:
• Parks and public gardens • Natural and semi-natural spaces (including • Wastelands and derelict open land) • Green corridors • Outdoor sports facilities • Amenity green spaces • Provision for children and young people • Allotments, community gardens and city farms • Cemeteries, churchyards and other burial grounds • Accessible countryside in urban fringe areas.
The following is a checklist of items that should be included in a green space strategy. It should not be seen as prescriptive or entirely exhaustive, although it does give an overview of the key elements.
1. Strategic context
• overview of relevant national, regional and local policies and initiatives • spatial planning context • local character/area profile • review of corporate strategies and objectives • relationship of green space strategy to other strategies and initiatives.
1 https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118142343/http://www.cabe.org.uk/files/green-space- strategies.pdf
Page 17
2. Supply Analysis
• identification of green spaces and their functions • definition of existing provision based on appropriate green space typology audit and assessment of existing provision, both quantitative and qualitative • playing field audit and other audits as required, e.g. play spaces • assessment of existing capital and revenue funding of green space.
3. Demand Analysis
• socio-economic and demographic structure of area • assessment of survey information to identify needs and aspirations of community, views on existing provision and current barriers to use • assessment of mechanisms for community involvement • assessment of user numbers, using tools such as the ILAM Model Customer Survey Questionnaires or Managers of Public Parks.
4. Analysis of issues, opportunities and priorities
• analysis of supply and demand (quantitative, qualitative and accessibility) • identification of catchment areas and deficiencies • establishment of local standards for quality and quantity • assessment of value • prioritisation of issues and areas for improvement • identifying human resources and skills.
5. Strategy aims, objectives and policies o vision statement
• key aims, objectives and policies • green space framework plan.
6. Action plan
• actions, timescales and delivery agents • identification of existing and potential funding • performance indicators • monitoring and review arrangements.
The Council will:
• No longer use pesticides • Increase the use of green recycled waste as mulch, reducing the need for the use of herbicide on shrub beds and hedge lines. • Reduce the need for chemical application by using horticultural techniques and actions in the first instance, reducing the need of chemical application.
The Council will only use UK government approved pesticides and comply with the Plant Protection Products (Sustainable Use) Regulations 2012 governing the use of pesticides.
• In the case of non-professional products - following instructions on storage and disposal of the product in accordance with instructions on the product label.
Page 18
• In the case of professional products - identifying and mitigating any risks; and following good filling, storage and disposal practice. • Limited stock will be held on any pesticide product to ensure that it is used by the expiry date. • Any pesticide product found to be identified as being withdrawn from use will be used prior to other products serving the same purpose that are authorised for use, up to being withdrawn from use. • Should a product become withdrawn from use, any remaining product will be disposed of via an authorised hazardous waste carrier.
Records of pesticide applications will be kept for a minimum of 3 years and will detail: date, location, area covered, operator and weather conditions.
The Council will keep aware of the environmental regulations that apply to its business and ensure that its legal obligations are met. The Council will operate suitable procedures and systems to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill and look at ways to limit its environmental impact.
Management and maintenance of Outdoor Amenities
• Use recycled materials where appropriate and use companies such as Wiltshire Wood Recycling • Use sustainable energy sources (such as solar lighting at Springfield Youth Shelter) • Assess chemicals used (e.g. cleaning/gardening) and ensure their appropriate safe disposal • Minimise use of harmful pesticides • Compost and shred garden waste, and use controlled burning only when necessary • Mulch horticultural waste where possible • Plant more trees and use indigenous species as much as possible • Minimise use of peat-based composts • Create, enhance and protect wildlife habitats • Review ground maintenance regimes to improve biodiversity • Use of a recycling bin at the Town Council premises, where appropriate for cardboard, plastic and paper
The Town Council’s outdoor services team have been moving away from using chemicals, replacing their use with cultural and manual methods. Pesticides are no longer used in playgrounds, open spaces, allotments, the closed and open churchyard or the cemetery. The council no longer uses chemicals to control plant diseases.
Further Information can be found at: https://www.rocketlawyer.co.uk/documents-and-forms/environmental- policy.rlm?gclid=Cj0KCQjw6IfoBRCiARIsAF6q06s8XWslgC1W8oO098eHt_0uHiQG2x8BbG_BqkcVW3s PWeSj8XzmDmQaAnEkEALw_wcB https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/25-year-environment-plan file:///C:/Users/MattPearce/Downloads/POST-PN-0538.pdf
Page 19 This page is intentionally left blank
MELKSHAM TOWN COUNCIL
Environmental Policy
1. Our Aim
Melksham Town Council cares for the environment through its own practices and by encouraging others. We will endeavour to be as conscientious as possible about conservation, use of resources and recycling and acknowledges its duty under the National Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 S.40, to consider the conservation of bio diversity when carrying out our functions.
2. Policy
The Council will keep aware of the environmental regulations that apply to its business and ensure that its legal obligations are met. The Council will operate suitable procedures and systems to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill and look at ways to limit its environmental impact. The Council will communicate this policy to staff and Members through typical channels such as team meetings and work planning. It will encourage suggestions of ways to reduce the environmental impact. The Council will minimise the amount of commercial waste being produced per employee, and waste going to landfill, and encourage environmentally-friendly ways of working through its processes, such those listed below:
3. General
• Maximise energy efficiency e.g. through use of low-energy light bulbs and insulation of pipes • Source materials and services locally where possible • Consider the durability and end-of-life disposal implications of products before purchasing • Find ways to reduce water consumption and checking for leaks • Promote and use local recycling initiatives • Turn off machinery, electrical appliances and lights when not in use • Minimise travel and encourage car sharing • Ensure suppliers and contractors are aware of our environmental policy (by providing them with a copy when we ask them for evidence of their public liability insurance) • Dispose of waste properly to prevent pollution or harm • Carry out energy audits of all Town Council premises and take appropriate action
Page 21
4. Office and Administration
• Purchase paper with a minimum of 80% recycled ingredients • Only print/photocopy when necessary and recycle waste paper • Use both sides of paper whenever possible • Take the minimum number of promotional leaflets as is necessary and return or recycle those that are not used • Recycle used ink cartridges and old mobile phones • Use email or telephone in preference to the postal service
5. Management and maintenance of outdoor amenities
• Use recycled materials where appropriate and use companies such as Wiltshire Wood Recycling • Use sustainable energy sources (such as solar lighting where possible) • Assess chemicals used (e.g. cleaning/gardening) and ensure their appropriate safe disposal • Ban the use of harmful pesticides • Compost and shred garden waste, and use controlled burning only when necessary • Mulch horticultural waste where possible • Plant more trees and use indigenous species as much as possible • Minimise use of peat based composts • Create, enhance and protect wildlife habitats • Review ground maintenance regimes to improve biodiversity • Use of a recycling bins at all Town Council premises, where appropriate for cardboard, plastic and paper
Page 22 Page 23
Dr Katherine Drayson Dr Katherine Guy Newey by Edited Policies to improve the improve to Policies Green Society Green UK’s urban green spaces urban green UK’s
Policy Exchange Green Society Green Society Policies to improve the UK’s urban green spaces
Dr Katherine Drayson Edited by Guy Newey
Policy Exchange is an independent think tank whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which will foster a free society based on strong communities, personal freedom, limited government, national self-confidence and an enterprise culture. Registered charity no: 1096300.
Policy Exchange is committed to an evidence-based approach to policy development. We work in partnership with academics and other experts and commission major studies involving thorough empirical research of alternative policy outcomes. We believe that the policy experience of other countries offers important lessons for government in the UK. We also believe that government has much to learn from business and the voluntary sector.
Trustees Daniel Finkelstein (Chairman of the Board), David Meller (Deputy Chair), Theodore Agnew, Richard Briance, Simon Brocklebank-Fowler, Robin Edwards, Richard Ehrman, Virginia Fraser, David Frum, Edward Heathcoat Amory, Krishna Rao, George Robinson, Robert Rosenkranz, Charles Stewart-Smith and Simon Wolfson.
Page 24 About the Authors
Katherine Drayson joined Policy Exchange in January 2013 as a Research Fellow for the Environment & Energy Unit. Before joining Policy Exchange, Katherine completed a PhD investigating the role played by ecology in the English planning system, and how this could be improved. Prior to this, she worked as an ecological consultant for both a global multidisciplinary consultancy and a specialist ecological consultancy. Katherine has a BA in Biological Sciences from the University of Oxford.
Guy Newey is Head of Environment and Energy at Policy Exchange. Before joining Policy Exchange, Guy worked as a journalist, including three years as a foreign correspondent in Hong Kong. He has an MSc in Environmental Technology from Imperial College, London. Guy’s research interests include energy efficiency, renewable energy policy, biodiversity and changing energy behaviour.
© Policy Exchange 2014
Published by Policy Exchange, Clutha House, 10 Storey’s Gate, London SW1P 3AY www.policyexchange.org.uk
ISBN: 978-1-907689-80-2 Printed by Heron, Dawson and Sawyer Designed by Soapbox, www.soapbox.co.uk
2 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 25 Policy Exchange’s Environment and Energy Unit
Policy Exchange’s Environment and Energy Unit conducts innovative and independent policy research into a wide range of environmental, infrastructure and regulatory challenges. Our objective is to influence policy making and to shape debate. We produce publications, organise events and use the media to promote our findings and policy proposals. A key focus of our work is to identify ways to tackle environmental challenges effectively, while minimising adverse impact on living standards. We promote well-designed regulation to exploit the power of markets to achieve environmental outcomes innovatively and cost-effectively.
If you would like to find out more about our work, please contact:
Guy Newey Head of the Environment and Energy Unit Policy Exchange Clutha House 10 Storey’s Gate London SW1P 3AY
Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0207 340 2650 Fax: 020 7222 5859 www.policyexchange.org.uk
Page 26 policyexchange.org.uk | 3 Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation for their support in funding this research. In addition, the author would like to thank Graham Duxbury (Groundwork), Annemarie Naylor (Common Futures) and Julian Dobson (Urban Pollinators Ltd.) who kindly reviewed and commented on this report. The author would also like to thank all those who gave their time and expertise to inform this research, including but not limited to:
Alana Lowe-Petraske (Withers Worldwide) Angela Li (Lambeth Borough Council) Anita Murray (Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea) Anna Strongman (Argent King’s Cross) Ben Paine (Policy Exchange intern) Central Primary School, Watford Chris Gourlay (Spacehive) Chris Haines & Alison Parry (Northamptonshire County Council) Dan Bloomfield (University of Exeter) David Beamont & Nicki Palmer (Victoria BID) David Putt (Bracknell Forest Homes) Drew Bennellick & Lucy Hares (Heritage Lottery Fund) Euan Hall & Suzanne Hughes (The Land Trust) Gavin Atkins (Mind) Garry Campbell (Groundwork) James Cooper (Woodland Trust) Jerry Gutwin (Islington Borough Council) Jessica Gibbons (Camden Borough Council) John Compton (B&Q Streetclub) John Trubshaw (Telford Green Brigade) Julia Frayne & David McLaren (Royal Parks Agency) Linda Jarrold (Voluntary Action Rotherham) Localis Lydia Ragoonanan (Nesta) Mark Camley & Emma Frost (LLDC) Mark Walton & Kate Swade (Shared Assets) Nonnie Crawford (Director of Public Health, Sunderland City Council) Rachel Edwards (DCLG) Rachel Penny (Natural England) Rhodri Davies (Charities Aid Foundation) Ricci de Freitas (Marchmont Association) Rob Shipway (Hall Aitken) Sara Lom & Grace Enright (Royal Parks Foundation)
4 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 27 Acknowledgements
Stephen Russell (Landscape Institute) Steven Ward (ukactive) Sue Ireland (City of London Corporation) Sue Morgan (Around the Block Ltd.) Tom Seaward (National Trust) Valerie Selby (Wandsworth Borough Council) Wild Network
Any errors that remain, and the conclusions of the report, are the authors’ own.
Page 28 policyexchange.org.uk | 5 Foreword
I congratulate Guy Newey and Policy Exchange for this report into the benefits of Public Parks and how to renew public support for their maintenance and flourishing. While abundant with practical suggestions that work within the parameters of utilitarian public policy analysis this report also gives expression to a tradition of civic virtue which views parks as a ‘respite and refuge’, as a ‘commons to cherish’, and indeed as an civic expression of the common good that exceeds any particular policy outcome. Our urban parks are an important example of how what were once virtues have become rights. The political issue of how to renew a sense of responsibility for the protection and maintenance of our civic inheritance is at the core of this report. This is particularly acute when there has been a decline in spending of around ten per cent since 2010/11. The creation of parks as a distinctive feature of English urban development was based upon a unique combination of philanthropic endowment, public subscription and parish councils. None of those institutions exists in any substantial form today. Local families, local people and local councils were the force that created some sense of public green space (London Fields) amidst the intensity of enclosure that dominated land holdings throughout the country. Dismissed and belittled by both economic liberals and Marxists as nostalgic and futile a determined and popular effort was made to re-create the commons in the middle of cities (Clapton Common). The resistance to enclosure and the defence of the Commons was most successful in the new urban and suburban cities, not least in London. Through the use of endowment the relentless demand of property development was stilled. Through public subscription a sense of a common life was forged between otherwise isolated residents. These were located within the boundaries of distinct and named local parishes and formed part of its institutional and ecological identity. It is to be remembered that the creation of large borough councils only happened in London in 1964, and that parks were created in the preceding hundred years within parish councils so that Hackney for example, was previously governed by councils called Shoreditch, Clapton, Stoke Newington, Stamford Hill and Hackney. Each of them had a park. Those political places, and people still say they live in them although they have no civic reality, were wiped out in favour of a politics of scale. That is also part of the story of how virtue became rights. People do not know how parks came into existence, they are an unquestioned part of their civic inheritance. This report looks at ways of reconnecting people to that inheritance in a participative and engaged way so that the Common Good they embody can not only be
6 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 29 Foreword
enjoyed but maintained by the individuals, families, communities, businesses and government agencies who benefit from them. There are many things proposed here that I would support. The use of Endowment funds and Living Legacies are both a very good way of giving incentives to virtue and reviving a sense of philanthropic responsibility. The public health benefits are well developed through the concept of Green Prescribing. Public participation and support are engaged with extensively and the community control and cashback idea are excellent. The ‘Friends’ of parks are all in place but the ‘lack of power’ that communities have and the forgotten art of civic self-government undermine their flourishing. This weakness in our civic life is further exacerbated by the huge public authorities for whom a range of public parks in diverse areas are just part of their responsibilities. I would suggest that a breakdown of political power in cities to the old parish level, so that specifically local people are responsible for the protection and flourishing of a place that they love is required. The combination of endowment, leadership training and the restoration of more human scale urban politics is the way ahead. Within this the parks would sit as part of a common civic inheritance that is entrusted to genuinely local councillors. Governance could be shared with local organisers and activists as well as philanthropic trusts. It would recreate the politics of the common good which created the parks in the first place. To restore the link with local people it is to be remembered that there can be no effective responsibility without power. Neither the State nor the market can even understand the meaning and importance of public parks. They both have a tendency to break things down into individual or collective utility and benefit. I commend this report for moving beyond both and looking at the incentives that can be given to civic virtue that is not only a benefit but a good. Power, and the balance of power, are vital to restore the coalition of philanthropy, public contribution and local councils. This report is admirable in presenting practical ways through which that journey can be started.
Maurice Glasman, Baron Glasman
Page 30 policyexchange.org.uk | 7 Contents
About the Authors 2 Policy Exchange’s Environment and Energy Unit 3 Acknowledgements 4 Foreword 6 Contents 8 Executive Summary 9
1 Background and Context 19 2 Local Authority Funding 26 3 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding 37 4 Public Sector Spending 46 5 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy 52 6 Civil Society and Private Sector Funding 62 7 Community Action 68
Summary and Conclusions 82
8 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 31 Executive Summary
“This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.” Theodore Roosevelt, Chicago, Illinois June 17 1912
Parks are places where people come together. They provide a place to play, enjoy nature and think. Within Britain’s great cities, they provide respite and refuge. A good local park can make city life bearable, particularly for those families and people who do not have much green space at home. The history of our cities can be told through the developments of our green spaces; from the creation of the world’s first municipal park (Birkenhead Park in the Wirral) to the gradual opening of Regent’s Park in London to the public.1 They are a commons to cherish. The success of our cities depends on making them attractive places to live in. Parks play a central role in attracting people to our cities. High quality and well- designed urban green spaces can help to reduce crime. They reduce flooding and cool cities. They are a social, economic and environmental asset. Our research has found that there may also be a link between improving parks and increasing house prices (see Chapter 2). Yet the benefits of our urban green spaces are not felt by everyone. Black and minority ethnic people, the disabled or chronically ill, the elderly, and people from poorer backgrounds have reduced access to high quality green spaces, and use green spaces less than other groups. For example, our analysis of urban green space (both private and publicly accessible, though not including domestic gardens) in Greater Manchester showed that people in the 25 per cent richest areas enjoy, on average, 2.7 times as much green space per head as the 25 per cent most deprived areas. In addition, we found that city-dwellers in higher socio- economic groups (A, B and C1) are more likely to have visited urban green spaces within the past seven days than those in lower socio-economic groups. Potentially making this inequality worse, our urban green spaces currently face a range of threats. Reduced local authority budgets mean that there is less funding available for green space maintenance. Without finding alternatives, this could result in the deterioration that we saw in the 1970s and 1980s, when lack of funding caused many green spaces to fall into disrepair and become 1 Within this report, urban green space is considered to havens of crime. In combination with increased demand for housing and other be any publicly accessible open development in our urban areas, there is therefore a risk that vital green spaces space containing ground-level vegetation, such as grass (for could be lost. example, parks, allotments, Our two-report series examines what can be done to help ensure that our cemeteries and community gardens, but excluding street urban green spaces are well maintained and that inequality in green space access trees and domestic gardens) and use is reduced. Our first report, Park Land, identified a lack of national-level used for recreation within urban areas (as defined by the Office for data on where our urban green spaces are, what state they are in, and who has National Statistics).
Page 32 policyexchange.org.uk | 9 Green Society
access to them. Having this data would help ensure that green spaces in deprived areas are protected, that funding is better targeted, and that policy interventions are more effective. However, data alone will not be enough. This report explores what else our urban green spaces need to be well maintained and to meet the needs of local communities. The report considers how public sector money is spent on parks, and what other sources of public sector money may be available to support improvements to urban green spaces. It looks at how we can attract more private sector and public money into improving urban green spaces. The report then looks at what policy changes might be needed to encourage people and communities to get more involved in looking after their parks. The thread running through both reports is how to foster a sense of responsibility for urban green spaces. Over the past three years we have seen a 30 per cent increase in the number of Friends and user groups. People care about the places that are important to them. Policymakers need to find ways to nurture that enthusiasm and ensure it flourishes, so that parks and green spaces remain at the heart of our cities’ lives.
How to increase funding for green spaces The majority of urban green spaces are owned by the public sector. However, as our Park Land report identified, these budgets are under huge pressure. We found that local authority spending on open spaces (not just green spaces) has been cut by an average of 10.5 per cent between 2010/11 and 2012/13. As a result (and partly because it is easier to raise funding for green space creation than for the more mundane, but crucial, ongoing maintenance of existing green spaces) there is a need to identify where maintenance funding can be drawn from other public sector budgets. However, the public sector alone cannot, is not, and perhaps should not, financially support urban green spaces in isolation. Communities derive important benefits from access to high quality urban green spaces, from improved health to social cohesion. Green spaces also benefit the private sector by helping to create attractive places to visit, live and work in. As a result, both the private sector and civil society share responsibility to support the maintenance and improvement of the green spaces. Our report identifies ways of supplementing local authority green space budgets and explores ways money could be more efficiently spent. We examine other potential sources of funding for improvements and maintenance of green spaces and getting people more involved in activities in their local parks, including through public health spending. Finally, the report considers different ways of encouraging civil society and philanthropic funding of local urban green spaces. Our key recommendations are:
1. Park Improvement Districts (Chapter 6) The first public parks were usually financed locally, whether through public subscriptions or the philanthropic donation of land. This remains true in some cases today. Wimbledon and Putney Commons are maintained by a levy collected in addition to council tax for residents within a short distance of these green spaces (a “Band D” property pays an extra £27.84 a year on top of its council tax).
10 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 33 Executive Summary
Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) also raise a levy, but on local businesses. Part of this levy goes towards improving the local environment, often including green spaces. In the US, the BID model has recently been extended to improve and maintain green spaces in residential areas via Green Benefit Districts. Residents vote on whether to create a Green Benefit District and once it is established, a compulsory levy (a San Francisco neighbourhood proposal suggests a charge of $0.951 per square foot of building or lot) is raised on residents within the area. This supports green space maintenance over and above what the local authority performs. If introduced into the UK, Green Benefit Districts could be named Park Improvement Districts to reflect their similarity with BIDs. Park Improvement Districts would not be appropriate in every location, for example in more deprived areas. However, the advantages of this approach are that: zz those that benefit most from a green space will support it the most; zz it offers communities flexibility in the level of maintenance and management they engage in; zz it encourages communities to take greater, and potentially increasing, responsibility for their local green spaces; zz it encourages communities to become more involved in volunteering in their local green spaces.
The Park Improvement District could support a range of different initiatives, including programmes of events in parks, funding schools to open their playgrounds to the public outside school hours and in school holidays, and supporting a park keeper, or parkie. Over time, as communities increase their skills base and take greater responsibility for green space maintenance, this could allow local authorities to transfer green space maintenance funding towards other green spaces, for example in more deprived areas. Government should pilot the creation of Park Improvement Districts to help fund the long term maintenance and improvement of local environments and urban green spaces.
2. Living Legacies (Chapter 5) Most people give more to charitable causes during their lifetimes than they bequeath in legacies after death. Fear of a lack of future financial security may prevent greater lifetime giving. One way to overcome this issue is the use of Charitable Remainder Trusts (CRTs, or Living Legacies). CRTs allow donors to specify a charity or charities to be the beneficiary of assets or capital that they put irrevocably into the trust. The donor, or a named beneficiary, receives an annual income from the trust for a specified period (for example, until death), thereby providing financial security for the donor. After the specified period, the charity receives the remaining capital value of the trust. Although the income beneficiary is liable for income tax on the annual income of the gift, the capital is tax exempt (as with legacies in a will) and is partly deductible from the donor’s income tax (depending on the income the beneficiary will receive).
Page 34 policyexchange.org.uk | 11 Green Society
Over more than 40 years, CRTs have become an important source of funding for US charities involved in education and the arts (distributing approximately $1.8 billion of principal to charities in 2011). One review estimated that the introduction of CRTs into the UK “could generate an additional £400 million for charity in cash and assets each year”. Their importance for green space charities lies in their potential to contribute to endowments, which provide a steady source of maintenance funding. In addition, by unlocking funding from new donors with smaller estates, they could help support smaller green spaces in less wealthy urban areas. The Treasury should introduce Charitable Remainder Trusts and ensure that charities supporting green space maintenance and regeneration are eligible as beneficiaries.
3. Green Prescribing (Chapter 3) Social prescribing is where GPs refer patients to non-clinical sources of support to improve their mental and physical health. Measures that could be prescribed include physical activity (known as ‘green prescribing’ after the colour of the prescription pads that New Zealand GPs used when pioneering this approach), taking part in a group activity, or even home improvements such as a new boiler. The aim is to address the root causes of ill health. Social prescribing is growing as a treatment and is particularly popular in dealing with mental health and obesity issues. There are several potential benefits, including improvements in patient health and wellbeing and more appropriate use of clinicians’ time. Many urban green spaces offer a place where both green prescription and other social prescription activities can take place, such as group walking or horticulture activities to aid weight loss and/or mental health. There is therefore a considerable opportunity for public health funding to be used to support activities in public green spaces. For example, an overweight patient could obtain a green prescription from their GP for a course of physical fitness classes. The patient would pay the standard prescription charge, if applicable, and the Clinical Commissioning Group (a group of GPs in a particular area, known as a CCG) would fund the remainder of the cost of the course. Those running the classes would monitor patient attendance and feed this information back to the GP. The class organisers would also pay the local authority a fee, as part of an agreement to hold classes in a public green space. This could then go towards the cost of maintaining the green space. As a co-benefit, such an approach may contribute to the maintenance and improvement of particular spaces (for instance, through horticultural activities and Green Gyms). The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) should conduct a social prescribing audit to determine what models are currently being used. This would help publicise the use of social prescribing amongst GPs and CCGs, enable learning from previous experience and determine which areas should be targeted for the introduction of new schemes. NICE and CCGs should determine the success of existing green prescribing schemes. Based on the results, green prescription trials should be run to identify which schemes are most successful and why. All trials should be fully evaluated for their health outcomes.
12 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 35 Executive Summary
Registers of local green prescription providers should be established by Health and Wellbeing Boards. These should include information on skills, training and expertise, location, which groups of patients they are able to support, and cost. This would allow GPs to match patients with local providers that are able to support their particular needs. It would also allow existing providers to identify ‘gaps’ in patient support, potentially encouraging further training, as well as additional and/or more cost-effective service provision.
4. Gift Aid (Chapter 5) Currently, when donations are made to a charity by a UK taxpayer, the charity can claim up to 25p in the pound through the Gift Aid scheme. Since 2002, this also applies to Community Amateur Sports Clubs. However, it does not apply to civic improvement projects that are not run by charities, such as work to improve the local environment (not just restricted to green spaces) conducted by Friends groups or other community groups. There are no insuperable obstacles to the eligibility requirements of Community Amateur Sports Club being modified to allow community civic improvement groups to claim Gift Aid. Central government should extend the Gift Aid scheme to community civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, to incentivise community investment in their local area, including green spaces. We estimate that this would cost the Treasury £7–15 million a year.
5. Endowment Funds (Chapter 2) A major problem facing public parks is the lack of stable funding for ongoing maintenance of a park. The best solution to this is using endowment funds, which generate income from a trust to pay for green space maintenance while the capital remains protected. Funding for endowments could come from a variety of sources, including Charitable Remainder Trusts (see Chapter 5). Endowments require investment expertise and management. Not all local authorities will have the capacity for this. A new model has therefore been developed to help overcome this issue. The Land Trust is an independent charitable trust that uses endowments to manage green spaces and deliver community benefits. Initially, the size of the endowment needed to maintain a site in perpetuity is calculated. This could range from £20,000 to more than £100,000 per hectare. Funding is then sourced from the public and private sectors (currently, approximately 90 per cent is sourced from the public sector) and invested. Another way to help generate funding for green space endowments is through developer contributions. Section 106 (S106) agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) both allow local authorities to raise funds from developers for new infrastructure works (including green spaces) but suffer from a lack of transparency about where and how funds are spent. New green spaces (for example planned as part of a built development) should be required to include a long term funding plan, which could include endowments part funded by developer contributions, as part of the planning application. All local authorities should conduct a review to determine whether endowments would be a suitable model for the sustainable funding of any of their existing green spaces.
Page 36 policyexchange.org.uk | 13 Green Society
DCLG should require each local authority to contribute to a central open access register of CIL payments and expenditure, to improve transparency and public confidence in the planning system. This will require an amendment to The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.
6. Competition for joining up Urban Green Spaces (Chapter 4) Prizes and competitions have long been used to encourage the development of solutions to difficult problems, such as the 1714 Longitude Prize. Extending competitions to problems facing the natural environment is a promising approach. In 2010, the Lawton review identified that our current network of wildlife sites is insufficient to maintain biodiversity levels. In response, the Government launched a £7.5 million competition to identify 12 ‘Nature Improvement Areas’ (NIAs). The 12 projects (chosen out of 76 applications) have leveraged an additional £40 million in cash, gifts in kind, and voluntary support. The competition also helped create new partnerships and conservation approaches. However, just 14 per cent of the NIA projects by area are located within urban areas. Urban green spaces are often fragmented. We have also found that local authority Green Space Strategies are important but currently insufficient. There is therefore a need to join up green spaces, for example by planting street trees and greening courtyards. This has happened in Berlin and Copenhagen. An NIA-style competition to address urban green space fragmentation would encourage innovation and help ensure that green space funding is well-directed. The Government should establish a new competition, similar to the Nature Improvement Areas competition. This would ask for proposals to increase connectivity between urban green spaces at a city-wide level, as well as improve public access to urban green spaces. Like the NIA competition, this would require partnership working, drawing on local authority Green Space Strategies, nature conservation organisation expertise, Natural England and the Environment Agency, the private sector and the public.
7. Police and Crime Commissioners Helping to Fund Parkies (Chapter 3) Neglected and derelict urban green spaces can provide a haven for crime, but well designed and maintained green spaces (particularly where local communities are involved in their maintenance) can help reduce crime. An argument can therefore be made for funding at least some urban green space maintenance and community activities from policing budgets. Some PCCs have established funds providing grants to support community safety. Similar initiatives should be offered by all PCCs, allowing communities and local authorities to apply for funding to help support a park keeper, or parkie, for those green spaces identified as particular hotspots of crime. Police and Crime Commissioners should allow communities and local authorities to apply for funding to help support park keepers for those green spaces identified as particular hotspots of crime.
14 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 37 Executive Summary
In addition to these seven key green space funding areas, we also recommend that: zz Chapter 2: Levies raised specifically for green space maintenance that are currently collected as part of council tax should instead be collected as a separate charge alongside council tax (for example, similarly to the Business Improvement District levy described in Chapter 6). This may require a change in legislation. This would ensure that local authorities are not penalised for freezing Council Tax when levy rates increase. zz Chapter 2: Local Authorities should be required by DCLG to act as Accountable Body for community projects supported by Lottery or Central Government funding, where requested by communities, to ensure that VAT does not have to be paid. All such community project funding programmes should include capacity building support, such as that provided by the Community Spaces programme facilitators, to ensure successful completion of projects. zz Chapter 3: NICE should conduct and evaluate trials to determine whether investing in improvements in green space access, quality, facilities and/or activities delivers measurable public health outcomes. This would also help to identify which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits. zz Chapter 3: Future Police and Crime Commissioner guidance documents should increase awareness amongst PCCs that well designed and maintained urban green space can help reduce crime. zz Chapter 3: The Department for Education should provide guidance to schools on how to green their open spaces safely, make best use of them, and increase public access outside of school hours. DfE should also provide guidance for schools interested in working with local authorities and Clinical Commissioning Groups to help maintain local green spaces. zz Chapter 3: Central Government should create a website for Local Nature Partnerships, similar to that available to Local Enterprise Partnerships. This would enable them to share knowledge and resources, such as examples of effective collaboration with LEPs and local authorities. zz Chapter 4: In line with our Park Land report, a crowdsourced, freely publicly accessible urban green space map should be created, to which local authorities and other public sector bodies can add their data. This will enable more accurate analysis of where resources should be directed to improve green space quality and provision and help inform local authority commissioning. zz Chapter 5: A crowdsourced urban green space map, as recommended in our Park Land report, should be created. DCLG should encourage local authorities to add data on the funding available for each green space. This could, for example, take the form of an hourglass that shows the remaining funding for the financial year. This could then be linked to a crowdfunding platform to enable either one-off or regular donations to particular green spaces.
Page 38 policyexchange.org.uk | 15 Green Society
How to encourage people and communities to take greater responsibility for their local green spaces Increased funding alone will not be enough. To ensure that communities enjoy the full range of benefits that green spaces provide and that green spaces fully meet the needs of local communities, people need to be more involved in decisions about how green space is used. They also need to have the opportunity to make improvements themselves. We have outlined a pathway of increasing community engagement with local green spaces, ranging from the recreational use of green spaces, to their ownership and management (Figure 1). Over time, communities may progress from one stage to another. We have also identified a range of barriers that prevent communities from taking greater responsibility for their local greens spaces, including lack of power; risk of injury; risk of the community group failing; and lack of knowledge and skills.
Figure ES1: Potential pathway of increasing engagement with green space
Park user
Consultee (e.g. on park maintenance and budget decisions)
Supervised volunteer
Member of acve Friends group
Local authority contract Friends group to perform certain maintenance tasks
Friends group ownership and management of green space
Policy interventions are proposed at different stages in the community engagement pathway to make it easier for, and incentivise, communities to engage with their local green spaces. Our key recommendations include:
1. Council tax rebate (chapter 7) Local authorities already offer a number of incentives to encourage volunteering and involvement in community life, For example, since 2013 Southampton City Council has applied a 100 per cent council tax discount to residents who serve as Special Constables within Southampton.
16 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 39 Executive Summary
A similar incentive could be offered for volunteers who work as part of constituted Friends, or other community, groups to improve their local green spaces. This could help prevent Friends groups being established only in response to threats to green spaces, such as housing development (there is anecdotal evidence that this can result in a long term adversarial structure that limits entrepreneurial ability). A council tax rebate could also encourage segments of the population that are not currently well represented in Friends groups to become more involved (Friends groups tend to be dominated by white people over the age of 35). Local authorities should offer council tax rebates for active members of civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, who do a large amount of voluntary activity in parks. This could be based on hours spent volunteering or other measures.
2. Pilots of community control A 2009 survey of local authorities found that 80 per cent of local authorities had completed at least one asset transfer, with parks and playing fields the second most popular asset to be transferred (making up 16 per cent of transferred assets). Yet our knowledge of what has happened to these assets, such as whether their quality has improved or declined since the move into community control, is lacking due both to a lack of a central registry and a lack of monitoring. DCLG should conduct a randomised control trial of green spaces under community and local authority control to determine what impact this has on green space quality and what factors contribute to improvements or reductions in quality.
3. Community Cashback (Chapter 7) In comparison with the wider public, social housing tenants have access to an additional selection of Community Rights. The most important in the context of green space management is the Community Cashback scheme. This involves the tenants’ group identifying a service they wish to run that costs less than £170,000. Services could include maintaining shared green spaces or carrying out repairs. The group then approaches the landlord with a proposal, and demonstrates community backing for it. The landlord and the tenants’ group enter into a Community Cashback Agreement, based on what the landlord would normally pay for the service. Any savings generated by the tenants’ group are reinvested to deliver local improvements and/or community benefits. The advantage of this approach over existing community rights for the general public is that the community are given a budget, have control over how it is spent, and any savings generated can be reinvested for further green space improvements. In addition, there is no up-front fundraising requirement for communities, and so is suitable for those in more deprived areas. The Community Cashback scheme should be extended to community groups wishing to manage and maintain local urban green spaces. Constituted community groups (subject to similar conditions to tenants’ groups) should be able to agree urban green space maintenance budgets with local authorities, with any savings generated used for community benefit. This would allow greater flexibility than the existing Right to Challenge, and potentially act
Page 40 policyexchange.org.uk | 17 Green Society
as a stepping stone towards greater management responsibilities and other community rights.
We also make other recommendations for increasing community engagement with local green spaces, including:
zz Chapter 7: DCLG should require Local Authorities to publish all uses of the different community powers under the Local Government Transparency Code 2014. DCLG should then aggregate this data to form a publicly accessible central database of all uses of the different community powers. This would enable full evaluation of their effectiveness and highlight where funding and training is best targeted (e.g. to areas that use these powers the least). zz Chapter 7: The Local Government Transparency Code 2014 should be amended to mandate local authorities to submit land and property data to the Government’s Electronic Property Information Mapping Service as a mandatory requirement, rather than on a voluntary basis.
18 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 41 1 Background and Context
Our first report on urban green space, Park Land, found that local authorities across England have cut their spending on open spaces by an average of 10.5 per cent between 2010/11 and 2012/13. Cuts are also likely to continue. For example, Birmingham City Council recently consulted on proposals to save up to £2.6 million annually from its parks budget (net expenditure in 2012/13 was £15.5 million).2 Our report found that there is potential for budget cuts to have a negative impact on urban green spaces, but that the data is lacking that would allow us to accurately predict what effects budget cuts will have. Our analysis of existing urban green space data across the UK found that much of it was expensive to access and none was able to provide a UK-wide picture of urban green space quantity, quality, access and ownership. We argued that without a UK-wide urban green space map containing this data, we would be unable to target interventions where they are most cost-effective and where they are most needed. In addition, we would be unable to make evidence-based trade-offs in urban land- use. We also argued for such a map to be fully and freely publicly accessible.
Box 1: Urban green space definition In both of our reports, we consider urban green space to be any publicly accessible open space containing ground-level vegetation, such as grass, that provide recreational opportunities (for example, including parks, allotments, cemeteries and community gardens, but excluding street trees and domestic gardens) within urban areas (as 2 Birmingham City Council, “The Budget Consultation,” 3,4 defined by the Office for National Statistics). 2013, www.birmingham.gov.uk/ budgetviews.
3 Office for National Statistics, This report focuses on what else would need to happen to help maintain and Local Authority Classification Pre-2009, 2009. improve our urban green spaces and prevent a repeat of the decline in quality 4 Office for National Statistics, 5 seen in the mid-1970s to mid-1990s. In the current context of local authority “Rural and Urban Area Definition for Lower Layer Super Output budget cuts and reduced urban green space staff and spending, other sources of Areas,” 2005. public sector and private sector funding need to be found. In addition, there are 5 S. Harding, “Towards a opportunities for the public to play a greater role in urban green space funding, Renaissance in Urban Parks,” Cultural Trends 9, no. 35 (January management and decision-making. To set out the case for urban green space 1999): 1–20. funding, our first report described the economic and environmental benefits that 6 T. Pateman, “Rural and Urban urban green spaces provide to the 80 per cent of the UK population living in Areas : Comparing Lives Using Rural / Urban Classifications,” 6 urban areas: this report describes the social benefits they provide. Regional Trends 43 (2011): 1–77.
Page 42 policyexchange.org.uk | 19 Green Society
Social benefits provided by urban green space
“The more that fields and woods are closed, the more does every atom of Common land, everywhere, all over England, become of importance to the people of every class, except that which owns its own parks and woods” Octavia Hill, Our Common Land (and other short essays), 1877
The social benefits of access to high quality urban green spaces discussed in the following sections include improved physical and mental health, community cohesion, reduced crime, and education.
7 L. Greenhaigh and K. Worpole, Health benefits Park Life: Urban Parks and Social Renewal (Comedia & Demos, 1995). “…public walks would not only promote the health and morality of the people, but be beneficial 8 L.E. Keniger et al., “What Are to the mere wealth of the country” the Benefits of Interacting with Nature?,” International Journal Robert Slaney MP, Hansard 21 February 1833 of Environmental Research and Public Health 10, no. 3 (January 2013): 913–35. The physical and mental health benefits of urban green space have long been 9 For example, existing research assumed. Victorian urban parks were originally conceived as ways of reducing cannot tell us whether different 7 types of green spaces deliver overcrowding and disease, as well as improving public morals. The logic of different health benefits or increased public access to high quality urban green spaces resulting in higher how they do this (K. Croucher, L. Myers, and J. Bretherton, levels of physical activity, lower obesity rates and improved mental health is The Links between Greenspace compelling and the subject of considerable research. e.g.8 It is something many of and Health: A Critical Literature Review, 2007). In addition, many us who spend time in urban green spaces know instinctively, despite the current studies are poorly designed lack of UK-wide urban green space data.9,10 (A.C.K. Lee and R. Maheswaran, “The Health Benefits of Urban Green Spaces: A Review of the Evidence,” Journal of Public Physical health benefits Health 33, no. 2 (June 2011): Access to green space is linked to reduced obesity, reduced risk of coronary heart 212–22). disease, and reduced risk of developing Type II diabetes.11,12 The Royal Institute of 10 K. Drayson, Park Land (Policy Exchange, May 2013). British Architects’ analysis of adult diabetes in England’s nine core cities, found
11 A.C.K Lee and R. Maheswaran, that the least healthy areas had a quarter less green space than the most healthy “The Health Benefits of Urban areas.13 The link with improved health is likely because access to green space can Green Spaces: A Review of the Evidence,” Journal of Public encourage physical activity. Natural England found that almost half of people who Health 33, no. 2 (June 2011): 212–22. visit the natural environment take part in at least 30 minutes of physical activity
12 K. Croucher, L. Myers, and at least three times per week. In contrast, just 22 per cent of people who never J. Bretherton, The Links between visit the natural environment engage in this level of exercise.14 There are also Greenspace and Health: A Critical Literature Review (greenspace indications that green surroundings are linked to reduced early childhood asthma scotland, 2007). prevalence.15 Natural England estimated the economic benefits of “equitable good 13 Rebecca Roberts-Hughes, access to green space” to be £2.1 billion per year in terms of savings to the NHS City Health Check (RIBA, 2013). (through reduced or avoided treatments for cardio-vascular heart disease, stroke 14 Natural England, Health 16 and Natural Environments – and type 2 diabetes). As a result, improving access to high quality urban green An Evidence Based Information Pack, 2012. space should be considered as an important tool to help increase physical activity
15 Landscape Institute,Public and improve health. Health and Landscape (London, UK, 2013). Mental health benefits 16 Natural England, An Estimate of the Economic The link between improved mental health and access to high quality green and Health Value and Cost space was reflected in the design of 19th century psychiatric institutions, which Effectiveness of the Expanded WHI Scheme 2009, 2009. included landscaped grounds specifically for patients. Hospital gardens were even
20 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 43 Background and Context
advocated by Florence Nightingale.17 There are strong indications that access to urban green space can:18 zz Reduce self-reported stress levels (the effect is greater the longer that people spend in green spaces); zz Reduce recovery times from stress; zz Improve recovery from attention fatigue and increase concentration; zz Improve mood; zz Improve levels of confidence and self-esteem; and zz Improve mental health (reducing admissions from mental illness).19,20,21 17 C. Hickman, “Therapeutic Gardens: An Overview of the There are indications that visiting woodlands and other green spaces can have History of Hospital Gardens in significant positive mental and physical impacts for those living with dementia.22 England from 1800,” in Cultural Landscapes in the 21st Century A recent study using longitudinal data on more than 10,000 people found that (UNESCO University and Heritage, “on average, individuals have both lower mental distress and higher well-being 2006), 1–8. when living in urban areas with more green space”.23 The same research group 18 Conclusions are not definitive because of the difficulties in also found that people who move to greener urban areas experience a sustained investigating these issues and significant improvement of their mental health.24 In addition, a study that 19 S. Bell et al., Greenspace and Quality of Life: A Critical used mobile EEG (electroencephalography) recorders to monitor participants’ Literature Review (OPENspace emotions as they walked through three different types of urban setting found & greenspace scotland, 2008). “evidence of lower frustration, engagement and arousal, and higher meditation 20 Croucher, Myers, and Bretherton, The Links 25 when moving into the green space zone.” In turn, this can have important between Greenspace and Health: economic benefits (see Box 2). A Critical Literature Review. 21 Natural England, Health and Natural Environments – An Evidence Based Box 2: Ecotherapy Information Pack.
The value of green space in the treatment of mental illness has been recognised by 22 Neil Mapes, Wandering the charity Mind. With the support of the Big Lottery Fund, Mind funded more than in the Woods: A Visit Woods Pilot Project (Dementia 130 ecotherapy projects across England over four years, involving more than 12,000 Adventure, 2011).
participants. Ecotherapy is structured and facilitated work in the outdoors, and can 23 M. P. White et al., include gardening, growing food, and environmental conservation work. An evaluation “Would You Be Happier Living in a Greener Urban Area? A Fixed- of the programme found that 60 per cent of participants went on to employment, Effects Analysis of Panel Data,” Psychological Science 24, no. 6 education or training. An in-depth analysis of five typical participants found that (2013): 920–28.
ecotherapy saved the state £7,082 per person each year (through reduced benefit 24 I. Alcock et al., “Longitudinal payments and NHS costs, and increased tax and National Insurance contributions). Effects on Mental Health of Moving to Greener and Less Green Urban Areas,” Environmental Science & In the UK, mental illness accounts for a third of all illnesses and costs Technology, December 2013. approximately £105 billion a year.26 Urban green spaces can therefore be 25 P. Aspinall et al., “The Urban Brain: Analysing Outdoor Physical considered as a tool to help manage and treat mental illnesses. Activity with Mobile EEG,” British Journal of Sports Medicine, March 2013.
Community cohesion and social capital 26 NHS Choices, Mental Health There are indications that high quality, accessible green space can help foster and Services: What Are Mental Health Services?, 2013, www.nhs.uk/ increase community cohesion by increasing interactions between different groups nhsengland/aboutnhsservices/ of people, although it is not clear how this occurs. There are also indications that mentalhealthservices/Pages/ Overview.aspx. access to green space increases volunteering, as well as community participation 27 Faculty of Public Health and 27 and satisfaction. Natural England, Great Outdoors: A study investigating the value of the city of Philadelphia’s park system How Our Natural Health Service Uses Green Space to Improve calculated the value of community cohesion provided by parks by adding the Wellbeing, 2010.
Page 44 policyexchange.org.uk | 21 Green Society
28 The Trust for Public amount of money donated to Friends groups and other parks organisations to the Land’s Center for City Park Excellence, How Much Value value of the volunteer work donated to parks. In 2007, this came to $8.6 million Does the City of Philadelphia Receive from Its Park and (with a population of more than 1.5 million, this equates to approximately $5.60 Recreation System? (Philadelphia per person per year).28 UK-wide data is lacking to perform a similar analysis, Parks Alliance, 2008). although Birmingham City Council is making an attempt.29 The City of London 29 Sarah Royal, Birmingham Open Spaces Forum, Personal Corporation recently celebrated the efforts of its 227 Epping Forest volunteers, Communication, February 2014 who donated more than 2,100 working weeks of volunteer work since 2010.30 30 Sarah Cosgrove, “Epping Nottingham City Council estimated that in 2011/12, each hour that a Park Ranger Forest Volunteers Clock up 2,000 Weeks of Free Work spent working directly with volunteers produced an in-kind return of more than in Four Years,” Horticulture 31 Week, February 25, 2014, £110. In 2003, GreenSpace conservatively estimated that the UK-wide volunteer www.hortweek.com/news/ workforce provided £17–35 million of work each year.32 login/1282461/.
31 Nottingham City Council, Nottingham City Council Parks Crime and Open Spaces Annual Report Green spaces and crime have a complex relationship that is not yet fully 2011/12, 2012. understood. Well-designed urban green spaces may discourage crime partly by 32 Nick Ockenden and Sarah 33 Moore, Community Networking being busier and people taking more pride in them. In addition, improving Project Final Report 2003 the quality of urban green spaces appears to reduce the fear of crime.34 There is (GreenSpace, 2003).
33 F. E. Kuo and W. C. Sullivan, also anecdotal evidence that, in combination with programmes for marginalised “Environment and Crime in the members of society, well-designed and well-maintained open space, can provide Inner City: Does Vegetation Reduce Crime?,” Environment and savings to police authorities and local businesses, as levels of crime and anti- Behavior 33, no. 3 (May 2001): social behaviour are reduced.35 Conversely, poorly designed and maintained green 343–67. spaces may encourage crime, for example by providing concealment or through 34 E.C. Garvin, C.C. Cannuscio, and C.C. Branas, “Greening Vacant the phenomenon that vandalised spaces appear to encourage more crime (Broken Lots to Reduce Violent Crime: Windows theory).36,37 A Randomised Controlled Trial,” Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention Education 19, no. 3 (June 2013): 198–203. 35 CABE Space, Decent Parks? “Does not the chemistry of nature present as large and pleasing a field for study, as the chemistry Decent Behaviour? The Link between the Quality of Parks of tobacco smoke, gin and inflammation?” and User Behaviour (Commission Extract from an 1844 poster asking working men to contribute to the creation of for Architecture and the Built 38 Environment, 2005). public parks in Manchester
36 M.K. Wolfe and J. Mennis, “Does Vegetation Encourage or Urban green spaces offer opportunities for both formal (e.g. school visits and Suppress Urban Crime? Evidence from Philadelphia, PA,” Landscape ecotherapy) and informal (e.g. play, educational boards and posters within urban and Urban Planning 108, no. 2–4 (November 2012): 112–22. green spaces) learning about nature, the environment and society. Some of the
37 James Q. Wilson and benefits include improved behavioural outcomes and attitudes to other children, George L. Kelling, “Broken staff morale, and increased awareness of environment and natural science skills.39 Windows,” The Atlantic Online, (March 1982): 1–9.
38 Thomas Taylor and Inequality in urban green space provision John Watts, Public Parks in Manchester: Address of the Operative Delegates to Their “Our Town is peculiarly barren of the means of out-door recreation” Fellow Workmen , 1844. Extract from an 1844 poster asking working men to contribute to the creation of 39 Ian Dickie, Ece Ozdermiroglu, public parks in Manchester40 and Zara Phang, Asessing the Benefits of Learning Outside the Classroom in Natural Environments (eftec, 2011). Urban green spaces are a truly universal resource that can enhance anyone’s
40 Taylor and Watts, Public Parks quality of life and increase the liveability of our cities. However, access to and use in Manchester: Address of the of urban green spaces is not evenly distributed. Even good access to green spaces Operative Delegates to Their Fellow Workmen. does not necessarily correlate with high use, for example if the quality of the
22 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 45 Background and Context
green space is low (as seems to be the case in more deprived areas, see below). The following sections will focus on the main groups of people found by research to experience inequality in urban green space provision.41
Health Natural England found that whether or not someone has a disability or long term illness is the most significant influence on the frequency of their visits to green spaces: those with a disability or long term illness are more than twice as likely to only visit green spaces three or fewer times per year.42
Ethnicity Black and minority ethnic residents tend to have reduced access to green spaces and use it less often: zz Wards in England where black and minority ethnic residents make up less 41 In some cases, it may be that particular groups of people (such than 2 per cent of the population have up to eleven times more urban green as the more socio-economically deprived) live in more densely space as wards where more than 40 per cent of the population were black or populated areas, which will affect minority ethnic residents.43 access per head figures. zz Large numbers of Indian communities in Leicester have restricted access to 42 J. Burt et al., Monitor of Engagement with the Natural medium-sized (20 hectare) sites within a 2km radius of their homes, and Environment Survey (2009–2012): lack of access to large and more distant (100 hectare sites within 5km) sites Difference in Access to the Natural Environment between Social 44 disproportionately affect Asian and black communities. Groups within the Adult English zz More than a quarter (26 per cent) of the black and minority ethnic population Population (Natural England Data Reports, Number 003., 2013).
in England only visit the natural environment three times or fewer per year 43 CABE Space, Urban Green (compared to 15 per cent of the rest of the population).45 Nation: Building the Evidence Base, 2010.
44 A. Comber, C. Brunsdon, Deprivation and E. Green, “Using a GIS-Based A recent investigation of health inequalities across Europe found that “People Network Analysis to Determine Urban Greenspace Accessibility who live in areas with high levels of deprivation are more likely to…live close to for Different Ethnic and Religious hazardous waste sites, in locations where public places feel unsafe, unwelcoming Groups,” Landscape and Urban Planning 86 (2008): 103–14. and uncongenial, have less access to green spaces and fewer opportunities for 45 J. Burt et al., Monitor of healthy activities.”46 Our own analysis of urban green space in Greater Manchester Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey (2009–2012): using existing and freely available (though fragmented and incomplete) green Difference in Access to the Natural space data revealed that people in the richest 25 per cent of areas enjoy, on Environment between Social Groups within the Adult English average, 2.7 times as much green space per head as the most deprived 25 per Population (Natural England Data cent. This is a statistically significant reduction from the average green space per Reports, Number 003., 2012). resident across the whole of Greater Manchester.47 46 M. Marmot, Review of Social Determinants and the Health CABE Space not only identified a similar trend of reduced green space in Divide in the WHO European deprived urban areas across England, but found that urban green space quality, Region: Final Report (World Health Organization, 2013). in terms of number of Green Flag areas per local authority, was found to be 47 (Chi square (3, n = 1425) “systematically worse in deprived areas and better in less deprived areas”.48 Poor = 72.43, p<0.001) green space provision and poor quality green spaces in deprived areas may help 48 CABE Space, Urban Green Nation: Building contribute to low visit rates (although as the data is poor, we cannot know for the Evidence Base. certain). Natural England found that just 30 per cent of people living in the most 49 Natural England, Monitor deprived areas had visited the natural environment in the previous seven days, in of Engagement with the Natural Environment: Annual Report 49 comparison with 52 per cent of people living in the least deprived areas. 2012/13, 2013.
Page 46 policyexchange.org.uk | 23 Green Society
Figure 1: The change in average green space per Greater Manchester resident with increasing deprivation50
160
140
120
100
80 een space (m2) per head 60
ea of gr 40 age ar
er 20 Av 0 1st quarle 2nd quarle 3rd quarle 2nd quarle (0 < IMD score (13.25 < IMD score (24.78 < IMD score (42.23 < IMD score < 13.25) < 24.78) < 42.23) < 81.59)
Index of Mulple Deprivaon (2010) quarles
Socio-economic status Our analysis of Natural England data has revealed that city-dwellers in higher socio-economic groups (A, B and C1) are more likely to have visited urban green spaces within the past seven days than those in lower socio-economic groups (see Figure 2). Related to this is the finding that those in higher socio-economic groups travel further to green spaces, perhaps because of greater access to cars.51
Figure 2: The percentage of urban respondents in different socio-economic groups that visited urban green spaces, by each visit category
ry 100
go A,B,C1 te 90 C2,D,E 80
70 50 Green space area calculations r each visit ca fo were derived from Natural 60 England’s GIS boundaries, the 50 Forestry Commission’s National Forest Inventory, the European 40 Environment Agency’s Corine urban green space map and 30 Ordnance Survey’s VectorMap District woodland data. These 20 ge of urban respondents
datasets were combined and ta 10 analysed using commercially en rc available Geographic Information Pe 0 System software. DCLG’s Index 01234 567>7 of Multiple Deprivation data was combined with ONS Lower Layer Number of visits to an urban green space in the last seven days Super Output Area boundaries. Based on Natural England’s weighted 2012/13 data52 51 Ibid.
24 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 47 Background and Context
Other groups Natural England found that those aged 65 and over were found to have significantly lower levels of participation in visits to green spaces.53 CABE Space also discovered other groups of people that tend to be disadvantaged in green space access, including people who are not working because of unemployment or sickness, and people who are studying or training.
Threats to urban green spaces
“Bauflächen entstehen, auch wenn man sich nicht um sie kümmert! Freiflächen verschwinden, wenn man sich nicht um sie kümmert.” (Construction areas come into being, even if you do not pay attention to them! Open spaces disappear if you do not take care of them.) Fritz Schumacher, Chief Planning Officer of the City of Hamburg.54
The main threats, including budget cuts and the loss of supporting institutions, that urban green spaces face have been summarised in Park Land. However, recent 52 Natural England, MENE EXCEL Year 1 – 4 Unrestricted, 2013 research has found that 45 per cent of local authorities are considering selling 53 Natural England, Monitor or transferring management of their parks and green spaces over the next three of Engagement with the Natural 55 Environment: Annual Report years. In addition, a recent analysis found that for all cities with a population of 2012/13.
50,000 or more, each urban household would lose approximately £1,400 over 54 Britta Kellerman, 50 years in urban green space benefits, should green spaces continue to be lost Die Entwicklung Des Freiraumverbundsystems 56 at current rates. Für Hamburg, 2003, www.hamburg.de/gruenes- netz/3907750/karte.html.
Conclusions 55 Peter Neal Consulting High quality and publicly accessible urban green spaces provide important social and Community First Partnership, State of UK Public Parks 2014: benefits, from physical and mental health to community cohesion. Many of these Renaissance to Risk? (Heritage will also have economic benefits. However, poor access to high quality green spaces Lottery Fund, 2014). (and therefore reduced visits) reduces these benefits for vulnerable segments of 56 Grischa Perino et al., “The Value of Urban Green Space the population. To explore how this could change, we need to determine what in Britain: A Methodological is holding us back from universal access to high quality urban green space, and Framework for Spatially Referenced Benefit Transfer,” 57 increasing the use of these spaces. One of the crucial factors is funding. Since the Environmental and Resource majority of our green spaces are owned by the public sector, the next chapter will Economics 57, no. 2 (2013): 251–72. 58 begin by exploring public sector funding for urban green spaces. 57 Urban Parks Forum, However, it is important to note that the diversity of our urban green spaces Public Park Assessment: A Survey of Local Authority means that there is no one solution that will be appropriate for all green spaces. Owned Parks, 2001.
Our aim with this report is to increase the number of options available for green 58 CABE Space, Community- space funding and community action. Third sector organisations have a critical Led Spaces: A Guide for Local Authorities and Community role to play in enabling communities to access these options. The provision of Groups (Commission for green space quality data, as recommended in our Park Land report, could aid this Architecture and the Built Environment and the Asset by identifying those green spaces and communities that need the greatest support. Transfer Unit, 2010).
Page 48 policyexchange.org.uk | 25 2 Local Authority Funding
The previous chapter outlined the main social benefits attributed to urban green spaces, and described the inequality of access to urban green spaces for different groups of people. Most urban green spaces in Britain are funded by local authorities from their budgets.59 Importantly, funding for parks and other urban green spaces is not ring-fenced, as the creation and maintenance of parks is not a statutory duty.60 This chapter covers the current status of local authority funding of urban green spaces. It explores its weaknesses, and identifies ways of improving and widening funding for urban green spaces. It is often easier to gain funding (e.g. via external grants) for capital works, such 59 CABE Space, Paying for as major regeneration or green space creation, than for ongoing maintenance in Parks: Eight Models for Funding 61,62 Urban Green Spaces (London, the absence of an ongoing revenue stream generated from urban green spaces. UK: Commission for Architecture For example, the Mayor of London’s Pocket Parks programme only provides and the Built Environment, 2006). funding for the creation of pocket parks across London, rather than their long 60 Harding, “Towards a 63 Renaissance in Urban Parks.” term maintenance. This preference for ‘place-making’ over ‘place-keeping’ has 61 Helen Woolley et al., Urban major implications for the future of our urban green spaces.64 This chapter will Parks: Do You Know What You’re Getting for Your Money? look at the different funding models for both urban green space creation and (Commission for Architecture maintenance, with the main focus on maintenance. and the Built Environment, 2006).
62 CABE Space, Paying for Parks: Eight Models for Funding Urban Funding on-going green space maintenance beyond local Green Spaces. authority budgets 63 Mayor of London, “Pocket Urban green space maintenance funding often comes out of local authority Parks Programme,” 2013, www.london.gov.uk/priorities/ budgets. Our 2013 Freedom of Information request (for more details, see page environment/greening-london/ improving-londons-parks-green- 13 of our Park Land report) revealed that, assuming all green space funding comes spaces/pocket-parks. from council tax receipts, an average of 2.7 per cent of council tax in 68 urban 64 Nicola Dempsey and Mel local authorities was spent on horticulture in 2012/13.65 That’s an average of Burton, “Defining Place-Keeping: The Long-Term Management of £11 per person for an entire year. Some councils have, however, gone further and Public Spaces,” Urban Forestry & raised specific green space levies. Urban Greening 11, no. 1 (January 2012): 11–20. 65 DCLG, council tax Receipts Levies on top of council tax Live Table, England, 2012 to 2013 and Q2 2013 to 2014, Properties close to high quality parks and other green spaces often sell at a 2013, www.gov.uk/government/ premium.e.g.66 Many benefits of green spaces are highly localised, such as good statistical-data-sets/live-tables- on-local-government-finance. views or easy access to play areas. This means that those who can afford a property
66 Luke M Brander and Mark close to a park may benefit disproportionately from local authority spending on J Koetse, “The Value of Urban the park; local government is essentially subsidising those who can most afford Open Space: Meta-Analyses of Contingent Valuation and Hedonic to live near municipal green spaces. Pricing Results.,” Journal of Considerable research has been conducted on the ‘proximate principle’, i.e. the Environmental Management 92, no. 10 (October 2011): 2763–73. positive impact of proximity to green space on house prices. It formed part of
26 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 49 Local Authority Funding
the long-term case for funding the earliest parks, including Central Park in New York and Regent’s Park in London.67 One option is for local authorities to raise urban green space maintenance funding through a levy, or addition to the council tax. Good examples of this approach can be seen for Wimbledon and Putney Commons, and Kensington’s Garden Squares (see Box 3).
Box 3: Funding of wimbledon and putney commons, and Kensington’s Garden Squares In 1990, new legislation enabled the collection of a levy from properties either within the old Parish of Putney or within three quarters of a mile of Wimbledon and Putney Commons. The total levy amount is set by the Board of eight Conservators who manage the Commons. The increased council tax is calculated based on the number of “Band D” equivalent properties in each of the three Boroughs affected; Wandsworth, Merton and Kingston.68 From 1991, this levy has been an important source of financing and its spending is directed by the Conservators, three of whom are appointed by the Government and five of whom are elected by levy payers every three years. Importantly, the levy is paid for by the main beneficiaries of the Commons (as a result of residents’ proximity to the Commons) according to the value of the property. The levy is therefore, arguably, a
fairer way of raising maintenance funding than a blanket increase in council tax. 67 John L. Crompton, “The Role In 2013/14, the levy raised £966,124, distributed between approximately 46,000 of the Proximate Principle in the Emergence of Urban Parks in the households. According to the Conservators, “No comparable open space in London United Kingdom and in the United costs so little to maintain in terms of cost per hectare as Wimbledon and Putney States,” Leisure Studies 26, no. 2 (April 2007): 213–34. 69 Commons.” A “Band D” property pays an extra £27.84 on top of its council tax. 68 Wimbledon and Putney The London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea also uses a levy based on the number Commons, “Facts & Figures,” 2007, www.wpcc.org.uk/commons.html. of “Band D” equivalent properties surrounding its private garden squares, based on 69 Wimbledon and Putney 19th century legislation. Spending for each garden square is directed by individual Commons Conservators, Press Garden Committees, made up of local resident volunteers. Garden levies in 2013/14, Release: Commons Levy 2013–14, 2013, www.google.co.uk/ for example, range from £1,600 for Avondale Park Gardens to £75,850 for Wetherby url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s& Gardens. In terms of council tax, for “Band D” properties, the smallest amount levied source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&u act=8&ved=0CDEQFjAC&url=h is £40.34 for properties surrounding Emperor’s Gate garden square, in comparison to ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.wpcc.org. 70 uk%2FDocuments%2FFinancial £338.43 for properties surrounding Clarendon/Lansdowne Road communal garden. %2520Statement%25202013-14. pdf&ei=-B7rU56lHeHe7Abg64GQ Bw&usg=AFQjCNG8jXjAWKdRUPd DcbIkMhSIuJ9Szg&sig2=VF_sLTe- The levies for both Kensington’s Garden Squares and Wimbledon and Putney Gg3gwbAjFTKv9Q&bvm=bv.72938 Commons are classified as part of council tax.71,72 If Central Government offer 740,d.ZGU. councils grants or rebates to freeze council tax (for example during the recession), 70 The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, Council Tax and Garden yet the Garden Committees or the Commons Conservators decide to increase the Square Levies www.rbkc.gov.uk/ levy, the Council must compensate for that increase in order to ensure that overall councilanddemocracy/counciltax/ gardensquares/gardensquarelevies. council tax does not increase and they qualify for the rebate. Whilst levy increases aspx, 2013 tend not to be large and so can be absorbed by the Council without detriment 71 Kingston Borough Council, Personal Communication, to other services or loss of Central Government funding for council tax freezes, December 2013 this remains a delicate balancing act, particularly in the current climate of local 72 Anita Murray, Royal Borough authority budget cuts.73 of Kensington and Chelsea Policy Control Manager Revenues Personal Recommendation: Levies raised specifically for green space maintenance Communication, December 2013 that are currently collected as part of council tax should instead be collected as 73 Anita Murray, Royal Borough a separate charge alongside council tax (for example, similarly to the Business of Kensington and Chelsea Policy Control Manager Revenues Personal Improvement District levy described in Chapter 6). This may require a change Communication, April 2014
Page 50 policyexchange.org.uk | 27 Green Society
in legislation. This would ensure that local authorities are not penalised for freezing Council Tax when levy rates increase. Imposing new green space maintenance levies on existing residents can be politically difficult. As a result, the potential for residents to vote on introducing their own green space maintenance levy will be explored in Chapter 6.
Endowments and Property Portfolios Endowments are a long term and sustainable source of green space funding. Property and/or money are donated and the interest accrued from their investment is used for the long term maintenance of green spaces, leaving the original endowment untouched (see Box 4).
Box 4: Milton Keynes’ Parks Trust Milton Keynes’ green spaces are cared for by the Parks Trust, an independent charity created in 1992 by the Milton Keynes Development Corporation. The Parks Trust is entirely self-financing, as a result of the income generated from “a substantial property and investment portfolio” that the Parks Trust was endowed with when it was first established.74 Importantly, whilst the Parks Trust has long-term leases on Milton Keynes’ major parks and open spaces, the freehold belongs to Milton Keynes Council. This means that both the Council and the Parks Trust must agree before significant changes can be made to these areas.75
Whilst recessions and low interest rates can impact on the income from an endowment for several years, over the long term they can provide a stable funding source. Advantages to using endowments for public sector owned green spaces include, for example:
zz Green space maintenance budgets are no longer affected by local authority budget cuts; zz Once a site has a sustainable endowment fund, it can become easier to obtain other grants and funding, as it can act as ‘match funding’; and zz In the long term, endowments can reduce public sector costs by breaking the cycle of green space deterioration requiring capital-intensive renovation.
However, endowments require investment expertise and management, as well as sufficient initial capital. Not all local authorities will have the capacity for this. A 74 www.theparkstrust.com/ about-us/about-us new model has therefore been developed to help overcome this issue (see Box 5). 76 75 www.theparkstrust.com/ Calls for using endowments to pay for parks are not new. Yet little progress about-us/frequently-asked- has been made on this, with the exception of a few examples, such as The Land questions
76 CABE Space, Paying for Trust and Milton Keynes’ Parks Trust. However, this may change with increasing Parks: Eight Models for Funding recognition by Central Government of the importance of long term, sustainable Urban Green Spaces (London, UK: Commission for Architecture funding. For example, the four-year Endowment Match Challenge strand of the and the Built Environment, 2006). Community First programme aims to raise £100 million from philanthropists, 77 Community Development whether individual or corporate. This will then be matched with £50 million Foundation, “Endowment Match Challenge,” 2013, www.cdf.org. of Central Government funding to form an endowment fund (managed by uk/content/funding-programmes/ an investment company rather than a charitable trust) to support community community-first/endowment- 77 match-challenge. projects in the long term. However, initial findings suggest lower than expected
28 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 51 Local Authority Funding
Box 5: The Land Trust The Land Trust was formed in 2004 as a partnership between the Homes and Communities Agency, Groundwork, the Forestry Commission and the Environment Agency to help remedy the general lack of consideration of long term green space maintenance, in both the public and private sectors. Now an independent charitable trust, The Land Trust owns and manages more than 1,000 hectares of public space in perpetuity to deliver community benefits, including inner city parks and community woodlands.78 Their funding model relies on first calculating the amount of money required to form a sustainable endowment fund for a site, based on an agreed management plan. Depending on the type of green space and facilities present, the endowment calculation could range from £20,000 to more than £100,000 per hectare.79 Funding is then sourced from the public and private sectors (currently, approximately 90 per cent is sourced from the public sector), and may be enhanced by revenue from commercial uses of the site, such as car parking.80 The funding is invested and the interest earned is intended to cover the maintenance of the site in perpetuity. donations from the public.81 One potential source of funding for green space maintenance endowments could, however, be developer contributions (see later in this chapter). With many District Councils unwilling to adopt new green spaces 78 The Land Trust, The Land Trust created as part of development schemes, developers have an important role to play Annual Report 2012–2013, 2013. 82 in funding the long term maintenance of green spaces. 79 Suzanne Hughes, The Land Recommendation: All local authorities should conduct a review to determine Trust Head of Communications and Marketing, Personal whether endowments would be a suitable model for the sustainable funding Communication, April 2014. of any of their existing green spaces. 80 Euan Hall, Chief Executive, The Land Trust, Personal Recommendation: New green spaces (for example planned as part of a built Communication, January 2014. development) should be required to include a long term funding plan, which 81 Cabinet Office, Cabinet could include endowments part funded by developer contributions, as part of Office Annual Report and Accounts 2012/13, www.gov. the planning application. uk/government/publications/ cabinet-office-annual-report-and- accounts-2012-to-2013, 2013. Rents, events, fees and charging 82 Annemarie Naylor, Common For a few urban green spaces, the collection of fees, rents or the sale of leases Futures Director, Personal may be a useful funding stream for maintenance. For example, the Royal Parks Communication, July 2014. 83 The Royal Parks Agency, Agency estimates that it will receive almost a fifth (18.3 per cent) of its 2013/14 The Royal Parks Business income from a combination of licences, rents, catering and car parking.83,84 Bath’s Plan 2013/14, 2013. Parade Gardens require intensive management to create and maintain the floral 84 The Royal Parks Agency, Unpublished Data, 2014 displays. Open between Easter and the end of September, Bath and North East 85 Bath and North East 85 Somerset residents have free entry to the Gardens. However, other visitors must Somerset Council, Discovery Card, pay a small entrance fee).86 Recent research has found that 85 per cent of green www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/ tourism-and-heritage/discovery- space managers intend to increase fees for facilities such as sports pitches over card, 2014. the next three years.87 86 Bath and North East Somerset Council, Parade The majority of green spaces may not have the facilities to become self- Gardens, www.bathnes.gov.uk/ sufficient. However, there are several disadvantages to charging for access to green services/sport-leisure-and-parks/ parks-opening-times-and- spaces. Charging may result in a green space becoming ineligible for grants, for locations/parade-gardens, 2014. example from the Landfill Communities Fund and the Lottery Funds. In addition, 87 Peter Neal Consulting and there is also a balance to maintain between raising revenue and encouraging Community First Partnership, State of UK Public Parks 2014: public use of green spaces; introducing new charges for existing facilities can Renaissance to Risk?.
Page 52 policyexchange.org.uk | 29 Green Society
raise strong public reactions (see Box 6). Alternatives that have been investigated in the US include ‘sweat equity’ and ‘workreation’, where the full market rate is charged for those who can afford it, but the most vulnerable can exchange volunteer work for their use of sports facilities.88 ‘Fee free days’ and ‘fee free hours’ have also been investigated and there is potential for these to become more widely used in the UK. Volunteering in return for access to a facility or event has been successfully demonstrated. For example, the US RockCorps concerts have encouraged more than 150,000 people worldwide to donate four hours of their time to volunteering, in return for a ticket.89 In Transferring green space management the UK, two RockCorps volunteering events “ at North Hulme Adventure Playground, to communities could therefore help ensure Manchester, attracted nearly 300 volunteers that funds raised within a park are spent to help decorate it.90 However, care needs to be taken in utilising this approach for access on the park to sports facilities; sport provides considerable ” public health benefits and so should be encouraged by making it as inexpensive and easy to access as possible. There may, however, be a role for football leagues and other sports teams to gain discounted fees over a season in return for
88 Peter Harnik, Local Parks, volunteering. Local Financing Volume Two: Voluntary fees can also be introduced; museums, for example, already Paying for Urban Parks Without Raising Taxes (Trust for Public encourage visitors to donate. The City of London’s Burnham Beeches site Land, 1998). previously employed voluntary donations at its car parks. Interestingly, when car 89 RockCorps, 4 Hours, parking charges at weekends and bank holidays were introduced, with voluntary www.rockcorps.com/?page_ 91 id=10, 2014. donations at other times, the voluntary donations increased. 90 RockCorps, Hulme Adventure Playground, Manchester, www.rockcorps.com/?p=478, Box 6: Charging for sports in the Royal Parks 2014. In 2013, the Royal Parks Agency announced that they had introduced a booking and 91 Sue Ireland, Director of Open Spaces, City of London charging system, operated by a private company, for the use of the Old Football Corporation, Personal Pitches in London’s Hyde Park for ‘formal sport’, such as leagues, matches and events. Communication, February 2014.
92 Leo Visconti, “The Royal Parks: Previously, the area had been free to use and a high profile campaign from a charity Stop Hyde Park from Charging softball league that had used the pitches for ten years led to a suspension of the charge People to Play Sport,” 2013, 92,93 www.change.org/en-GB/ pending the results of a public consultation. petitions/the-royal-parks-stop- hyde-park-from-charging-people- to-play-sport. Events, such as races and music concerts, can also help raise significant revenue 93 Royal Parks Agency, “The Old Football Pitches for some appropriate green spaces. For example, the Royal Parks Agency estimates Consultation Open Day,” it will receive almost a fifth (18.3 per cent) of its 2013/14 income from event 2013, www.royalparks. 94 org.uk/press/press- fees and permits. However, events can also be controversial as they can generate releases/2013-press-releases/ noise, litter and damage, and exclude local residents from all or part of the green the-old-football-pitches- consultation-open-day. space. Even where a public green space is conducive to generating income from 94 The Royal Parks Agency, rents or events, that income will often go into a central local authority pot, The Royal Parks Business Plan 2013/14. rather than being ring-fenced for green space maintenance and improvement.
95 Nesta, Funding for New Transferring green space management to communities could therefore help Round of Digital R&D Art ensure that funds raised within a park are spent on the park (see Chapters 6 and Projects Revealed at Annual Forum, www.nesta.org.uk/news/ 7). This could help encourage novel and innovative fundraising efforts, such as funding-new-round-digital-rd-art- digital art exhibitions.95 projects-revealed-annual-forum, 2014.
30 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 53 Local Authority Funding
Funding new green spaces and regeneration of existing ones Making a case for public sector funding of green space regeneration can be challenging. This is partly due to a lack of data on the impact that changes on green space quality, access and use can have on the local area, such as on mental and physical health (see the Public Health section later in this chapter) and on the local economy. To help highlight this issue, we have conducted our own analysis of the effect of improving existing green spaces on house prices. Many urban parks have been awarded Heritage Lottery Fund grants for major capital works since 1996. Our analysis of property transactions around Southwark Park in London (see Box 4) reveals that there may be a link between green space quality and property prices, but that more detailed research is needed to be able to demonstrate this conclusively.
Box 7: Changes in property prices with changes in park quality The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) provided data on grants given for the regeneration of urban parks. We analysed property prices surrounding Southwark Park in London, using free Land Registry price paid data from 1995 to 2013. Using commercially available Geographic Information System (GIS), we calculated the median price for properties (houses and flats) between 1995 and 1997 in two zones; within 100 metres of the park, and between 100 and 200 metres of the park. This provided a baseline from which to assess median changes in property price within the two zones for each quarter between 1998 and 2013. Plotting this data (see Figure 3) reveals that between 1998 and mid-2002, the median increase in property prices between 100 and 200 metres of Southwark Park was 1.75 times higher than the median change in property prices within 100 metres of the park. However, this trend reversed in the second quarter of 2002. The HLF awarded a £2.7 million grant for the regeneration of the park in 2001 and the main works were conducted between 2002 and 2004. After mid-2002, the median change in property prices within 100 metres of the park was 1.1 times higher than that for properties between 100 and 200 metres of the park. The median change in property price within 100 metres of Southwark Park increased by 645 per cent between the periods 1998 to 96 This is a crude analysis, not taking into account property mid-2002 and mid-2002 to 2013, compared to 286 per cent for properties between 100 characteristics (such as size and 200 metres of the park. and number of bedrooms), or other factors that could affect It is not possible to conclude that renovation works resulted in an increase in property property prices (such changes prices with this analysis.96 This is particularly the case since a repeat analysis on two in demography, etc.). However, to our knowledge, it is the first other HLF-funded parks (Handsworth Park in Birmingham and Leazes Park in Newcastle- time an attempt has been made upon-Tyne) did not reveal a similar relationship. However it does suggest that the link to assess the impact of changes in park quality on property prices, between green space quality and property prices bears further investigation. and this is therefore an important first step.
Page 54 policyexchange.org.uk | 31 Green Society
Figure 3: Median change in property prices within 100m and between 100 and 200m of Southwark Park, using the median property price between 1995 and 1997 as a baseline. The trendlines are shown as dashed lines. These trendlines cross approximately two years after Southwark Park was awarded funding (i.e increases in house prices closer to the park overtook those further away from the park)
0–100m Linear (0-100m) 30 100–200m Linear (100-200m)
25 HLF award funding All works completed
20
operty price (£0,000) 15
10
5 Median change in pr
0
-5 2011 Q1 2012 Q1 2013 Q1 1999 Q1 2000 Q1 2001 Q1 2002 Q1 2003 Q1 2004 Q1 2005 Q1 2006 Q1 2007 Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010 Q1
Year and quarter
97 John L. Crompton, The Impact of Parks and Open Space on Bonds and tax increment financing Property Values and the Property The US offers a greater range of local government taxation measures to incentivise Tax Base (Ashburn, Vancouver: 97 National Recreation and Park support for new open spaces than the UK, such as Special Assessments. New Association, 2000). Jersey, for example, recently considered two funding streams; one of which 98 Scott Fallon, Deadlock over proposes a $200 million bond issue, whilst the other proposes diverting a State Funding Threatens N.J. Open 98 Space, 2014, www.northjersey. proportion of the state’s sales tax revenues to open spaces preservation. As a com/news/Deadlock_over_state_ funding_threatens_open-space_ result of legislative deadlock, it is now considering using 6 per cent of corporate preservation.html?c=y&page=1. business tax revenues to fund open spaces.99 99 NJ Spotlight, Bill In 2012, tax increment financing for infrastructure projects was introduced Earmarking Funds for Open- Space Preservation Clears into the UK. It works by “allowing local authorities to borrow money for Committee, www.njspotlight. infrastructure projects against the anticipated increase in business rates income com/stories/14/03/17/ 100 bill-to-make-open-space- expected as a result of the said infrastructure project.” However, this will only preservation-a-constitutional- be suitable in areas where reliable and sufficient rates income will be generated as amendment-clears-committee/, 2014. a result of urban green space improvement, either through fee-charging facilities 100 Mark Sandford, Tax or raising a green space levy from nearby businesses. The Nine Elms development Increment Financing (House 101 of Commons Library, 2013). in Battersea will be part-funded through tax increment financing.
101 James Pickford, “London Alternatively, a local authority bond issue could raise the capital for green space Project to Use Risky Funding creation (or regeneration, once the link between property prices and regeneration Model”, Financial Times, April 2013, www.ft.com/ has been fully explored, see Box 7). The difficulty with bond issues is that they are cms/s/0/fcda4910–9f64– a debt that must eventually be paid with interest. This is relatively straightforward 11e2-b4b6–00144feabdc0. html#axzz36mbR0iP2. where fee-charging facilities exist: a five-year bond issue by a sports charity has
32 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 55 Local Authority Funding
successfully raised £5 million to redevelop and open two Olympic Park venues (the Copper Box Arena and the Aquatic Centre) to the public.102 However, for those green spaces that will be unable to generate sufficient revenue, a green space levy on council tax for properties in proximity to green space could help to repay the bond issue and interest. This approach could be used for smaller green spaces. A variant of this (using bonds as part of a tax increment financing scheme) is often used in the USA.103
Developer contributions Capturing the benefit of development is a key method for raising funding for the creation of new urban green spaces. For example, Section 106 (S106) agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) both allow local authorities to raise funds from developers for new infrastructure works (including green spaces). In the case of CIL, funds cannot be used to remedy existing infrastructure deficiencies. They are instead intended for the creation, operation and maintenance of new infrastructure.104
Table 1: Comparison of the Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 Agreements105,106,107
S106 Agreements CIL
Can include tariff payments, as well Flat rate tariff depending on development as variable, negotiated payments type and gross internal area Restricted to the infrastructure needed Can be used to provide infrastructure to directly mitigate the impact of a proposal anywhere within the local authority’s boundaries From April 2014, S106 funds can no longer Funds from multiple developments be pooled to deliver infrastructure projects can be pooled Only 7 per cent of developments include Can be raised against a wide range S106 agreements of development types 102 The SIB Group, Bond Funding There can be time limits imposed There is no time-limit for spending funds will help Leading Social Enterprise for spending funds Build on Olympic Legacy, www.sibgroup.org.uk/news/ news/2014/bond-funding-will- help-leading-social-enterprise- build-on-olympic-legacy/, 2014.
A further major advantage of CIL is its capacity to be used by local communities. 103 Mark Sandford, Local Government in England: 15 per cent of CIL revenue, up to a maximum of £100 per council tax dwelling, Capital Finance (House of can be given to the Parish (these can now be created in urban areas that lack Commons Library, 2014). them) and Town Councils affected by the development, to be spent on local 104 DCLG, The Community Infrastructure Levy: 108 infrastructure. For those communities that have a neighbourhood plan in place, An Overview, 2010. the funding increases to 25 per cent of CIL revenue (the potential impact of this 105 The Planning Officers Society, will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7). In theory, both CIL and S106 Section 106 Obligations and the Community Infrastructure Levy: funds could be placed in a trust to provide an endowment to ensure the long term An Advice Note, 2011. maintenance of urban green spaces. 106 DCLG, Community Infrastructure Levy: Finally, CIL payments can be made not only in cash but in land. The potential Guidance, 2013. for this to provide new urban green spaces, or asset-based endowments to 107 G Burgess et al., The support existing green spaces, could be important (see Box 8 for an example Incidence, Value and Delivery of Planning Obligations in England of CIL revenue being used to fund urban tree planting and maintenance). In in 2007–08: Final Report (London, addition, neighbourhood funding could be used for green space maintenance UK: Department for Communities and Local Government, 2010). works, for example as part of an endowment. We currently have no way of testing 108 DCLG, Community how effective land donation and CIL spending on urban green spaces will be, Infrastructure Levy: Guidance.
Page 56 policyexchange.org.uk | 33 Green Society
particularly since neighbourhood planning is currently concentrated in more rural areas.109 There is also potential for developer contributions to establish or supplement endowment funds for the maintenance of urban green spaces (see the earlier section non endowments).
Box 8: Birmingham Tree Bond Birmingham City Council has proposed the creation of a ‘Tree Bond’ to support the maintenance and expansion of Birmingham’s urban tree population. A 1 per cent levy of the Council’s annual energy procurement contracts, matched by 1 per cent of the Council’s CIL revenue would produce an estimated £500,000 annual income for tree planting and management, and wood fuel production and distribution. This would enable larger numbers of Council buildings to be eligible for the Renewable Heat Incentive.110
A major criticism of S106 agreements is their lack of transparency.111 As our Nurturing Nature report identified, the planning system is opaque, with access to planning documents, including S106 agreements, difficult for most members of the public.112 This is particularly the case when attempting to collate S106 agreement information across a particular geographic area (planning applications are rarely shown in map format). Given the community emphasis of CIL, there should be no such lack of transparency over CIL payments and expenditure. Currently, each local authority is required to publish annual reports on how much CIL has been collected and spent, and what it has been spent on. However, each local authority uses a different template for this information and can be difficult to locate on Council websites. In addition, there are no publicly available figures for the amount of CIL collected and spent across the UK. Allowing the public to clearly identify which communities are benefitting most (or least) from CIL could, for example, motivate the creation of a neighbourhood plan. It would also enable the public to hold local authorities to account for CIL expenditure, increasing confidence and trust in the planning system.113 In line with our recommendations to create a register of Environmental Statements and biodiversity offsetting schemes, a similar 109 Planning Portal, Existing Neighbourhood Plans, register should be created for CIL payments and expenditure. http://neighbourhoodplanner.org. Recommendation: DCLG should require each local authority to contribute uk/map, 2014. to a central open access register of CIL payments and expenditure, to 110 Trees & Design Action Group, Trees in the Townscape: A Guide improve transparency and public confidence in the planning system. for Decision Makers, 2012. This will require an amendment to The Community Infrastructure Levy 111 Burgess et al., The Incidence, Regulations 2010. Value and Delivery of Planning Obligations in England in 2007– The ability of green spaces, or ‘green infrastructure’, to provide several of the 08: Final Report. services that traditional ‘grey infrastructure’ provides (such as flood defence) 112 G Newey, Nurturing Nature: Policy to Protect and Improve should, in theory, increase the chance of securing CIL funding. In practice, lack Biodiversity (London, UK: Policy of recognition of the many benefits we derive from urban green spaces may Exchange, 2012). mean that, green spaces will be unable to compete with other infrastructure 113 Christopher Swain and Malcolm Tait, “The Crisis of demands. Until appropriate natural capital accounting (including analysis of long Trust and Planning,” Planning term benefits and costs) is adopted as the norm by the Treasury and other public Theory & Practice 8, no. 2 (2007): 229–47.no. 2 (2007 sector bodies, green spaces will likely continue lose out to other infrastructure
34 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 57 Local Authority Funding
sectors that appear to deliver greater economic gains.114 The Treasury’s Green Book is undergoing a review process but it is not clear when or if natural capital accounting will be included.115
Grants Local authorities may be able to access a combination of external grants and partnership funding for green space creation. These could be from a variety of sources, ranging from the Heritage Lottery Fund to charities and other public sector bodies. For example, the regeneration of Burgess Park in Southwark was funded with capital from the Greater London Authority (£2 million), Southwark Council (£2 million) and a partnership between Southwark Council and the Aylesbury Estate’s New Deal for Communities (£4 million).116 However, aside from the time and resources required to complete grant applications, grants can, in some circumstances, create unanticipated difficulties (see Box 9). In addition, grants are rarely available for long-term maintenance funding. Recommendation: Local Authorities should be required by DCLG to act as Accountable Body for community projects supported by Lottery or Central Government funding, where requested by communities, to ensure that VAT does not have to be paid. All such community project funding programmes should include capacity building support, such as that provided by the Community Spaces programme facilitators, to ensure successful completion of projects. This section has found that there are several opportunities amongst existing commonly used funding streams to help ensure long term urban green space maintenance. However, both public sector funding and developer contributions are likely to be most abundant during periods of high economic growth, potentially leading to a reliance on grants during recessions. Given the numerous social, environmental and economic benefits that urban green spaces provide, what other sources of public sector funding could be unlocked to help create new, and most importantly maintain existing, urban green spaces (private sector and civils society funding streams are explored in Chapters 5 and 6)?
114 Natural Capital Box 9: The Community Spaces programme Committee, The State of Natural Capital: Towards The Community Spaces programme was launched in 2008 and was funded by the Big a Framework for Measurement Lottery Fund, managed by the charity Groundwork and delivered by a partnership of and Valuation, 2013. organisations. Over six years, the £46 million was awarded to more than 900 community 115 HM Treasury, “The Green Book: appraisal and evaluation in projects in order to improve local environments and increase community involvement central government” 2013, www. in their local environments.117 gov.uk/government/publications/ the-green-book-appraisal-and- In common with most green space funding schemes, this programme provided evaluation-in-central-governent. ‘development grants’, which enabled communities to buy professional advice 116 Southwark Council, Southwark Council to and convert ideas into a viable project. However, the programme also provided a Welcome the Local free consultancy service to guide communities through applications and project Community at Burgess Park Opening, www.southwark. development. This helped improve skills and ensure that only three groups failed to gov.uk/news/article/868/ complete their projects. In addition, ‘sustainability grants’ were available to help support southwark_council_to_welcome_ the_local_community_at_ long term project maintenance, underlining the importance of providing long-term burgess_park_opening, 2012. support. An evaluation study conducted by Hall Aitken identified numerous benefits 117 Groundwork, Community Spaces, 2014.
Page 58 policyexchange.org.uk | 35 Green Society
Table 2: A selection of the benefits of the Community Spaces programme118
Category Benefit
The Public 9.3 million residents benefit from the improved environment and facilities 1,734 schools were involved The Almost 800 hectares of land were improved Environment Almost 85,000 trees were planted Improvements in rates of dog fouling, anti-social behaviour, litter, and vandalism Community 93 per cent of groups will continue after the programme’s end Groups 84 per cent of groups are more confident 79 per cent of groups gained new skills 75 per cent of groups think their communities are now stronger
The evaluation did, however, identify several barriers to the successful implementation of projects. Two of the most important were:
zz The planning system was a costly and complex barrier for 27 per cent of groups, despite the advice and help of the facilitators. Jargon and lack of engagement from planning officers were particular issues. zz Approximately 10 per cent of community groups found that local authorities were unwilling to act as Accountable Body (it is not known what the figure for other Big Lottery funded projects is). This meant that groups had to pay VAT, i.e. one fifth of 118 Rob Shipway, Community Big Lottery funding for these projects was returned to the Treasury. It also meant Spaces Evaluation: End of Programme Evaluation that groups often had to pay contractors in advance of receiving grant funding. (Hall Aitken, 2014).
36 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 59 3 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding
The previous chapter explored funding sources that local authorities can already use to help supplement urban green space budgets. Green spaces deliver a wide range of environmental, economic and social benefits. There is therefore an argument for at least partly cross-subsidising green space maintenance using other sources of public sector funding, which will be explored in this chapter. In order for green spaces to compete with statutory duties for limited public sector funds, however, a more rigorous and coherent evidence base is required.
Public health
Green spaces and public health budgets In 2013, full responsibility for public health, including the ring-fenced public health budgets, was devolved to local authorities.119,120 Green spaces are linked to important public health benefits, including reduced obesity and improved wellbeing (see Chapter 1). This has been recognised by the NHS (see Box 10), within Defra’s 2011 Natural Environment White Paper, and by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).121,122 There is therefore a potential case for local authority public health budgets to directly support urban 119 Whilst the NHS provides clinical health services, public health involves disease prevention, health promotion, Box 10: Natural Choices for Health and Wellbeing improved life expectancy and the One example of public budgets being used to directly improve green spaces is reduction of health inequalities. the Liverpool Primary Care Trust (PCT) funding the ‘Natural Choices for Health and 120 HMG, Healthy Lives, Healthy People: Our Strategy for Public Wellbeing’ programme in Liverpool. This programme aimed to reduce inequality in Health in England, 2010.
health and wellbeing, increase engagement with the natural environment and provide 121 Defra, The Natural opportunities for disadvantaged people. In 2011, community groups in particularly Choice: Securing the Value of Nature. CM 8082 (London, disadvantaged areas and areas lacking in green infrastructure were invited to apply UK: Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, for grants to increase wellbeing through improving their local environment. From The Stationery Office, 2011).
112 expressions of interest, 38 projects were awarded between £1,000 and £38,000 122 National Institute for (£380,000 was spent in total). More than 3,200 people participated (including 135 paid Health and Clinical Excellence, Physical Activity and the employees). An evaluation revealed an increase in wellbeing of up to 18 per cent (as Environment, 2008.
measured using a scale developed by the Universities of Warwick and Edinburgh). In 123 Carly Wood, Rachel Bragg, addition, despite participants having average wellbeing scores lower than the average and Jo Barton, Natural Choices for Health and Wellbeing: for Liverpool at the start of the programme, participants had higher wellbeing scores A Report for Liverpool Primary 123 Care Trust and The Mersey Forest than the Liverpool average by the end of the programme. (University of Essex, 2013).
Page 60 policyexchange.org.uk | 37 Green Society
green space maintenance and improvement. Indeed, this is already happening in some local authorities. Sunderland City Council is using public health funds, released by combining existing services into one contract, to support services such as “parks, green spaces and allotments”.124 Sunderland has one of the highest physical inactivity levels in the country and existing green spaces are under-used by the public. As a result, Sunderland will be consulting residents to find out what would encourage them to use existing green spaces more. This could include installing facilities as simple as picnic benches or outdoor gyms, or connecting green spaces with cycle routes.125 NICE acknowledges that there is a lack of evidence on the “impact that changes to the physical environment have on physical activity levels”, as well as their cost- effectiveness.126 The current absence of data on green space access and quality (see our Park Land report) limits our ability to draw firm conclusions about the effects of improvements in green space access and quality on public health. In addition, encouraging healthier use of green spaces, for example through creating gardening and sports activities, could potentially be as important for public health
124 Gareth Iacobucci, as improving access and/or quality (for example, a Big Lottery Fund evaluation of “Raiding the Public Health its wellbeing projects discovered that participant life satisfaction scores increased Budget,” British Medical Journal 348 (2014): g2274. by three times more than would be expected if the person had doubled their 127 125 Nonnie Crawford, income). Yet there is little evidence available on which local authorities can Sunderland City Council Director of Public Health, Personal base spending decisions. This could discourage local authorities from directly Communication, April 2014. funding urban green spaces with their public health budgets. As a result, trials 126 NICE, Individual Research are needed to determine the evidence for public health outcomes as a result of Recommendation Details, www.nice.org.uk/proxy/?sourc different types of green space improvements. eUrl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nice. Recommendation: NICE should conduct and evaluate trials to determine org.uk%2fresearch%2findex.js p%3faction%3dresearch%26o whether investing in improvements in green space access, quality, facilities %3d833, 2014. and/or activities delivers measurable public health outcomes. This would also 127 Cles Consulting and help to identify which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits. New Economics Foundation, Big Lottery Fund National Well-Being Evaluation (Big Lottery Fund, 2013). Social prescribing and green prescribing
128 Janet Brandling and William Social prescribing is where GPs refer patients to non-clinical sources of House, “Social Prescribing in support to improve their mental and physical health.128 Measures that could be General Practice: Adding Meaning to Medicine,” British Journal prescribed include physical activity, taking part in a group activity, or even home of General Practice 59, no. June improvements, such as a new boiler (see Box 11 for an example of how social (2009): 454–56. prescribing is being used to improve the wellbeing of elderly patients).129 The 129 Emily Gosden, “GPs to ‘prescribe a boiler’ to patients living in cold homes” The Telegraph, www.telegraph. Box 11: Voluntary Action Rotherham co.uk/earth/energy/10842297/ GPs-to-prescribe-a-boiler-to- A pilot social prescribing service for the elderly is being delivered by the charity patients-living-in-cold-homes. Voluntary Action Rotherham (VAR), with £500,000 annual funding from the NHS html, May 2014. Rotherham Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).130 Once the GP has made a social 130 Chris Dayson, Nadia Bashir, and Sarah Pearson, prescription, specialised VAR employees accompany patients to the first few sessions From Dependence to of the prescribed activity to help build patient confidence. The CCG funds between 10 Independence: Emerging Lessons from the Rotherham Social and 20 weeks’ worth of activities per patient, and offers support to access affordable Prescribing Pilot (Sheffield Hallam University, 2013). transport where possible. After the initial 10–20 week programme, patients are offered
131 Linda Jarrold, Voluntary the option to continue the activity via self-funding (typically at a cost of £2 to £3 per Action Rotherham Adult Health session). However, patients with low incomes are given help if it is still needed. On and Social Care Development 131 Officer, Personal Communication, average, the cost is around £300 per patient. April 2014.
38 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 61 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding
aim of such an approach is to address the root causes of ill health. For example, if the root cause of depression is isolation and loneliness, rectifying that via social prescribing will be more beneficial in the long term to both the patient (through earlier intervention) and the NHS (via avoided medical costs) than simply prescribing anti-depressants. Social prescribing is growing as a treatment and is particularly popular in dealing with mental health and obesity issues. Social prescribing can also operate within the system of personal health budgets for people with long term health conditions introduced in 2014.132 The potential benefits (though as will be explored later in this section, long term, comparative data on its benefits is lacking) of social prescribing include: zz improvements in patient health and wellbeing; zz a reduction in inappropriate prescribing of anti-depressants and other medications; zz a reduction in the number of visits by frequent attenders to GPs; zz more appropriate use of clinicians’ time; zz improvements GP practice links with the local voluntary and community sector; and zz an increase in the range of services offered by the GP practice, allowing more holistic care.133,134
‘Green prescribing’ is a subset of social prescribing and involves GPs prescribing physical activity that may be based outdoors (confusingly, the term originally referred to the colour of the prescription pads that GPs in New Zealand, where this approach was pioneered, used to prescribe physical activity).135 Activities could range from intense physical exercise to horticultural work, depending on the needs and abilities of the patient. Many urban green spaces offer a place where both green prescription and other social prescription activities can take place, such as group walking or horticulture activities. For example, the Sydenham Garden community project, in collaboration with Lewisham CCG and the charity MindCare, provides therapeutic sessions in horticulture and arts and crafts for patients with early-onset dementia.136 Green prescribing therefore offers a considerable opportunity for public health funding to be used to support activities in public green spaces. As co-benefits, such an 132 NHS England, Personal approach may contribute to the maintenance and improvement of particular Health Budgets, www. spaces, and attract people who have previously used parks either rarely or not at personalhealthbudgets.england. nhs.uk/About/faqs/, 2014. all (as has been the case in TCV’s Green Gyms, see Box 12). 133 Age Concern and Age UK, For example, an overweight patient (with no complicating conditions Social Prescribing: A Model for preventing physical exercise) could obtain a green prescription from their GP for Partnership Working between Primary Care and the Voluntary a course of physical fitness classes. The patient would pay the standard prescription Sector, 2012. charge, if applicable, and the Clinical Commissioning Group (a group of GPs in 134 Brandling and House, “Social Prescribing in General Practice: a particular area, known as a CCG) would fund the remainder of the cost of the Adding Meaning to Medicine.” course. Those running the classes would monitor patient attendance and feed this 135 Ruth Jepson, Heather information back to the GP. The class organisers would also pay the local authority Cameron, and Roma Robertson, Green Prescription Schemes: a fee, as part of an agreement to hold classes in a public green space. This could Mapping and Current Practice then go towards the cost of maintaining the green space. (NHS Health Scotland, 2010). Social prescribing has been identified as a potential way of treating a range of 136 Sydenham Garden, Referrals, www.sydenhamgarden.org.uk/ medical conditions for several years. The 2006 Our Health, Our Care, Our Say index.php?page=referrers, 2014.
Page 62 policyexchange.org.uk | 39 Green Society
Box 12: TCV Green Gym The Conservation Volunteers (TCV) established the first Green Gym in 1998 in Oxfordshire. Since then, it has become a nationwide programme.137 By 2008, approximately 10,000 volunteers had helped improve more than 2,500 green spaces as part of 95 Green Gyms across the UK.138 Green Gyms are led by trained project leaders, who show volunteers how to do a range of physical activities that improve green spaces. This includes hedge laying, vegetation clearance, pond construction and path creation. Where vulnerable people are recommended to attend by health professionals, they are accompanied by carers who can provide the necessary health and social care expertise. A national evaluation of 52 Green Gyms revealed that 36 per cent of responding participants had heard about the Green Gym from health and social care professionals and providers. The study also found that those participants who scored lowest in terms of health, wellbeing and physical activity before getting involved improved the most. An important co-benefit of this scheme was attracting new green space volunteers.
White Paper supported existing social prescribing schemes and encouraged more use of the technique.139 The 2010 Public Health White Paper indirectly supports social prescribing by advocating public health services delivered in partnership with communities and the voluntary sector.140 However, there is a mismatch between policy and practice: whilst a Nesta survey of more than 1,000 GPs found that 90 per cent considered that social prescriptions would benefit patients, just one-sixth of GPs regularly offer social prescribing.141 This may be due to several different barriers. The first barrier is lack of data. There is currently no comprehensive data on how many, where, or what type of, social prescribing schemes are in place in England and Wales, or how successful they are. Whilst there are several 137 The Conservation Volunteers, Start a Green Gym, www.tcv.org. studies evaluating individual schemes (see Box 12 for an example) there are uk/greengym/start-green-gym, few comparative or long term studies. There is also little data available on the 2014. number of green prescription schemes in the UK, although Scotland has helpfully 138 Paul Yerrell, National Evaluation of BTCV’s Green Gym ‘mapped’ the 170 green prescription schemes that involve outdoor activities, such (Oxford Brookes University, 2008). as walking and horticulture.142 139 Department of Health, Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: This lack of data may explain why some CCGs are less convinced than A New Direction for Community others by the existing evidence on the public health benefits of green spaces. Services, 2006. For example, a recent survey of GPs and CCGs found that half of respondents 140 HMG, Healthy Lives, Healthy People: Our Strategy for Public considered ecotherapy (see Box 2, Chapter 1) as “a valid and suitable treatment Health in England. for common mental health problems” such as anxiety and depression. Yet 141 Katharine Langford, “56 per cent wanted to know more about the evidence for the benefits of Peter Baeck, and Martha 143 Hampson, More than Medicine: ecotherapy.” This suggests a need for a more coherent, rigorous and targeted New Services for People Powered Public Health (Nesta, 2013). evidence base. This could be achieved through adequately designed and
142 Jepson, Cameron, evaluated trials. and Robertson, Green Recommendation: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Prescription Schemes: Mapping and Current Practice. (NICE) should conduct a social prescribing audit to determine what models
143 Ecominds, Feel Better are currently being used. This would help publicise the use of social prescribing Outside, Feel Better Inside: amongst GPs and CCGs, enable learning from previous experience and determine Ecotherapy for Mental Wellbeing, Resilience and Recovery, 2013. which areas should be targeted for the introduction of new schemes.
40 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 63 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding
Scotland’s green prescription mapping exercise included a survey of scheme providers, which identified further barriers. These include health and safety issues (particularly amongst those involved in horticultural work) and the longevity of providers (will they remain in place for several years). There is also the issue of whether providers can offer the specialist staff needed for some mental and physical health conditions. The provision of ongoing funding and support for providers would likely help to overcome these issues. One way in which that support can be provided is being piloted in Rotherham (Box 10). Here, the focus is on social prescribing for the elderly but a similar model could be expanded to include green prescribing. Finally, there is a suggestion that lack of knowledge about suitably qualified providers, i.e. civil society groups that are willing and able to support referred patients, may be discouraging GPs from social and green prescribing.144 Being unable to easily compare costs and service provision may also hinder green prescription. A website of green prescription providers could therefore encourage the use of green prescription by GPs. However, such problems are not insurmountable. Results from the questionnaire sent to green prescribing schemes in Scotland identified a range of characteristics shared by successful schemes: zz a GP or health professional with responsibility for strategy and scheme promotion; zz ongoing and sustainable funding; zz a simple referral process; and zz feedback to the health professionals (e.g. ensuring that participants have attended and that providers are legitimate and effective).145
Recommendation: NICE and CCGs should determine the success of existing green prescribing schemes. Based on the results, green prescription trials should be run to identify which schemes are most successful and why. All trials should be fully evaluated for their health outcomes. Health and Wellbeing Boards seem well-placed to create, or expand on an existing, register of the potential green prescription activities on offer in a local area that meet the required standard. Such a register would also allow easy scrutiny by civil society and others that the schemes were legitimate. To help ensure these registers reflect changes in green prescription providers over time, consideration should be given to crowdsourcing green prescription provider information, i.e. allowing providers to register and amend their details. Recommendation: Registers of local green prescription providers should be established by Health and Wellbeing Boards. These should include information on skills, training and expertise, location, which groups of patients they are 144 Brandling and House, able to support, and cost. This would allow GPs to match patients with “Social Prescribing in General Practice: Adding Meaning local providers that are able to support their particular needs. It would also to Medicine.” allow existing providers to identify ‘gaps’ in patient support, potentially 145 Jepson, Cameron, encouraging further training, as well as additional and/or more cost-effective and Robertson, Green Prescription Schemes: service provision. Mapping and Current Practice.
Page 64 policyexchange.org.uk | 41 Green Society
146 William H Whyte, City: Rediscovering the Center, 1988. Crime
147 Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, Role of the “The best way to handle the problem of undesirables is to make the place attractive to PCC, http://apccs.police.uk/role- of-the-pcc/, 2014. everyone else.” 146 148 Home Office,Have You William H. Whyte Got What It Takes? Your Role as Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), 2012. Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) were established in 2012 and took 147 149 Edward C Burks, “Hoving control of police force area budgets worth a combined £8 billion. An important to Upgrade Bryant Park Area; Hoving Has Plan for Bryant Park,” responsibility of PCCs is to deliver a more cost-effective police service that will New York Times, June 24, 1966, both improve community safety and reduce crime.148 One way in which this can http://select.nytimes.com/gst/ abstract.html?res=FB071EFA3C55 be delivered is through urban green spaces. As discussed in Chapter 1, neglected 117B93C6AB178DD85F428685F9. and derelict urban green spaces can provide a haven for crime, but well designed 150 “Hoving Calls a Meeting and maintained green spaces (particularly where local communities are involved to Plan For Restoration of Bryant Park; Cleanup Is Urged for Bryant in their maintenance) can help reduce crime (see also Box 13). Park,” New York Times, June 22, 1966, http://select.nytimes.com/ gst/abstract.html?res=FB0910F F3C55117B93C0AB178DD85F4 Box 13: Bryant Park, New York City 28685F9. In 1966, a New York Times article described Bryant Park as attracting “drug addicts, 151 American Society of prostitutes, winos and derelicts”.149 The park’s supervisor, Andrew Petrochko, claimed Landscape Architects, Bryant Park, 150 www.asla.org/2010awards/403. that “It’s the worst I’ve seen it in my 25 years here”. By the early 1970s, police html, 2010. barricades were necessary at the park’s entrances after 9pm.151 In 1979, Bryant Park 152 Project for Public Spaces, was the scene of 150 robberies.152 Bryant Park, www.pps.org/ great_public_spaces/one?public_ However, by the late 1990s, the park had been transformed into “an urban oasis”.153 place_id=26, 2001. Critical to this transformation was the redesign of the park: new entrances were added, 153 Alison Gregor, “Bryant Park 154 Office Rents Outperform the visual barriers were removed, and paths, lighting and signage were improved. The Rest of Midtown Manhattan,” management and maintenance of the park by a new Business Improvement District (see October 2012, www.nytimes. com/2012/10/03/realestate/ Chapter 6) ensured the introduction of kiosks, a theatre ticket stand and a restaurant to commercial/bryant-park-office- not only raise funds for maintenance but also attract public activity and scrutiny. In turn, rents-outperform-the-rest-of- 155 midtown-manhattan.html?_r=0& this “reduced crime by 92 percent and doubled the number of annual park visitors”. adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1398171679- WVKbT72v6JbCs22B3Srs6g. 154 Project for Public Spaces, An argument can therefore be made for funding at least some urban green Bryant Park, www.pps.org/ great_public_spaces/one?public_ space maintenance and community activities from policing budgets, and this has place_id=26, 2001. been taken on board by some PCCs. For example, Nottingham’s Forest Sports 155 National Recreation and Park Association, Creating Safe Zone is a project to improve sports facilities in The Forest recreation ground, Park Environments to Enhance including the creation of a “new pavilion, changing rooms and [football] Community Wellness, 2012, 156 www.nrpa.org/Grants-and- pitch”. The £1.7 million project will be partly funded (£150,000) by the Partners/Recreation-and-Health/ Nottinghamshire PCC.157 Healthy-Communities/. In addition, some PCCs have established funds providing grants to support 156 Nottingham Post, £1.6m 158 to kick off new sports zone at community safety.e.g. Similar initiatives should be offered by all PCCs, allowing Forest, www.nottinghampost. communities and local authorities to apply for funding to help support a park com/pound-1–6m-kick- new-sports-zone-Forest/ keeper, or parkie, for those green spaces identified as particular hotspots of crime. story-18685905-detail/story. html, 2013. Recommendation: Police and Crime Commissioners should allow
157 Eddie Curry, Nottingham communities and local authorities to apply for funding to help support park City Council Head of Parks and keepers for those green spaces identified as particular hotspots of crime. Open Spaces, APSE Parks Seminar Presentation, 20 March 2014. Although some individual PCCs may realise the crime reduction benefits
158 Matthew Ellis, of investing in urban green space, others will be unaware of the link. Whilst Commissioner’s Community Fund, emphasising the importance of communities in reducing crime, current PCC www.staffordshire-pcc.gov.uk/ fund/, 2014. guidance makes no mention of the importance of the local environment. Future
42 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 65 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding
guidance documents should therefore highlight the relationship between well designed and maintained local environments and reductions in crime. Recommendation: Future Police and Crime Commissioner guidance documents should increase awareness amongst PCCs that well designed and maintained urban green space can help reduce crime.
Education The 1943 County of London Plan, written in the wake of severe bomb damage, emphasised the importance of allowing the same space to serve different needs. For example, “The provision of playing fields for adults and school-children might with advantage be considered as a single problem, for usually the school- children’s games periods are arranged during school hours, when adults are at work, so that it is possible, subject to the maximum intensity of use to which pitches can be put, for the same playing fields to be used for both purposes”.159 Seventy years later, Rotherfield Primary School won a two year campaign to use an adjacent green space. This space was owned by the council for the use of nearby housing association residents. Now, the school has exclusive access to the space in school hours during term time and residents have access the remainder of the time.160 The area has even been spruced up using money from the local CCG.161
Box 14: Schoolyards to Playgrounds, New York City The $117 million (£70 million) ‘Schoolyards to Playgrounds’ programme was adopted in New York in 2007, as part of Mayor Bloomberg’s strategic plan for the city.162 The aim was to open schoolyards to the general public in the evenings, at weekends and during the school holidays, to help address poor access to green space in the city. A mapping exercise identified 290 schoolyards potentially suitable for the scheme. Of these, 69 required no capital improvements and could simply be opened. However, in many cases, schoolyards comprised only asphalt, lacking play facilities and not being used for recreation but, for example, for car parking. Renovations of these sites, costing between $400,000 and $1.2 million, were undertaken. As of April 2013, 229 schoolyards were open to the public. Three-quarters of schoolyard visitors walk to reach it and more than 159 Patrick Abercrombie and John Henry Forshaw, “Chapter 3: two-thirds exercise in the playground either ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’. Open Spaces and Park System,” The Department of Education owns the schoolyards and employs the school custodial in County of London Plan, 1943, 36–47. staff responsible for site operation and maintenance for all the playgrounds. The 160 Syma Mohammed, custodial staff ensure that the schoolyard gates are open between 8am and dusk when School Wins Two-Year Fight the school is not in session. The Department of Education makes reimbursement for to Use Parkland, 2013, www. islingtongazette.co.uk/news/ maintenance costs conditional on the submission of monthly use surveys. By comparing school_wins_two_year_fight_to_ the use of the site with the amount charged by the custodian, the Department can use_parkland_1_2264615. decide which schoolyards to close in favour of opening others that are likely to be more 161 London Borough of Islington Council, “Islington Active Spaces,” heavily used. Community concerns about anti-social behaviour, noise and loss of car 2013, www.islington.gov.uk/ services/children-families/ 163 parking were addressed through a series of meetings. cs-things-to-do/Pages/Islington- Active-Spaces.aspx.
162 Mayor Michael R. Conversely, schools can also green their existing outdoor areas and open them Bloomberg, plaNYC: A Greener, Greater New York (Update April to the public (see Box 14). Such a move will require considerable consultation, 2011), 2011. the provision of maintenance funding, as well as staffing agreements to open and 163 New York City Global close the gates. The UK’s cities are considerably greener than New York, and so Partners, Best Practice: Converting Schoolyards to fewer urban areas are likely to require this intervention. Nevertheless, opening Community Playgrounds, 2013.
Page 66 policyexchange.org.uk | 43 Green Society
school playgrounds can be an effective way to increase access to green space and recreation areas, and should be considered in areas deprived of green space where land prices are too high or space too limited to allow the creation of a new park. With the rise in School Farms, the success of the Growing with Schools programme and the positive impacts of Forest School programmes, there is increasing recognition that outdoor learning is an important part of a child’s education.164,165,166 Schools could, therefore, begin to play an important role in green space creation and maintenance by:
zz Greening their own land; zz Increasing public access to their own green space (e.g. during weekends and holidays); and zz Supporting the maintenance of local green spaces where schools have no access to their own.
This could be done in partnership with local authorities and other public sector bodies, such as CCGs (as in the case of Rotherfield Primary School). In some cases, this has already happened. For example, the caretaker at Watford’s Central Primary School locks the gate to the school buildings at the end of the school day and opens the gates to the ball park and pocket park. This allows full public access after school hours, at weekends and during school holidays. The pocket park is maintained by Watford Borough Council and a committee of nearby residents monitor the pocket park and ball park on an informal basis.167 Recommendation: DfE should provide guidance to schools on how to 164 FCFCG, “School Farms Network”,2013, www.farmgarden. green their open spaces safely, make best use of them, and increase public org.uk/education/school-farms- access outside of school hours. DfE should also provide guidance for schools network.
165 FCFCG, “Growing with interested in working with local authorities and Clinical Commissioning Schools”, 2013, www.farmgarden. Groups to help maintain local green spaces. org.uk/education/growing-with- schools/.
166 Liz O’Brien and Richard Leps, lnps, city deals and growth deals Murray, “Forest School and Its Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are partnerships between local authorities Impacts on Young Children: Case Studies in Britain,” Urban Forestry and businesses. Established in 2011, there are now 39 LEPs covering the whole & Urban Greening 6, no. 4 (2007): of England. Like the City Deals (see below), the intention is to “drive sustainable 249–65.
167 Central Primary School, economic growth and create the conditions to increase private sector jobs in Personal Communication, their communities.”168 LEPs now have access to considerable funding resources, May 2014. including the £730 million Growing Places Fund, the £15 million Rural Growth 168 Michael Heseltine, 169 No Stone Unturned in Pursuit Networks, and £5 billion of EU Structural Funds between 2014 and 2020. of Growth, 2012. LEPs have the potential to direct funds to improve urban green space provision. 169 National Audit Office, For example, applications for the EU Structural Funds require consideration of Funding and Structures for Local 170 Economic Growth, 2013. green space. Should the revised Treasury Green Book include natural capital 170 HMG, The Development accounting, this would help LEPs to make the case to Central Government and Delivery of European Structural and Investment Funds for incorporating green infrastructure (including green spaces) into their Strategies: Supplementary programmes. In addition, LEPs are key partners in developing City Deals and the Guidance to Local Enterprise 171,172 Partnerships, 2013. more recently introduced Growth Deals. Both schemes provide funding for
171 HMG, Unlocking Growth initiatives that benefit the local economy, although City Deals go further and also in Cities – Wave ,1 2012. involve the devolution of certain powers to cities. 172 HMG, Growth Deals: Initial Good quality green spaces contribute to the attractiveness of cities to investors, Guidance for Local Enterprise Partnerships, 2013. residents (see Box 7 for our analysis of how green space quality can affect property
44 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 67 Other Potential Public Sector Sources of Funding
prices), and tourists. They also contribute to their resilience against climate change and flood events (see ourPark Land report) and provide important social benefits (see Chapter 1). The maintenance and creation of green spaces should therefore form part of a city’s economic growth strategy. Yet while the first wave of City Deals were being used as a way of supporting low carbon development, our analysis has found that all eight first wave City Deals failed to consider their green spaces as opportunities for investment (although Liverpool did focus on the cleanliness of the River Mersey).173,174 In addition, the Growth Deals for the five most populous urban areas in England (Greater London, Greater Manchester, Greater Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool) revealed that only Liverpool considered the natural environment as playing a role in economic growth.175 This highlights the critical role than Local Nature Partnerships (LNPs) should be playing in raising the profile of the natural environment in urban areas and its potential contribution to the local economy. However, in contrast to the LEPs, the 48 LNPs have gaps in their coverage of England and limited access to funding beyond an initial £1 million capacity building fund.176,177 This compromises their ability to effect long term change in the local environment. In addition, there is no requirement for LNPs and LEPs to collaborate, and no way of monitoring where this is or is not happening. Recommendation: Central Government should create a website for Local Nature Partnerships, similar to that available to Local Enterprise Partnerships. This would enable them to share knowledge and resources, such as examples of effective collaboration with LEPs and local authorities.
Conclusions 173 Faye Scott, Green Cities: This chapter has identified existing sources of funding that could supplement Using City Deals to Drive local authority green space maintenance and creation budgets. It has also explored Low Carbon Growth (Green Alliance, 2012). potential changes to those funding sources to help ensure longer-term funding, 174 Liverpool City Region Local with a focus on levies on top of council tax, endowments, and grants. However, Enterprise Partnership, Liverpool there also other potential sources of public sector funding beyond local authority City Region Deal, 2012. green space budgets that could be harnessed for green space maintenance, such 175 Liverpool City Region Local Enterprise Partnership , Liverpool as public health and education. Of these, the most important is likely to be public City Region Growth Deal, 2014. health; green spaces offer a wide range of public health benefits (see Chapter 1), 176 Defra, “Map of Local Nature Partnerships,” 2013, www.gov.uk/ despite there being no statutory duty to maintain them. Each of these will be government/publications/map-of- appropriate in a specific range of different circumstances. local-nature-partnerships. Yet given the current focus on austerity, public sector funding must be spent 177 Defra, “Local areas are keen to form Local Nature cost-effectively, i.e. deliver the greatest green space improvements and benefits, in Partnerships,” 2011, the areas where they are needed most, for the least money. This will be explored www.gov.uk/government/news/ local-areas-are-keen-to-form- in the next chapter. local-nature-partnerships.
Page 68 policyexchange.org.uk | 45 4 Public Sector Spending
The previous chapter identified a variety of potential new funding sources for urban green space maintenance, ranging from public sector budgets for health and education, to taking advantage of existing local structures and schemes, such as City Deals and local Enterprise Partnerships. However, whilst raising public sector funding for urban green spaces is one important obstacle to overcome; spending that funding effectively is another.
Green space strategies
“All forms of open space need to be considered as a whole, and to be co-ordinated into a closely- linked park system” Abercrombie & Forshaw, County of London Plan, 1943
A green space strategy (or open space strategy) is a document created by a local authority to establish its “vision for using its green space and the goals it wants to achieve, plus the resources, methods and time needed to meet these goals”.178 Ideally, green space strategies can help to better target existing resources and make the case for maintained or increased funding. The National Audit Office (NAO) found that “over 70 per cent of green space managers thought they had helped to strengthen support for green space amongst other officers and local politicians”.179 Although there is no statutory requirement for local authorities to create a green space strategy, our Freedom of Information request found that almost 83 per cent of local authorities have at least some form of written green space strategy (see Figure 4). The content and quality of existing urban green space strategies varies enormously. Of the 116 urban local authorities that said they had an open space strategy, only 74 could be located for analysis. Of these, 40 per cent failed to include any measureable targets for the quantity of green space in their area. In addition, 40 per cent failed to include measureable targets for the quality of their green spaces, and more than one third failed to include any measureable targets for public access to green space. Compounding this problem, 54 per cent failed to indicate any timetable for improvements and 55 per cent failed to include a monitoring strategy 178 CABE Space, Green Space Strategies, 2004. to ensure targets had been reached. There are also issues surrounding the survey
179 National Audit Office, work required to inform green space strategies. When these were first created, Enhancing Urban Green Space funding issues meant that smaller sites, (typically those less than 0.4 hectares in (London, UK: The Stationery Office, 2006). area), often along with green spaces belonging to schools, highways and housing
46 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 69 Public Sector Spending
Figure 4: The cumulative percentage of urban local authorities with at least some form of written green space strategy. 2000 and 2006 data was taken from the National Audit Office, 2013 data was from the 116 urban local authorities that responded to our own Freedom of information request
90%
80%
70%
60% 2013 50% 2006 40% 2000 30%
20%
10%
0% Percentage of urban local authories with some form of wrien green space strategy estates were not included.180 This meant that areas could be highlighted as deficient in open space, which in actuality had good provision. In addition, this could impact on the way that local authorities commission public projects and services, such as building schools and highways maintenance. Without an accurate and comprehensive green space strategy and data on green space quality, it is difficult to include green space maintenance in public project and service delivery contracts. Recommendation: In line with our Park Land report, a crowdsourced, freely publicly accessible urban green space map should be created, to which local authorities and other public sector bodies can add their data. This will enable more accurate analysis of where resources should be directed to improve green space quality and provision and help inform local authority commissioning.
Competitions Prizes and competitions have long been used to encourage the development of solutions to difficult problems. For example, in 1714 the British Government introduced a competition for a reasonably accurate method of determining longitude at sea. This was crucial for Britain to maintain its maritime advantage. The prize was £20,000 (approximately £4 million in 2012 terms) and the unexpected winner was John Harrison, a carpenter and watchmaker.181 There are several advantages to the use of competitions and prizes rather than, for 180 Sue Morgan, Around example, grants: the Block Ltd Director, Personal Communication, March 2014.
181 H. Quill, “John Harrison, zz The prize money is only paid out based on success. Copley Medallist, and the £20 zz Greater capital can be raised for the task. For example, the 26 teams competing 000 Longitude Prize,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of for the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE collectively spent $100 million. London 8, no. 2 (1963): 146–60.
Page 70 policyexchange.org.uk | 47 Green Society
zz A greater range of approaches can be trialled and tested. For example, when Netflix offered a $1 million prize for an improved prediction algorithm, more than 400,000 entries were generated. zz A prize opens the field of participants, allowing innovative non-experts (such
182 Erika B. Wagner, “Why Prize? as John Harrison and the Longitude Prize) to take part. The Surprising Resurgence of zz They increase public awareness of the problem that the prize is hoping Prizes To Stimulate Innovation,” 182 Research-Technology to solve. Management 54, no. 6 (November 2011): 32–36.
183 J H Lawton et al., Extending competitions to the complex problems facing the natural Making Space for Nature: environment is a promising approach. In 2010, the Lawton review identified A Review of England’s Wildlife Sites and Ecological Network that our current network of wildlife sites is insufficient to support biodiversity (Defra, 2010). given continuing environmental change and human pressures. In response, the 184 Defra, The Natural Government launched a £7.5 million competition to identify 12 initial ‘Nature Choice: Securing the Value 183,184 of Nature. CM 8082. Improvement Areas’ (NIAs). In total, 76 applications were received and the
185 Collingwood 12 final projects have leveraged an additional £40 million in cash, gifts in kind, Environmental Planning, and voluntary support.185 The competition also helped create new partnerships Monitoring and Evaluation of Nature Improvement Areas: and conservation approaches.186 Year 1 (2012–13) Progress Report, 2013. A few British cities have also made attempts to improve green space connectivity,
186 John Lawton, Nature including the All London Green Grid, and the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Improvement Areas One Year Network.187,188 However, many urban green spaces remain fragmented, and some on: A Guest Blog by Professor Sir John Lawton, 2013, urban areas are deprived of access to green spaces (see Chapter 1). We have also www.rspb.org.uk/community/ found that Green Space Strategies are important but currently insufficient (see the ourwork/b/martinharper/ archive/2013/03/27/ previous section). In addition, we have found that 86 per cent of NIAs by area nature-improvement-areas- are located outside of areas classified as urban by the Office for National Statistics. one-year-on-a-guest-blog-by- professor-sir-john-lawton.aspx. There is therefore a need to address green space fragmentation in cities. 187 Greater London Authority, Some German and Scandinavian cities have also begun to address the issue All London Green Grid, www.london.gov.uk/priorities/ of urban green space connectivity, including Copenhagen (‘Green Fingers’), environment/greening-london/ Berlin (‘Biotope Area Factor’, also taken up by Southampton) and Hamburg improving-londons-parks-green- 189,190 spaces/all-london-green-grid, (Green Network, see Box 15). The US city of Milwaukee’s entry to the 2014. 2012–13 Bloomberg Philanthropies Mayor’s Challenge attempted to plant derelict 188 Scottish Natural Heritage, land (from foreclosures) with orchards, gardens, and small farms to improve Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network, www.snh.gov.uk/land- and-sea/managing-the-land/ spatial-ecology/case-studies/ glasgow-clyde-green-netw/, 2014. Box 15: Hamburg’s Green Network
189 Richard D. Knowles, Hamburg’s Grünes Netz (Green Network) plan involves the completion of an almost 100 “Transit Oriented Development in year old vision. In 1919, Fritz Schumacher developed the axial concept for Hamburg, Copenhagen, Denmark: From the Finger Plan to Ø Restad,” Journal which involved Hamburg’s development being concentrated in radial axes from the of Transport Geography 22 (May centre, separated by areas of green and open space (similar to Copenhagen’s ‘Green 2012). Fingers’ concept). Over time, the concept of ‘green rings’ was also introduced. Green 190 Annika Kruuse, GRaBS Expert Paper 6: The Green Space and public open spaces now form approximately half of Hamburg’s area, but many are Factor and the Green Points System, 2011. isolated from other green spaces. Existing spaces will therefore be linked by “Narrow
191 City of Hamburg, green corridors and footpaths in the shape of green streets with reduced traffic”. The Grünes Netz Hamburg, city has also identified several areas that are deficient in open and green space (as 2012, www.hamburg.de/ contentblob/3908156/data/ London also has). As a result, “Greening courtyards and multiple or different use of erlaeuterungen-freiraumver- school grounds, sports grounds, car parks or streets will be used to increase the supply engl.pdf. of open space in areas where it is impossible to create new public open space”.191 Bigger 192 City of Hamburg, Gesamtprojekt: Häufig gestellte projects include a green canopy over the six to eight lane A7 motorway. Financing this Fragen, www.hamburg.de/a7- 192 deckel/faq-gesamtprojekt/, 2014. scheme will require a mixture of public sector and private sector funding.
48 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 71 Public Sector Spending
Figure 5: Schematic representation of the two green rings and radial axes of Hamburg’s Green Network193
community nutrition.194 These approaches help to create a cohesive network of urban green spaces: connecting existing green spaces and increasing green space provision. The benefits include improved public access to green spaces, and a range of environmental benefits. In addition, there is a growing need for new partnerships to help address the public sector funding gap that urban green spaces are facing (see our Park Land report for further details). Recommendation: The Government should establish a new competition, similar to the Nature Improvement Areas competition. This would ask for proposals to increase connectivity between urban green spaces at a city- wide level, as well as improve public access to urban green spaces. Like the NIA competition, this would require partnership working, drawing on local 193 City of Hamburg, “Die beiden Grünen authority Green Space Strategies, nature conservation organisation expertise, Ringe verbinden die Natural England and the Environment Agency, the private sector and the public. Landschaftsachsen,” 2014, www.hamburg.de/ gruenes-netz/3907110/ Community budgets die-gruenen-ringe.html. 194 Tom Barrett, “Mayors Under the traditional government (whether local or central) system, urban green Challenge Finalist: Milwaukee spaces have slipped through the gaps in terms of policy and funding. At a Central (Video, Vote)”, Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost. Government level there is no Minister, department, team, or even individual, solely com/tom-barrett/mayors- responsible for urban green spaces. At a local government level, parks and green challenge-milwauke_b_2711353. html?utm_hp_ref=mayors- spaces are often the responsibility of larger Leisure, Streetscene and/or Environment challenge, 2014.
Page 72 policyexchange.org.uk | 49 Green Society
teams with multiple maintenance contracts. Outside of government, there is no single, coherent voluntary or industry sector voice for green spaces.195 Community Budgets are intended to help break down the silos of government policy and spending. They pool budgets from local authorities and other public sector bodies for spending on people and places rather than government functions.196 In the UK, they have been used in various forms since the early 1990s. The aims are to avoid duplication of effort by sharing local knowledge, and make savings by using community assets and volunteer effort. This is aided by relaxing or removing any central rules and regulations that prevent more flexible public spending.197 As a result, community budgets have the potential to deliver better outcomes more cost-effectively (although robust evaluation data is often lacking). In 2011, the Government launched Whole Place community budget pilots in four areas, at a cost of £4.8 million. The aim was to conduct cost-benefit analyses of reforms under four themes: including health and wellbeing, economic opportunity, community safety, and families with complex needs.198 For example, the Greater Manchester area identified the number of young children not ready for school by the age of four or five as a particular issue. As a result, it proposed early risk identification and effective support provision. These would be achieved through a ‘whole family’ approach from public services and the introduction of common terms and conditions for childcare workers.199 The pilot programme ended in 2012 with the publication of the business cases. Ernst & Young calculated that if the estimated benefits from the four pilot areas were scaled up across the country, the net benefit for the taxpayer could be between £4 and 8 billion each year.200 These plans are currently being implemented. It is imperative that proper assessment of the pilots is done. There are two main mechanisms by which green spaces could benefit from community budgets. The first is the maintenance (rather than continued decline) of existing green space budgets as a result of the cost savings achieved by the community budget. The second is the potential increase in green space budgets: breaking down existing public sector silos through community budgets could
195 Drayson, Park Land. enable the recognition of the multiple economic, environmental and social
196 Mark Sandford, Community benefits green spaces provide. The widespread use of community budgets could, Budgets and City Deals (House therefore, help secure long term improvements in urban green space funding. of Commons Library, 2014).
197 DCLG, Community However, community budgets are not a panacea. They require upfront Budgets, www.gov.uk/ investment and resources to establish, and the resultant savings and benefits government/policies/ giving-local-authorities-more- take time to develop. In addition, outcomes need to be measured, and savings control-over-how-they-spend- and benefits need to be harnessed and reinvested fairly. This can be aided by the public-money-in-their-area--2/ supporting-pages/community- sharing of knowledge and experience. budgets, 2014.
198 NAO, Case Study on Integration : Measuring the Costs Participatory budgeting/neighbourhood and Benefits of Whole-Place community budgets Community Budgets, 2013. Whilst community budgets provide a more holistic framework for public sector 199 HM Government and Local Government Association, Local spending, that spending remains directed by the public sector, often with little Public Service Transformation: community engagement. Participatory budgeting, in contrast, provides local A Guide to Whole Place Community Budgets, 2013. people with a direct say in how their local authority’s funds are spent. Citizens
200 Ernst & Young LLP, are provided with information that “enables them to be engaged in prioritising Whole Place Community Budgets: the needs of their neighbourhoods, propose and debate new services and projects A Review of the Potential for Aggregation, 2013. and set budgets in a democratic and transparent way”, without the responsibility
50 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 73 Public Sector Spending
of project delivery.201 In practice, there are many ways this can be achieved, from top-down consultation to various forms of intensive participation process. Participatory budgeting was first invented in Porto Alegre (Brazil) in 1989. Participatory budgets are now used in more than 100 European cities, including London (Box 16 describes how participatory budgeting works in Chicago).202
Box 16: Participatory budgeting in Chicago’s 49th ward The City of Chicago is split into 50 wards, each of which is represented by an elected alderman. Every year, each alderman is allocated more than $1 million to spend on infrastructure improvements in their ward.203 Spending decisions are entirely at the 201 PB Unit, “What is Participatory Budgeting?”, 2007, discretion of the aldermen. In 2009, Alderman Joe Moore used participatory budgeting www.participatorybudgeting.org. to engage ward residents in the spending of his funding. The four-step process was uk/about. designed by a steering group comprising representatives of various civic, religious 202 Yves Sintomer, Carsten Herzberg, and Anja Röcke, and community organisations in the ward. Advice and guidance were provided by a “Participatory Budgeting variety of institutes and organisations. Various green space projects have been voted in Europe: Potentials and Challenges,” International Journal for, including a playground replacement, tree planting, path creation, and the creation of Urban and Regional Research 32, no. 1 (March 2008): 164–78. of community gardens.204 All residents of the ward aged 16 or over are eligible to vote. 203 City of Chicago, Capital 205 However, turnout remains relatively low (1,500 of the more than 40,000 residents). Improvement Program, www. cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/ obm/provdrs/cap_improve. html, 2014. As with community budgets participatory budgeting is not a silver bullet.206 204 Joe Moore, Participatory Different approaches will be needed in different contexts, requiring upfront Budgeting, www.ward49.com/ investment in outreach and engagement. Their savings and benefits are also likely participatory-budgeting/, 2014. to take longer than those of community budgets.207 However, the benefits of the 205 Joe Moore, Participatory Budgeting, www.ward49.com/ participatory budgeting approach have been recognised by Central Government: participatory-budgeting/ “Where it has been tried internationally it has enhanced participation in local #Intro, 2014. 206 Robert Rutherfoord et al., democracy, improved the delivery of local services, and enhanced the roles of Neighbourhood Community local councillors.”208 The ten Our Place pilots between 2012 and 2013 resulted Budget Pilot Programme: Research, Learning, Evaluation in the creation of neighbourhood level community budgets co-designed with and Lessons (DCLG, 2013). local residents, as well as operational plans for delivery in 2013/14. Although the 207 Communities and Local impact of these budgets cannot yet be evaluated, initial actions include the creation Government Select Committee, Community Budgets, 2013. of London’s first parish council in 10 years and the creation of e-democracy tools 208 ODPM, Citizen Engagement to engage citizens in decision-making.209 The scheme has now been rolled out to and Public Services: Why 210 Neighbourhoods Matter (London, 100 further communities. Local evaluations will be conducted, with funding UK: Office of the Deputy Prime and support from DCLG. DCLG are also collating and sharing the lessons learned Minister, 2005). from the pilots.211 209 DCLG and LGA, Our Place! (London, UK: Local Government Association, 2013). Conclusions 210 LGA, “Our Place This chapter focused on the spending of public sector green space funding. Neighbourhood Community Budgets”, 2013, www.local.gov. Green Space Strategies are one useful tool to help achieve targeted and cost- uk/community-budgets/-/journal_ content/56/10180/3691921/ effective funding, but are currently inadequate. Pooling public sector funding ARTICLE.
(via community budgets) and devolving decision-making to communities 211 Rachel Edwards, (through participatory budgeting) are also important. Complementing this, there CLG Big Society & Community Rights Division, Personal remains considerable scope for urban green space funding from civil society and Communication, July 2014. the private sector (for example, every £1 of Nottingham City Council’s Parks 212 Eddie Curry, Nottingham and Open Spaces funding generates £10 of external funding), and this will be City Council Head of Parks and Open Spaces, APSE Parks Seminar 212 explored in the following chapter. Presentation, 20 March 2014.
Page 74 policyexchange.org.uk | 51 5 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
The previous chapter covered the existing methods the public sector can use to raise funding for parks and other urban green spaces. It also explored potential new funding sources that could help make up the shortfall in local authority budgets and how these could be more effectively spent. However, the public sector alone cannot, is not, and perhaps should not, financially support urban green spaces in isolation. As described in Chapter 1, communities derive important benefits from access to high quality urban green spaces, from improved health to social cohesion. Green spaces help to make our cities attractive places to live, benefitting not only civil society but also the private sector. As a result, both the private sector and civil society have some responsibility to support the maintenance and improvement of the green spaces. This represents a considerable opportunity, since local authority green space managers have seen a more than 30 per cent increase in the number of friends and user groups.213 Partly as a reflection of this, in 2013, the charity Nesta launched its Rethinking Parks programme to support innovation in sustainable parks funding. Charities and voluntary organisations were invited to apply for a share of £1 million funding. This chapter therefore examines how existing civil society and private sector funding methods can be strengthened or improved, as well as exploring new methods of funding (as part of this research, we have also considered Community Shares and Social Impact Bonds but consider that there are few policy opportunities associated with these).
Philanthropic and charitable donations Donations from wealthy individuals provided some of our earliest public green spaces, perhaps as a result of slow government action in the 19th century 213 Peter Neal Consulting and Community First Partnership, (despite the impetus of an 1833 Select Committee report on public walks, its State of UK Public Parks 2014: “recommendations were only implemented very slowly, and at first by means Renaissance to Risk?. 214 214 J. Mordaunt Crook, of private munificence”). Britain’s first publicly accessible and deliberately “Book Review: The Park and designed park was created in 1840. A wealthy mill owner commissioned the Town, Public Landscape in the 19th and 20th Centuries an arboretum on land that was formerly a summer retreat, and donated the by G. F. Chadwick,” Victorian completed park to Derby Town Council and the public.215 This example also Studies 11, no. 2 (1967): 241–43. illustrates a problem noted in the previous chapter; it is often easier to attract large 215 BBC Derby, Derby’s Arboretum Park, 2003, donations for capital works rather than ongoing maintenance (although this issue www.bbc.co.uk/derby/features/ is starting to be addressed: see Box 17). Private donations remain an important tours/parks/derby/arboretum_ history.shtml. part of park creation, improvement and maintenance.
52 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 75 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
Box 17: The Royal Parks Foundation The Royal Parks Foundation was established in 2003 in response to reduced government funding for the Royal Parks Agency (the delivery body for the eight Royal Parks in London, including Hyde Park). The Foundation is an independent charity (allowing it to claim Gift Aid) that has focused on large projects, as well as sports and education provision, i.e. typically those things for which the Royal Parks receive little or no government funding. In 2011/12, the Foundation made grants of approximately £1.8 million to the Royal Parks.216 The Foundation’s running costs are covered by the funds raised from the annual half marathon that it organises. Its main sources of funding include charitable grants, public donations and the private sector. Members of the public can make one-off or regular payments of varying amounts to the Royal Parks. Small donations (£25 each) can also be made for particular natural features (including deer, ducks, trees and stag beetles) within the Royal Parks via adoption programmes. Major donations can also be made specifically to a particular project or park and the gift can be acknowledged. Independent schools located close to the Royal Parks have also been targeted to help fundraise.217 High profile philanthropic organisations have also provided funding to the Royal Parks via the Foundation. For example, an Esmée Fairbairn Foundation grant in 2006 helped to create wetlands in Bushy Park.218 The Tiffany & Co. Foundation also pledged $1.25 million for a two-year programme to restore water features across the eight Royal Parks. The Foundation has also encouraged corporate donations. Deutsche Bank funded an expansion of the Foundation’s science programme to 100 of the most disadvantaged secondary schools in London, and the Halcyon Gallery has supported classes for primary and secondary school children at the Foundation’s education centre.219,220
There is one important difficulty in relying entirely on donations to parks and other urban green spaces. Donations are usually highly location-specific; most people donate to their local park.221 This can mean that parks in more deprived areas receive fewer donations than those in wealthier areas. It can also mean that larger parks can attract a greater number of potential donors than smaller green spaces simply by virtue of their geography (see Figure 6).
216 The Royal Parks Agency, Figure 6: The effect of increasing park size on its zone The Royal Parks Annual Report and Accounts 2011–2012, 2012.
of influence 217 Sara Lom, Royal Parks Foundation Chief Executive, 100 m 100 m Personal Communication, August 2013.
200 m 218 The Royal Parks Foundation, 100 m Our First Ten Years, 2013.
219 The Royal Parks Agency, The Royal Parks Annual Report and Accounts 2012–2013, 2013.
220 The Royal Parks Foundation, Large Park Small Park Support the Centre, 2014, www.supporttheroyalparks.org/ Radius 400 metres 200 metres explore/isis_education_centre/ what_is_the_isis_education_ Area 125,664 metres 31,416 metres centre/support_the_centre. Area of 100 metre buffer 157,080 metres 94,248 metres 221 Sara Lom, Royal Parks around the park Foundation Chief Executive, Personal Communication, August 2013.
Page 76 policyexchange.org.uk | 53 Green Society
These effects can be clearly seen in New York (see Box 18) and is likely to also be the case in the UK.222 This means that smaller and/or less popular green spaces may be more reliant on fluctuating public sector budgets.
Box 18: Central Park, New York One of New York’s largest parks, Central Park is managed by both the City’s Parks & Recreation Department and a conservancy (a private, non-profit organisation dedicated to the conservation of the park) via a management agreement. Central Park is relatively well funded in comparison with other, smaller, New York parks. Donations to the conservancy are tax deductible. Arguing that this means park donations deprive the New York government of tax revenues, the new mayor, Bill de Blasio, is supporting a controversial proposed Bill. The Bill would redistribute 20 per cent of the funds from those park conservancies with an operating budget of more than $5 million to less well-maintained parks (usually managed by the city’s Parks & Recreation Department).223 The difficulty with this Bill is that, like taxation it redistributes funds, but unlike taxation it redistributes voluntary donations rather than income. This could reduce overall civil society donations to parks since there is less control over what donations support and there is no guarantee that the redistributed funds will be well managed, or managed in the way that donors wish their gifts to be used for. Donations to high profile parks free up public sector spending on other areas. Similar proposals to redistribute voluntary donations should not be extended to the UK. Nevertheless, there is a need to encourage donations to smaller green spaces and/or green spaces in more deprived areas.
One potential solution to the problem of donations being given primarily to larger sites in wealthier areas with active Friends groups and/or charitable trusts, is the creation of advocacy groups for all the green spaces in a neighbourhood, rather than for a single green space. New York’s Open Space Alliance for North Brooklyn provides an example of this approach, by fundraising for 224 222 This cannot be absolutely and improving more than 100 green spaces. The Wildlife Trusts and the determined as we have no National Trust are successful examples at the regional and national levels, where national-level data on green space funding (see our Park collective fundraising benefits many sites. However, there are few organisations Land report). in the UK that fundraise for green spaces at a neighbourhood (as opposed to a 223 Michael Saul & Melanie West, “De Blasio Parks Stance single-site) level. Unsettles Some”, Wall Street There are approximately 50 existing Friends group forums (networks of Journal (13 October 2013), 225 http://online.wsj.com/news/ Friends groups in the same area) in the UK. However, these currently tend articles/SB100014240527023045 to only offer support for Friends groups, rather than collective fundraising. One 20704579130051128993582. exception is London’s Bankside Open Spaces Trust, which not only supports 224 Open Space Alliance for North Brooklyn, About OSA, existing community groups, but also conducts its own fundraising activities and http://osanb.org/learn/about- osa/, 2014. improvement activities. For example, the Trust is attempting to raise £137,000 to 226 225 National Federation create a sunken garden in the ruins of Winchester Palace. However, a potentially of Parks and Green Spaces, important existing vehicle for green space philanthropy at a neighbourhood level Membership, www.natfedparks. org.uk/membership-1.html, 2014. is the community foundation (see Box 19). Community foundations could be
226 Bankside Open Spaces a potentially pivotal source of funding for small green spaces in more deprived Trust, Winchester Palace Appeal, areas that are unable to attract large donations from residents in their immediate www.bost.org.uk/future-projects/ winchester-palace-appeal/, 2014 surroundings.
54 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 77 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
Box 19: Community foundations Community foundations were originally developed in the US but there are now 46 community foundations across the UK. Donors can establish bespoke endowed funds with community foundations for particular purposes, such as youth or environment work, in a particular place. The community foundation will administer the fund, carry out due diligence on applicants, and prepare a portfolio of potential projects or organisations for the donor to support. Community foundations also help measure the impact of a donor’s funding. As an alternative to a bespoke fund, community foundations can also provide information for new donors about existing charities and community groups that meet their requirements. As a result, a donor could provide funds for several different Friends groups and/or green space charities within a particular neighbourhood without having to replicate existing provision. The success of community foundations across the UK can be seen in the number of donors they attract (more than 15,000) and the size of the endowments they manage (£380 million).227 A further advantage is that Gift Aid (see later in this chapter for more detail) can be claimed for donations to community foundation funds, increasing their size.
Legacies Donations of money or property in a will are known as legacies. The types of charities that benefit from legacies are relatively limited: more than two-thirds (65.3 per cent) of UK bequests are for cancer research, medical research, hospitals and hospices.228 In the year to September 2013, just 61 UK charities 227 UK Community Foundations, Helping 229 received approximately £1.1 billion from legacies. In addition, relatively few Build Thriving Communities, http://ukcommunityfoundations. people leave charitable legacies. A 2012 poll suggested that 58 per cent of the org/, 2014.
UK adult population do not have a will. Of the 250,000 estates notified for 228 Anthony B Atkinson, probate in 2009, only 16 per cent included charitable legacies (in comparison Peter G Backus, and John Micklewright, “Charitable with approximately 30 million people who give to charity during their Bequests and Wealth at lifetime).230,231 Death,” 2012 Legacies are most commonly (87 per cent) left as a percentage of an estate’s 229 Legacy Foresight, “The Fastest Growth for Five Years,” final value, rather than as a fixed cash gift (this prevents charities from benefitting Legacy Bulletin, no. 4 (2013). at the expense of other beneficiaries, such as family members).232 This has two 230 Unbiased.co.uk, Write a Will Week, www.unbiased.co.uk/ main implications: advice-on/write-a-will-week, 2014. zz in an economic downturn, the value of charitable legacies may decrease; and 231 John Micklewright et al., Giving to Development: zz as people live longer, there is potential for the cost of care to erode the value Full Research Report – ESRC of legacies. End of Award Report, RES-155-25- 0061 (ESRC, 2009).
232 Legacy Foresight, “The Legacies currently play a variable, yet potentially significant, role in funding Fastest Growth for Five Years.” urban green spaces. The National Trust, for example, obtains 20 per cent of its 233 National Trust, How Legacies 233 Help, www.nationaltrust.org.uk/ income from legacies. However, the Royal Parks Foundation obtained only get-involved/donate/ways-of- £15,000 (0.4 per cent) from legacies in 2013/14. As with other donations, giving/leaving-a-gift-in-your-will/ the-difference-your-gift-could- legacies tend to be restricted to specific parks, or areas of parks. For example, make/, 2014 in the case of Richmond Park, legacy gifts enabled the restoration of the 234 Grace Enright, Royal Parks Pembroke Lodge fountain and contributed to the restoration of the Isabella Foundation Development Officer, Personal Communication, 234 Plantation. February, 2014
Page 78 policyexchange.org.uk | 55 Green Society
Living legacies Whilst legacies are a useful tool for charitable giving, most people give more during their lifetimes than they bequeath in legacies after death. Policies to encourage more lifetime giving are therefore attractive. Gift Aid (see the following section) is one of the most well-known tax incentives, as well as Payroll Giving (particularly for higher rate taxpayers).235 However, both of these forms of donation are limited by the donor’s perception of risk: lack of future financial security was identified as a barrier to giving amongst high earners.236 One way to overcome this issue is the use of Charitable Remainder Trusts (CRTs, see Box 20). In the US, CRTs are an important source of funding for charities involved in education and the arts.237 They are also used in Canada and Germany, and are known in the UK as ‘Lifetime Legacies’ or ‘Living Legacies’ but have not yet been introduced here.
Box 20: Simplified description of Charitable Remainder Trusts CRTs (see Figure 7) allow donors to specify which charity or charities should be the beneficiary of assets or capital that they put irrevocably into the trust. The donor, or another named beneficiary, receives an annual income (usually either a fixed amount or a percentage of the trust’s assets) from the trust for a specified period (usually up to 20 years or until death). Any additional income generated from the trust is either given to the designated charity or reinvested. After the specified period, the charity receives the remaining capital value of the trust. Although the income beneficiary is liable for income tax on the annual income of the gift, the capital is tax exempt (as with legacies in a will) and is partly deductible from the donor’s income tax (depending on the income the beneficiary will receive).238,239
Figure 7: Schematic of asset flow with a potential UK Charitable Remainder Trust model
1. Gi of assets 3. Remainder of assets on death of donor Charitable Urban green Donor Remainder space charity Trust or charies 235 Rhodri Davies, Give Me a Break: Why the UK Should Not Aspire to a “US-Style” Culture of Charitable Giving (Charities Aid Foundation, 2014). 2. Annual income during 236 Ledbury Research and life of donor Barclays, Barriers to Giving, 2010.
237 Davies, Give Me a Break: Why the UK Should Not Aspire Income tax to a “US-Style” Culture of Charitable Giving. Charitable 238 Ibid. Remainder 239 Philanthropy Review, Trust A Call to Action to Encourage More People to Give and People to Give More, 2011.
56 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 79 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
In addressing donor fears of financial insecurity in old age, this model has several advantages over a standard legacy: zz Unlocking funding from smaller estates; zz Enabling closer links between the donor and the charity, potentially resulting in further giving by volunteering (e.g. trusteeship), in kind contributions, or lifetime donations eligible for Gift Aid; and zz A guaranteed and irrevocable lump sum for the charity at the closure of the trust (which could potentially be used to leverage additional funding or loans).240
The importance of CRTs in overcoming barriers to giving can be seen in the US, where CRTs have been used for more than 40 years.241 In 2011, US CRTs had a net value of $94 billion, with $124 million of income and approximately $1.8 billion of principal distributed to charities that year. Despite the difference in the respective sizes of the US and UK economies and the very different cultures of giving, a review of potential changes to charitable giving in the UK estimated that the introduction of CRTs into the UK “could generate an additional £400 million for charity in cash and assets each year”.242 The importance of CRTs for green spaces lies in their potential to contribute to endowments, which provide a sustainable source of green space maintenance funding (see Chapter 4 for details). In addition, their capacity to unlock funding from new donors with smaller estates increases their potential to support smaller green spaces in less wealthy urban areas. Current UK legislation means that gifts made with the reserved right to use it (for example a house given to children but where the parent remains in the house without paying market rent) are subject to Inheritance Tax. This would need to be changed (via a Finance Bill) to allow the introduction of CRTs, which are, essentially, gifts made with the reserved right to use part of it each year, but without the capital value being subject to Inheritance Tax. However, there are three main objections to overcome for CRTs to be introduced into the UK. The first, and strongest, is the potential cost to the Treasury. Let us first assume that the UK is only capable of donating a certain percentage of GDP each year to charity, and that CRTs will only provide a different way to give to charity (rather than attracting new donations). In this case, the Treasury would not lose inheritance tax or capital gains tax payments, as charitable legacies are already exempt from these taxes: the difference would be the immediate tax relief of CRTs in comparison with the deferred tax relief of legacies. In addition, outright gifts of land, property, shares and cash can also be eligible for income tax relief and so there would, potentially, be no additional loss from the introduction of CRTs. However, the appeal of CRTs for the charitable sector is their ability to attract new 240 Charity Tax Group, Lifetime donors and potentially generate additional giving from existing donors. For example, Legacies: Proposals from Charity potential new donors in the UK could include pensioners, who under new rules are Sector, 2004. 241 Michael I Sanders, no longer restricted to buying an annuity with their pensions, but can cash in as “Charitable Remainder Trusts much or as little as they wish. In this case, the Treasury would forego tax payments under the Tax Reform Act of 1969,” Boston College Law Review on the value of the assets in those CRTs that act as donations over and above what 12, no. 3 (1971): 409–29. would previously have been donated to charity by legacies, Payroll Giving and 242 Philanthropy Review, outright gifts. This is a difficult amount to estimate given the very different economic A Call to Action to Encourage More People to Give and People and cultural circumstances of those countries that already use CRTs. to Give More.
Page 80 policyexchange.org.uk | 57 Green Society
A second concern is the potential for abuse of CRTs for donor financial gain. In the US, CRT abuse led to the 1969 Tax Reform Act.243 This formalised the type of trust that tax deductions could be claimed for and more closely linked the tax deduction with the benefit received by the charity at the end of the trust period. Learning from the experience of the US should enable the UK to avoid CRT abuse. Finally, there is a concern that CRTs could ‘cannibalise’ existing charitable legacy or other donations. However, as we have demonstrated, whilst existing tools for charitable giving are useful, they do not address a major barrier to giving, namely fear of financial insecurity. In addition, a large proportion of the population lack wills, and a small proportion of those who have made wills make charitable legacies. CRTs would therefore help to generate donations additional to those from legacies. Recommendation: The Treasury should introduce Charitable Remainder Trusts and ensure that charities supporting green space maintenance and regeneration are eligible as beneficiaries.
Gift Aid Currently, when donations are made to a charity by a UK taxpayer, the charity can claim up to 25p in the pound through the Gift Aid scheme (see Table 3).244 Since 2002, this also applies to Community Amateur Sports Clubs. However, it does not apply to civic improvement projects that are not run by charities, such as work to improve the local environment (not just restricted to green spaces) conducted by Friends groups or other community groups.
Table 3: Benefit limits for donations, for both charities and Community Amateur Sports Clubs245
Amount of donation Maximum value of benefits
£0–£100 25% of the donation £101–£1,000 £25 £1,001+ 5% of the donation (up to a maximum of £2,500)
To be eligible to claim Gift Aid, Community Amateur Sports Clubs must fulfil certain conditions. Table 4 outlines the applicability of these conditions to community civic improvement groups: there are no insuperable obstacles to the eligibility requirements of Community Amateur Sports Club being modified to 243 Sanders, “Charitable allow community civic improvement groups to claim Gift Aid. Remainder Trusts under the Tax Reform Act of 1969.” Extending the Gift Aid scheme to community civic improvement groups could, 244 HMRC, Tax Efficient Giving to in theory, Charity: The Basics, www.hmrc. gov.uk/individuals/giving/basics. htm, 2014. zz help to address the long term decline in local authority funding of urban 245 HMRC, Gift Aid: The Basics, green spaces identified in our Park Land report; www.hmrc.gov.uk/charities/ gift_aid/basics.htm, 2014 zz encourage community groups to take more responsibility for their local
246 Chris Gourlay, Tax Breaks environment; and for Civic Crowdfunders? zz ensure that green spaces are well maintained and reflect the needs and http://spacehive.com/Blog/ 246 Details/1058, 2014. requirements of the local community.
58 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 81 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
Table 4: Community Amateur Sports Club eligibility conditions and their applicability to community civic improvement groups
Community Amateur Sports Club Applicable to Community Civic Improvement Eligibility Conditions247 Groups, such as Friends groups?
Formal constitution ✔ Membership must be open to all, ✔ without discrimination Fee levels must not pose a significant ✔ obstacle to membership
Organised on an amateur basis, i.e. ✔ although would require rephrasing zz non-profit zz providing only the ordinary benefits of an amateur sports club zz on dissolution, net assets must be used for approved sporting or charitable purposes The main purpose of the Club must be ✔ although would require rephrasing to provide facilities for, and encourage participation in, one or more eligible sports The Club must ✔ zz be established in an EU Member State or relevant territory zz provide its facilities in a single EU Member State or relevant territory Managers must be fit and proper ✔ persons
An estimate of the cost to the Treasury of extending the Gift Aid scheme is included in Box 21.
Box 21: Estimated cost to the Treasury of allowing Gift Aid on civic improvement projects The National Federation of Parks and Green Spaces estimates that there are approximately 5,000 Friends groups across the UK.248 A recent analysis suggests that 247 HMRC, Community Amateur Sports Clubs: Detailed Guidance Friends and other community groups raise £30 million each year for their parks and Notes, www.hmrc.gov.uk/casc/ green spaces (suggesting that the 5,000 groups raise an average of £6,000 each per casc_guidance.htm, 2014. year).249 Assuming that the whole £30 million would be eligible for 25 per cent Gift Aid, 248 National Federation of Parks and Green Spaces, this would cost the Treasury £7.5 million each year. Assuming that this figure could Membership, www.natfedparks. org.uk/membership-1.html, 2014. be doubled to take into account those community groups raising funds for their local 249 Peter Neal Consulting environment excluding parks and green spaces, this could cost the Treasury up to £15 and Community First Partnership, million per year. In comparison, in just over 10 years, the more than 6,200 registered State of UK Public Parks 2014: Renaissance to Risk?. Community Amateur Sports Clubs have claimed approximately £12 million in Gift 250 HMRC, Community 250,251 Aid. Amateur Sports Clubs Consultation Document, 2013.
251 CASCInfo, The Definitive Recommendation: Central government should extend the Gift Aid scheme to Guide for Community Amateur Sports Clubs, www.cascinfo. community civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, to incentivise co.uk/, 2014.
Page 82 policyexchange.org.uk | 59 Green Society
community investment in their local area, including green spaces. We estimate that this would cost the Treasury £7–15 million a year.
Subscriptions and Crowdfunding Subscriptions are a form of donation and they have been used to pay for goods or services for centuries. They are a voluntary advance payment (one-off or regular). Subscriptions were used to help fund the creation of some of the first public parks in Britain and tended to be short term donations. The land to create Peel Park, Queen’s Park and Philips Park in Manchester was purchased from private landowners in the mid-19th century, largely by local public subscription. Mark Philips MP and the then prime minister Sir Robert Peel both had local connections and each contributed £1,000 towards the purchase price of the land, which was subsequently named for their efforts.252,253 The internet has helped to transform the funding of individual projects by public subscription. Crowdfunding platforms reach a wider audience (for example through social media), can provide more detailed information on the project (for example, in videos and images), and pledged funds are only taken from subscribers once the funding target for the project is met. The platforms are themselves funded by taking a percentage of the total sum raised. Crowdfunding has now started to expand from the arts and commercial products (for example on popular online crowdfunding platforms, such as Kickstarter and IndieGoGo) to include civic projects. For example, the charity GreenSpace established the Green Places Fund to support green space 254 252 Parks & Gardens UK, renovations. This crowdfunding platform allowed local authorities to list Peel Park, Salford, 2014, green space projects that communities and businesses could fund. Pilots with www.parksandgardens.org/ places-and-people/site/6250. Birmingham City Council and Nottingham City Council were established, but 253 Medlock Valley Project, the demise of GreenSpace in 2013 meant that the Green Places Fund website was Philips Park: Past & Recent 255 History, 2009, www.philipspark. sold by its administrators in 2014 (the purchaser is not yet known). However, org.uk/MedlockValley/Medlock_ a UK project has taken crowdfunding for urban green spaces a step forward and Valley_Places/Philips_Park/ Default.aspx. created a platform that allows community groups, as well as local authorities, to
254 GreenSpace, Green propose projects (see Box 22). Places Fund, www.green-space. org.uk/GreenPlacesFund/index. php, 2013 Box 22: Spacehive 255 Kevin Counihan, Winterhill Largo Associate Director, Personal Spacehive’s online platform was launched in 2012 to make it easier for communities to Communication, January 2014 improve their local areas, including parks and other urban green spaces. Once a project 256 Chris Gourlay, Spacehive has been submitted to Spacehive (most are proposed by local communities), it has to Chief Executive,Personal 256 Communication, November 2013. be verified before fundraising can begin. A range of different organisations, such as
257 Chris Gourlay, Spacehive Locality and Manchester City Council, act as verifiers to make sure that project proposals Chief Executive,Personal are viable.257 Once a project is verified, project delivery managers are contractually Communication, March 2014.
258 Spacehive, FAQs: How can obliged to deliver the project if it reaches its funding target. Project delivery managers we help?, https://spacehive.com/ do not need to be professionals, so long as there is sufficient expertise to be able to Home/Faqs, 2014. deliver the project.258 259 Ibid.
260 Subbable, About, https://subbable.com/about, 2014. Typically, crowdfunding is used for one-off capital projects with a finite timeline, 259 261 Pozible, Say Hi to i.e. creation or renovation rather than ongoing maintenance. However, in 2013 Subscription Crowdfunding, new platforms were created that allow ‘subscription crowdfunding’ (including www.pozible.com/blog/article/ 260,261 index/13?, 2014. Subbable and Pozible). These operate in a similar way to paying for using
60 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 83 Civil Society and Private Sector Philanthropy
a private gym; with upfront monthly payments. Funders can pay regularly for as long as they wish, which could help generate sustainable funds for maintenance. As yet, there is no subscription crowdfunding model for urban green spaces, and no evidence base that can show the community which parks or other green spaces need the most support.262 As with traditional subscription, thought needs to be given by communities and platforms to the creation of incentives to donate. Recommendation: A crowdsourced urban green space map, as recommended in our Park Land report, should be created. DCLG should encourage local authorities to add data on the funding available for each green space. This could, for example, take the form of an hourglass that shows the remaining funding for the financial year. This could then be linked to a crowdfunding platform to enable either one-off or regular donations to particular green spaces.
Match funding Match funding involves one organisation (often, but not always, a public sector body) offering a donation to match one provided by another individual or organisation. This can either be in various ratios, such as a 1:1 match, or up to a certain value. Interestingly, Manchester’s three public parks (see the Subscriptions section later in this chapter) are also an early example of match funding. After the 1833 Select Committee report on public walks, the Government released £10,000 (approximately £880,000 in 2012 terms) in 1841 for the creation of public parks across the country, contingent on match funding from “political bodies wishing to benefit from this fund”.263 Manchester secured £3,000 (approximately £264,000 in 2012 terms) of this Central government funding but raised more than £25,000 (more than £2 million in 2012 terms) from the city’s poor quarters, large factories and mills, as well as from wealthy citizens and businessmen.264 The Mayor of London has pledged match funding for the creation of 100 pocket parks (small areas of public space that are predominantly green) by 2015.265 The latest round of funding offers up to £50,000 of capital funding, together with specialist project support. Maintenance funding is not provided but projects must demonstrate that the park will be maintained. Applications can be made by local authorities, communities, or creative, cultural or business groups, although evidence of partnership collaboration is required. Importantly, each grant must be at least 100 per cent matched by external funding. This can be raised through crowdfunding, and Spacehive (see Box 22) has a dedicated page of projects eligible for the Pocket Park Programme. The examples of Manchester’s public parks and London’s pocket parks show how important match funding can be in raising funds for capital projects. However, it has not yet been harnessed for maintenance, which is a major omission. 262 Drayson, Park Land. 263 John W Henneberger, “Origins of Fully Funded Public Conclusions Parks,” The George Wright Forum There is considerable capacity for private sector and civil society philanthropy to 19, no. 2 (2002): 13–20. 264 Peter Neal, “The Past, fund urban green space maintenance. However, Central Government can make it Present and Future of Victorian easier and more tax efficient for people and organisations to donate, for example City Parks” (BA (Hons), Manchester Polytechnic, 1985). by extending Gift Aid to civic improvement groups, and introducing Charitable 265 Mayor of London, Pocket Remainder Trusts (living legacies). Parks Prospectus, 2013.
Page 84 policyexchange.org.uk | 61 6 Civil Society and Private Sector Funding
The previous chapter investigated historic patterns of philanthropic giving to parks and other green spaces by civil society and the private sector. It also explored new ways of giving. This chapter, however, covers non-philanthropic funding of green spaces by civil society and the private sector, primarily through service charges and levies (paid by both the private sector and civil society) and private sector sponsorship.
Sponsorship Corporate and citizen sponsorship can play a significant role in raising funds for green spaces, whether for events, facilities, or branded products. Sponsorships are “investments in causes or events to support corporate objectives (for example, by 266 Meryl Paula Gardner and enhancing corporate image) or marketing objectives (such as increasing brand Philip Joel Shuman, “Sponsorship: 266 An Important Component of awareness).” the Promotions Mix,” Journal of Advertising 16, no. 1 (1987): 11–17. Events
267 The Royal Parks, The most familiar form of sponsorship to regular users of UK urban parks is Barclaycard presents British sponsorship of events. For example, the 10 day summer festival in Hyde Park Summer Time Hyde Park, www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/ is sponsored by Barclaycard and the ‘parkrun’ events are sponsored by adidas, hyde-park/hyde-park-attractions/ Sweatshop and PruHealth.267,268 Coca-Cola Great Britain has also begun its barclaycard-british-summer-time- in-hyde-park, 2014. ParkLives programme of free sessions of youth and family activities in parks: 268 Parkrun, Our Sponsors and Coca-Cola Zero will provide the equipment.269 Supporters, www.parkrun.org.uk/ sponsors/, 2014.
269 Liz Lowe, Coca Cola Great Facilities Britain Corporate Responsibility Sponsored facilities, such as fountains, buildings and sports facilities, are typically and Sustainability Manager, Personal Communication, 2014. named after the sponsor. This leads to the major advantage that once a facility is
270 Harnik, Local Parks, named after a sponsor, that sponsorship can last for many years. However, the Local Financing Volume Two: commercialisation of public green spaces, made visible through corporate logos Paying for Urban Parks Without 270 Raising Taxes. and branding, can be controversial amongst park users. In some cases, this has 271 Chicago Tribune News, led to restrictions. For example, although a $5 million contribution to Chicago’s “McDonald’s to Sponsor Bicycle Center”, http://articles. Millennium Park cycle centre to support its operations for 50 years resulted chicagotribune.com/2006–06–10/ in the centre being named after McDonald’s, their famous logo is absent.271 In news/0606100216_1_cycling- bike-endowment, 2006 other cases, branding is an integral part of the facility provided. For example, in
272 Chelsea FC Foundation, Stamford Bridge in London, collaboration between adidas and Chelsea Football Adidas Blue Pitches, Club (FC) Foundation has provided four free all-weather pitches. The pitches are www.chelseafc.com/foundation- 272 article/article/2732579, 2014. Chelsea blue and branded with the adidas and Chelsea FC logos.
62 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 85 Civil Society and Private Sector Funding
Branded products In the US, companies can buy the right for their products to be exclusively sold at food and drink concessions and kiosks across parks and park systems.273 For example, the Cleveland Metropark system is sponsored by Coca-Cola and Kraft Foods, amongst others.274 In some cases, sponsorship will be a useful way to raise funding for green spaces and should be welcomed. However, it will not be appropriate in all cases: other sources of funding will also be needed.
Service charges and levies Local authorities are not the only bodies that can raise levies (whether in the form of service charges or tax levies, as described in Chapter 2) for the long term maintenance of green spaces. Levies and service charges are different from subscriptions in that they are not voluntary. One major advantage for green spaces is that compulsory levies and service charges provide a more predictable and long-term supply of maintenance funding than donations and sponsorship. They also mean that those who benefit most from easy access to green spaces (i.e. those that live nearest them) are those that pay for their upkeep.
New developments Service charges and levies are relatively easy to impose on new built developments, simply because there are no existing residents to object. The London Legacy Development Corporation, a public sector not-for-profit, has taken advantage of levies to raise funds for the ongoing maintenance of the newly created Olympic Park (see Box 23).
Box 23: Queen Elizabeth II Olympic Park, London The London 2012 Olympics presented an opportunity for the creation of “the most significant urban park in the UK for well over a century” with more than 45 hectares of green space.275 With the emphasis of the 2012 Olympic Games being on ‘legacy’, long term maintenance funding for the park will be required. Initially, events will be an 273 Harnik, Local Parks, important source of funding, but as the residential plots within the Park are built, the Local Financing Volume Two: frequency of events will decrease. As a result, long-term funding will be provided by a Paying for Urban Parks Without Raising Taxes. £1 per square foot service charge on many of the 6,800 nearby residential units granted 274 Cleveland planning permission. In addition, nearby commercial occupiers will be charged £1.50 Metroparks, Our Sponsors, per square foot, which will be collected directly by LLDC.276 www.clevelandmetroparks.com/ Main/Our-Sponsors.aspx, 2014.
275 Olympic Park Legacy Company, Creating the Queen Private developers can also raise funds for the maintenance of green spaces from Elizabeth Public Park: Post-Games the surrounding properties that benefit most from. For example, approximately Transformation, 2012. 276 Mark Camley, LLDC Executive 40 per cent of the new 67-acre mixed use site at King’s Cross will be public realm, Director of Park Operations and including squares and public parks.277 The largely private estate will be managed Venues, Personal Communication, by the specialist on-site King’s Cross Estate Services. The cost of this service is November 2013 277 King’s Cross Central paid for by estate occupiers through a service charge, with any shortfalls (until Limited Partnership, Overview: the estate is completed) picked up by the landlord, King’s Cross Central Limited King’s Cross, 2013. Partnership. The aim is for the Estate Services team to be fully funded through the 278 Anna Strongman, Argent LLP Senior Projects Director, Personal 278 service charge. Communication, March 2014.
Page 86 policyexchange.org.uk | 63 Green Society
Existing Developments It is more politically difficult to introduce compulsory levies and service charges on existing residents or occupiers. In the private sector, this has been overcome by the introduction of Business Improvement Districts.
Business Improvement Districts
“Shopping and business districts are much more attractive when green infrastructure – for example, living walls, roof gardens, and trees – is included. Together they provide the perfect combination for improving vibrancy within the local economy.” Victoria Business Improvement District Vibrancy Report, 2014
Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) have a long history in Canada and the US.279 The Local Government Act 2003 (Part 4) paved the way for their introduction in the UK.280 BIDs are private organisations (in some cases, non-profit) that “supplement public services within geographically defined boundaries” by taxing businesses within those boundaries.281 There are 174 formal BIDs in the UK and the Republic of Ireland, the majority of which (141) are in town centres.282 To create a new BID, a BID proposal must describe the extra services it would provide, the levy rate (including discounts and/or exemptions), and the length of time the BID will operate (out of a maximum of five years). A ballot of all non-domestic ratepayers in the BID area is then held (and paid for by the billing authority where turnout is more than 20 per cent). Once a BID has been voted for and created, all businesses within its geographical area must pay the BID levy. 279 Kevin Ward, “‘Policies in The levy is collected by the local authority and held in a separate BID revenue Motion’, Urban Management and State Restructuring: The account. After the maximum term of five years, a new ballot must be conducted, Trans-Local Expansion of Business Improvement Districts” 30, no. 1 (2006): 54–75. Box 24: Victoria Business Improvement District 280 Business Improvements Districts (England) Regulations Victoria BID was established in 2010. It is funded by a BID levy of 1 per cent of 2004 (SI 2004/2443) and Business businesses’ rateable value. The Victoria BID administers these funds according to the Improvement Districts (Wales) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/1312). goals set out in the Victoria BID proposal document, through a board of levy payers and
281 Lorlene Hoyt and Devika a management team. Gopal-Agge, “The Business Shortly after the Victoria BID was established, it commissioned a green infrastructure Improvement District Model: A Balanced Review (covering all green spaces, such as street trees, green roofs, etc.) audit of the area, in of Contemporary Debates,” Geography Compass 1, no. 4 partnership with the Environment Agency and Natural England. This was the first such (2007): 946–58. audit to be completed by a UK BID. The aim was to identify how surface water flood 282 British BIDs, BID Locations, risk could be reduced and biodiversity enhanced, through improvements to existing www.britishbids.info/ BIDLocations.aspx, 2014. green spaces and the creation of new green spaces. As a result of this exercise, the
283 Victoria Business Victoria BID worked with the owners of The Rubens at The Palace hotel to create one Improvement District, of London’s largest green walls at 350 square metres. The wall comprises over 20 plant The Victoria Vibrancy Report 2014, 2014. species that are intended to capture rainfall and improve air quality, as well as support 284 The Rubens at the biodiversity. A rainwater harvesting function has also been integrated into the design The Living Wall Palace, , 283,284 www.rubenshotel.com/about-us/ to capture rainwater from the hotel’s roof and top up the mains supply to the wall. the-living-wall, 2012. An ongoing project is the creation of central London’s first street-side rain garden. This 285 Nigel Dunnett, John Lewis will involve the conversion of 75 square metres of raised cobbled paving into a sunken Head Office, Victoria Street, 285 London, www.nigeldunnett.info/ garden that will collect runoff from the building and street. Raingardens/JohnLewis/, 2013.
64 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 87 Civil Society and Private Sector Funding
presenting an opportunity to close the BID, or make any required changes in the levy rate and/or services provided.286 Our Park Land report identified some of the economic and environmental benefits that high quality green spaces can provide. Many of these benefits can be felt by businesses; green spaces make places more attractive to visit and spend time in, ameliorate the ‘urban heat island’ effect, and can reduce the risk of flooding. BIDs across the UK have recognised this and are creating and improving green spaces within their boundaries (see Box 24). BIDs can raise large amounts of money from both the BID levy and a combination of grants, commercial activity and council investment. A 2013 survey found that the levy and additional income provided 129 BIDs across the UK with an annual income of £96 million.287 Partly as a result of this, BIDs are playing an important role in greening town and city centres; from the creation of an urban forest in central London (Better Bankside BID) to hosting an urban gardening festival as part of Manchester’s garden city initiative (Heart of Manchester BID).288,289 BIDs may also play an educational role for those businesses not previously aware of the benefits of urban green spaces. BIDs are well placed, in partnership with the Environment Agency, Natural England and water companies, to develop and implement green space solutions to local flooding issues, such 286 Mark Sandford, as rain gardens, ponds and swales (see Box 24). An important co-benefit of this Business Improvement Districts would be increased local biodiversity. One potential green space maintenance (SN/PC/04591) (House of Commons Library, 2013). funding opportunity is for water companies to offer rebates for Business 287 British BIDs, Nationwide Improvement Districts that create and manage green spaces for flood prevention. BID Survey 2013, n.d. However, there are concerns about the way that public access to publicly owned 288 Better Bankside, Bankside Urban Forest, yet privately managed spaces is managed in BIDs. Claims that specific groups of www.betterbankside.co.uk/ people, such as the homeless, are excluded from public space in BIDs raises the buf, 2012. issues of accountability and democracy.290,291 BIDs are also not necessarily suitable 289 CityCo, Manchester Garden City, http://cityco.com/project/ in highly residential areas, where communities of residents may be best placed to manchester-garden-city/, 2013. effect change in their local green spaces. 290 Anna Minton, Ground Control: Fear and Happiness in the Twenty-First-Century City, Park Improvement Districts 2nd Edition (Penguin Books, In the US, Community Benefit Districts are local areas where residential 2012). 291 Ward, “‘Policies in Motion’, property owners tax themselves to fund projects that benefit the entire district Urban Management and State (similar to BIDs but for community rather than business benefit). The funds are Restructuring: The Trans- Local Expansion of Business administered by a non-profit organisation established by the residents. Multiple Improvement Districts.”
BIDs and Community Benefit Districts can exist in the same city. For example, 292 Oakland Metropolitan Oakland, California, supports six BIDs and three Community Benefit Districts.292 Chamber of Commerce, Oakland’s Business Similar structures, known as Neighbourhood Improvement Districts, are used in Improvement and Community Germany.293 However, this model can be taken a step further for the support of Benefit Districts, www. oaklandchamber.com/pages/ urban green spaces (see Box 25). businessimprovementcommunity If introduced into the UK, Green Benefit Districts could be named Park benefitdistrictsbidcbd/, 2012 293 Frank Friesecke and Improvement Districts to reflect their similarity with BIDs. Their design should Silja Lockemann, “Neighbourhood consider a variety of circumstances, for example how long they can last for, which Improvement Districts in Germany – A New Form of residents would be exempt from paying the levy (for example, those receiving Urban Governance for the benefits), the turnout required to make a vote valid, and the percentage of Improvement of Residential Areas,” in Integrating Generations votes required to implement the levy. Park Improvement Districts would not be (presented at the International appropriate in every location, for example in more deprived areas. However, the Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Working Week, Stockholm, advantages of this approach are that: Sweden, 2008).
Page 88 policyexchange.org.uk | 65 Green Society
zz those residents benefiting most from a green space support it the most; zz there is flexibility in the level of maintenance and management a community engage in; zz it encourages communities to take greater, and potentially increasing, responsibility for their local green spaces; zz it encourages communities to become more involved in volunteering in their local green spaces.
Box 25: San Francisco Green Benefit District In 2012, a group of residents from the San Francisco neighbourhoods of Dogpatch and Northwest Potrero Hill (in collaboration with a local non-profit organisation) took the US Community Benefit District model and modified it to raise funds for the ongoing maintenance of their green spaces. The proposed Green Benefit District requires the owners of commercial, residential and industrial properties within the democratically determined boundary to pay a tax, to be used specifically for the maintenance of the green spaces within the boundary. The tax would be collected via the City Tax collector and the funds transferred to the Green Benefit District. Importantly, the City would remain responsible for providing an agreed level of baseline maintenance. The Green Business District levy would then be used to support enhanced maintenance works, as well as provide seed capital for small green space projects and build local capacity for green space maintenance and creation.294 An initial survey found only 6 per cent of residents against the idea of forming a Green Benefit District.295 A proposal for the Green Benefit District tax level suggests a charge of $0.951 per square foot of building or lot, depending on the use of the land. Industrial properties and properties used for non-profit activities would be charged half this rate.296 The next stage of the Green Benefit District project is ‘petition’. Of those property owners that would be required to pay the tax, 30 per cent + 1 must sign a petition of support in order for the project to progress to the next stage. The final ‘ballot’ stage is an official ballot, in which 50 per cent + 1 affected property owners that vote must be in favour of the project before the Green Benefit District can be formed. This was scheduled for June or July 2014.297
In addition, as communities take greater responsibility for green space maintenance over time, this could allow local authorities to transfer maintenance funding to other green spaces, for example in more deprived areas. As with BIDs, 294 The Dogpatch/ NW Potrero Hill GBD, partnership with the Environment Agency, Natural England and water companies Improving and maintaining public could help to deliver local solutions to flooding and improve biodiversity. Water open space www.phd-gbd.org/ index.html, 2014 company rebates could also be offered to Park Improvement Districts where green 295 Potrero Hill / Dogpatch spaces are managed for flooding. GBD, Green Spaces Survey, 2013, www.phd-gbd.org/ Initiatives that the Park Improvement District could support include survey-phase.html. programmes of events in parks and supporting a park keeper, or parkie. In 296 Potrero Hill / Dogpatch addition, funds could be given to local schools in areas deprived of green space GBD, What’s My Annual GBD Assessment?, 2014, www.phd- to open their playgrounds to the public outside school hours and in school gbd.org/formation-phase.html. holidays. This could be through paying staff to open and close playground gates, 297 Potrero Hill / Dogpatch GBD, or installing a fence so that the school buildings can remain locked whilst the Ballot, www.phd-gbd.org/ballot- phase.html, 2014 playground is left open.
66 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 89 Civil Society and Private Sector Funding
The introduction of Park Improvement Districts would require either new legislation (both the Kensington Garden Squares and Wimbledon and Putney Commons council tax levies required new legislation) or changes to existing legislation (BIDs are currently enabled via an amendment to the Local Government Act 2003). An amendment to the Local Government Act, for example, could extend BID powers to communities, allowing them to raise funds to maintain and improve their local environments and green spaces to the standard they require. Importantly, this should not necessarily mean that communities take over basic maintenance unless they are willing to do so. As with the San Francisco Green Benefit District, a legal agreement (through negotiation between communities and local authorities) detailing the responsibilities of the local authority with regard to basic maintenance should be permitted. Recommendation: Government should pilot the creation of Park Improvement Districts to help fund the long term maintenance and improvement of local environments and urban green spaces.
Conclusions The ability of businesses to tax themselves and regenerate the local environment with the proceeds is helping to transform several urban areas in England. This ability should be extended to allow communities to tax themselves to maintain their green spaces to the standard they want. Yet funding, whether from the public sector, private sector, or civil society, will not be sufficient to ensure that urban green spaces meet the needs of their surrounding communities. Civil society engagement and activity will also be required.
Page 90 policyexchange.org.uk | 67 7 Community Action
“…optimising the use of public assets is not the primary objective: the over-riding goal is community empowerment.” The Quirk Review of Community Management and Ownership of Public Assets, 2007298
The previous two chapters explored the different sources of existing and potential funding from the public sector, civil society and the private sector for the maintenance and creation of urban green spaces. However, funding alone will not be enough to ensure that our urban green spaces meet the needs of their surrounding communities. Funding will also not be sufficient to ensure that communities enjoy the other benefits that green spaces provide, such as increased physical activity and an opportunity for making friends. The active involvement of communities with their local green spaces can help to deliver this.
Figure 8: Potential pathway of increasing engagement with green space299
Park user
Consultee (e.g. on park maintenance and budget decisions)
Supervised volunteer
Member of acve Friends group
298 Barry Quirk, Stephen Thake, Local authority contract Friends group to perform and Andrew Robinson, Making certain maintenance tasks Assets Work: The Quirk Review of Community Management and Ownership of Public Assets, 2007. 299 Sherry R. Arnstein, “A Ladder Friends group ownership and management of green space of Citizen Participation,” Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35, no. 4 (1969): 216–24.
68 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 91 Community Action
Community engagement can take many forms, from consultation and supervised volunteering, to active management and ownership. A simplified pathway of increasing engagement with a local green space is shown in Figure 8. Over time, communities may progress from one stage to another and could begin at any stage in the process depending on the skills and time available. Community engagement can change over time, for example as a result of the evolution of a group over time, or changing circumstances or populations.300 Not all communities will currently have the inclination, skills and resources to take over the full ownership and management of urban green spaces. However, the 2007 Quirk Review (investigating community involvement with public assets) identified the need for the public sector to empower communities to take on the management and ownership of public assets, rather than focusing solely on asset optimisation.301 There are encouraging signs that communities are already becoming more involved in their local green spaces: 47 per cent of Friends groups have seen an increase in their membership over the last three years.302 There is also a wider unsatisfied appetite to get more involved in directing local authority services: according to an Ipsos Mori survey, almost a quarter of the adult population want more of a say in local services. Moreover, five per cent of the adult population want more active involvement in local services (see Figure 9), which would more than double current ‘active’ participation.303
Figure 9: Levels of involvement/interest in involvement in local services304
4% 5% 16%
Already involved
Want acve involvement 24% Want more of a say
Just want informaon
Don't care
47%
300 B. W. Tuckman, “Developmental Sequence Through stakeholder interviews and a literature review, we have identified four in Small Groups,” Psychological Bulletin 63 (1965): 384–99. main barriers to increasing community engagement with their local urban green 301 Quirk, Thake, and Robinson, spaces (in addition to lack of time): Making Assets Work: The Quirk Review of Community Management and Ownership zz A perceived lack of community powers; of Public Assets, 2007. zz Risk of injury on site; 302 Peter Neal Consulting and Community First Partnership, zz Risk of the community group failing; and State of UK Public Parks 2014: zz Lack of knowledge and skills. Renaissance to Risk?. 303 Ipsos MORI, Do the Public Really Want to Join the The following sections explore these barriers, discuss existing solutions and Government of Britain?, 2010. identify new ways to overcome them. 304 Ibid.
Page 92 policyexchange.org.uk | 69 Green Society
Community powers for greater involvement in urban green spaces There is widespread uncertainty and misunderstanding about existing powers that communities have to become more involved with, or take over the ownership of, their local urban green spaces.305 This section will focus on powers that offer communities a greater say in decisions affecting their urban green spaces, or the opportunity for communities to manage their local green spaces. The following section will focus on powers that offer communities the chance to own their local green spaces. A diagram showing how community powers relate to the community engagement pathway (Figure 8) can be found in Figure 11.
Neighbourhood planning Neighbourhood plans are planning documents drawn up by communities with the support of local authorities. On approval by an independent inspector, a community referendum must be held (more than 50 per cent of the community must vote in favour for the plan to pass).306 Plans should consider not only what already exists in the area, but also what is missing. As a result, there is scope for green space creation, as well as preservation and enhancement.307 Ideally, these should be supported by strong local authority green space strategies. This would help to ensure green space connectivity across neighbourhood plan areas. However, as identified in Chapter 4, green space strategies are often lacking in measurable and/or timetabled targets. Neighbourhood plans could become increasingly important as their number increases; more than 1,000 neighbourhood planning areas have been designated and 17 have passed the referendum stage.308 The Inner East Preston neighbourhood plan, for example, considers four main policy areas, one of which is green spaces.309 The importance of the neighbourhood plan in securing the neighbourhood 305 Quirk, Thake, and Robinson, funding element of the Community Infrastructure Levy was discussed in Chapter Making Assets Work: The Quirk Review of Community 2. However, the process of creating a neighbourhood plan can also increase Management and Ownership community engagement with their local area, including green spaces. of Public Assets, 2007.
306 DCLG, Revenue Spending Power 2011–12 Participatory budgeting and 2012–13 Including NHS Participatory budgeting (see Chapter 4) is another important step in engaging Support for Social Care, 2010, www.gov.uk/government/ communities with their local green spaces, particularly in areas that lack particular news/a-fair-deal-for-local- taxpayers-freezing-council-tax- skills or have a poor sense of community. and-protecting-the-vulnerable. 307 DCLG, National Planning Meanwhile use Policy Framework, 2012. Meanwhile use, i.e. the temporary use of under-used buildings or land by civil 308 Rachel Edwards, DCLG Big Society & Community society, can be an important way of making sure a neighbourhood’s assets are Rights Division, Personal being fully used. Meanwhile use of derelict land, so long as communities are Communication, June 2014.
309 Friends of Fishwick & fully aware that their use of the land is temporary, offers several advantages for St Matthew’s, Neighbourhood landowners: Plan Formal Consultation, http:// friendsoffishwickandstmatthews. org.uk/?p=770, 2014. zz insurance and security costs are paid for by the occupiers; 310 Meanwhile Project and zz a used site can be more attractive to potential buyers than a derelict site.310 SQW Consulting, Meanwhile Use: Benefits to Landlords, 2010, www.meanwhilespace.com/ Our analysis of Homes and Communities Agency 2009 Site Level Data reveals users/landlords/have-space- needing-meanwhile-use/. that there were approximately 10,700 hectares of vacant or derelict brownfield
70 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 93 Community Action
land (with or without buildings), in urban areas in England.311 Although not all of this land will be suitable for meanwhile use as green space, this covers an area almost the size of Manchester. There is currently no data available to determine how many sites, or the area they cover, have been temporarily converted into urban green space. However, it is likely that the vast majority of these sites will not be ‘greened’. What is preventing landowners from actively encouraging meanwhile use of derelict sites as green space? One major barrier is uncertainty of ownership. Some sites may be vacant or derelict precisely because ownership is complex or confusing; since meanwhile use requires permission from the landowner, this will make meanwhile use more difficult.312 A register of public sector land (see later in this section) would allow communities to identify public sector land potentially suitable for meanwhile use as urban green space.
Community Right to Challenge For communities willing and able to take on long term responsibilities for their local urban green spaces, the 2011 Localism Act enshrines two important Community Rights: the Right to Challenge and the Right to Bid (described later in this section).313 311 Homes & Communities Agency, 2009 Site Level Data, The Community Right to Challenge gives voluntary and community groups www.homesandcommunities. (as well as charities, parish and town councils, and two or more local authority co.uk/nlud-pdl-results-and- analysis., 2009. employees) in England the right to submit an expression of interest to run a local 312 David Taylor, Public Space authority service on its behalf, without any transfer of assets. Urban green space Lessons – Land in Limbo: Making management is included within the services eligible for Right to Challenge. For the Best Use of Vacant Urban Spaces (CABE, 2008), http:// example, Bradford Community Environment Project are conducting a pre-feasibility webarchive.nationalarchives. gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/ study to use the Right to Challenge to provide an alternative allotment service www.cabe.org.uk/publications/ model.314 Community groups can submit expressions of interest in partnership land-in-limbo. with commercial organisations, as well as with charities and councils.315 Once an 313 HMG, Localism Act 2011, 2011. expression of interest is accepted by a local authority, the procurement process is 314 MyCommunityRights, 316 open to private sector bids, as well as community groups. BCEP – A Force for Change where it has Proved Previously Difficult, http://mycommunityrights. Effectiveness of the Community Right to Challenge org.uk/case-studies/ There have been 36 expressions of interest under the Right to Challenge; six right-to-challenge-a-force-for- change-where-it-has-proved- of these have been accepted.317 However, there is no publicly available database previously-difficult/#sthash. identifying the types of services or the local authorities involved. This makes it EN0R6Ocr.dpuf, 2014. 315 Mark Sandford, Localism difficult to evaluate how effective this Community Right has been, or will be, in Act 2011: The Community Right promoting and enabling community engagement with their local green spaces. to Challenge (House of Commons Library, 2014).
316 Locality, The Social Community powers to own urban green spaces Investment Business, and Third Sector Leaders ACEVO, Community Right to Challenge: “Many of the benefits of transferring land to community groups exist precisely because the Understanding the Community people who live closest to the space care most deeply about it, and they usually spot opportunities Right to Challenge, 2012. 317 Rachel Edwards, or problems first.” DCLG Big Society & Community Asset Transfer Unit & CABE Space, 2010318 Rights Division, Personal Communication, June 2014.
318 Asset Transfer Unit and The powers described earlier allow communities to have a greater say in the CABE Space, Community-Led protection, location, spending decisions and management of their green spaces. Spaces: A Guide for Local Authorities and Community However, there are several powers available for those communities with the skills Groups, 2010.
Page 94 policyexchange.org.uk | 71 Green Society
and inclination to own and manage their local green space: the Community Right to Bid, Asset Transfer, and the Right to Reclaim Land.319 The advantage of
319 Compulsory Purchase for transferring or selling public sector assets, such as parks and other urban green Communities will not be relevant spaces, to community-based organisations is that they have access to skills, for the majority of urban green 320 spaces, which are owned by capacity, and sources of funding not available to councils. They may also be the public sector and so will better able to enthuse community efforts, such as volunteering and fundraising not be covered in more detail in this report. The Right to (see Box 26 and the projects being supported). Finally, communities may be Contest focuses on the sale better placed to develop novel and innovative fundraising methods, such as of currently used public sector 321 sites that “could be put to better those being supported by Nesta’s Rethinking Parks competition. However, a good economic use”, such as housing or business expansion, rather business case is required if the asset is not to become a liability. This could include than necessarily green space using money generated from other assets, such as buildings, or using money creation. generated on site, for example through charging for sports facilities.322 320 N Dunnett, C Swanwick, and H Woolley, Improving Urban Parks, Play Areas and Community Right to Bid for Assets of Community Value Green Spaces (Department for Transport, Local Government and The Right to Bid allows community groups to take on the ownership of urban the Regions, 2002). green spaces under certain circumstances. The first stage involves local community 321 Nesta, The 11 Projects that are Rethinking Parks, www.nesta. groups identifying potential Assets of Community Value. These can be buildings org.uk/blog/11-projects-are- or land where the main use “furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of rethinking-parks, 2014. the local community”.323 Given the social benefits that urban green spaces provide 322 Asset Transfer Unit and CABE Space, Community-Led (see Chapter 1), they are likely to fulfil this requirement. Once identified by a Spaces: A Guide for Local community, the asset may be entered onto the local authority’s list of Assets of Authorities and Community Groups. Community Value.
323 HMG, Localism Act 2011. The second stage occurs once the owner of the Asset wishes to sell it (at which 324 Locality, The Social point owners must inform the local authority). A six week moratorium on the Investment Business, and Local Government sale is initiated to allow the community group to decide whether or not it wishes Regulation, Community Right to bid for the Asset. If the community group does decide to bid for the Asset, it to Bid: Understanding the 324 Community Right to Bid, 2012. has a further 4.5 months to “develop a proposal and raise the money required”.
325 Pinterest, DCLG Community Rights, www.pinterest.com/ Effectiveness of the Community Right to Bid communitiesuk/community- rights/, 2014. As with the Community Right to Challenge, DCLG has made funding available
326 Kingston Borough to community groups to exercise their Right to Bid. More than 1,200 assets have Council, Community Right now been listed as Assets of Community Value, including urban green spaces to Bid, www.kingston.gov.uk/ info/200162/doing_business_ such as Grove Park in Weston-Super-Mare, and Madingley Green in Kingston- with_kingston_council/122/ 325,326 community_right_to_bid/2, 2014. upon-Thames. Eight of these 1,200 assets have now been taken over by 327 327 Rachel Edwards, DCLG communities. Whilst asset lists are available from local authorities, there is as yet Big Society & Community no publicly available central database of registered assets or successful acquisitions Rights Division, Personal Communication, June 2014. under the Right to Bid. This makes it difficult to track the effectiveness of this
328 ODPM, Circular 06/03: Community Right over time. Local Government Act 1972 General Disposal Consent (England) 2003 (Her Majesty’s Asset transfer Stationery Office, 2003). Asset transfer has a longer history than the Localism Act’s Community Rights, 329 Locality, The Social 328 Investment Business, and being enshrined in 2003 legislation. Although sometimes confused with the Local Government Regulation, Right to Bid, Asset Transfer is quite distinct (see Table 5). It enables local authorities Community Asset Transfer: Understanding Community to transfer public sector land or building management and/or ownership (usually Asset Transfer, 2012. via long leasehold) to community-based organisations such as community 330 ODPM, Circular 06/03: Local interest companies.329 Importantly, the transfer can be made at less than market Government Act 1972 General 330 Disposal Consent (England) 2003. value, so long as it promotes economic, social or environmental well-being.
72 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 95 Community Action
Table 5: The main differences between the Community Right to Bid and Asset Transfer331
Criterion Community Right to Bid Asset Transfer
Asset owner Public sector and/or private Public sector sector Mechanism Purchase via open market Transfer at less than market competition value Framework Pre-emptive legal right for Voluntary for public bodies communities
Box 26: Marchmont Community Garden, London Borough of Camden An award-winning public garden was created by community groups on a sunken and vacant site identified as an eyesore in 2004/5. Following a failed attempt in 2009 to create key-worker housing on the site, Camden Borough Council offered the Kings Cross-Brunswick Neighbourhood Association a ‘peppercorn’ lease agreement for the site.332 Design ideas for a public garden were then sought from local residents. A steering group of local organisations secured a £100,000 grant from Big Lottery, along with funds from Camden Council. The management of the garden is the responsibility of the Marchmont Community Garden Partnership, which has organised regular events. The garden also benefits from free waste collection for seven years and the garden gates are opened and closed by Camden’s Parks contractor.333 In its first year, the garden was awarded first prize in the Camden in Bloom 2012 competition, for the ‘Best Community Run Garden’.
A 2009 survey of local authorities found that 80 per cent of local authorities had completed at least one asset transfer, with parks and playing fields the second most popular asset to be transferred (making up 16 per cent of transferred assets).334 Yet our knowledge of what has happened to these assets, such as whether their quality has improved or declined since the move into community 331 Locality, The Social control, is lacking due both to a lack of a central registry and a lack of monitoring. Investment Business, and Local Government Regulation, Recommendation: DCLG should conduct a randomised control trial of Community Asset Transfer: green spaces under community and local authority control to determine Understanding Community Asset Transfer. what impact this has on green space quality and what factors contribute to 332 Kings Cross – Brunswick improvements or reductions in quality. Neighbourhood Association, Annual Report 2011/12, www.kcbna.org.uk/wp-content/ Effectiveness of Asset Transfer uploads/2012/12/KCB-Annual- As with the Community Right to Challenge and the Community Right to Bid, Report-2012.pdf, 2012. 333 Ricci de Freitas, Marchmont there is no central database of assets transferred to communities. This makes Community Garden Project Board evaluation difficult, for example determining what proportion of transferred Chair, Personal Communication, October 2013. assets remains in community ownership or have reverted to the public sector, 334 Luke Delahunty, difficult. This data would be useful to rebut the claim that asset transfer would Asset Transfer Unit Evaluation: result in assets reverting back to the public sector in a worse condition than when Baseline Report for the Development Trusts Association they were transferred. (SQW Consulting, 2009).
Page 96 policyexchange.org.uk | 73 Green Society
Community Right to Reclaim Land The 2011 Right to Reclaim Land enables anyone to apply to the Secretary of State to investigate why public sector land or buildings are vacant, under-used or derelict. It then empowers the Secretary of State to force the sale of such land or buildings on the open market, providing communities with an opportunity to purchase them.335 This power was previously known as Public Request to Order Disposal (PROD), but was only successfully used once in more than a decade. This was partly due to the difficulty of identifying whether land or properties were publicly owned; datasets were fragmented and not readily accessible to the public.336 It may also have been partly due to a weakness of this Community Right, in that it only applies when the “council has no plans to bring it into use” regardless of whether those plans will be carried out.337
The evidence base for community powers As described earlier in this chapter, there is no publicly available central database of uses of the different community powers. This makes it difficult to evaluate their effectiveness and target resources where they are most needed. Recommendation: DCLG should require Local Authorities to publish all uses of the different community powers under the Local Government Transparency Code 2014. DCLG should then aggregate this data to form a publicly accessible central database of all uses of the different community powers. This would enable full evaluation of their effectiveness and highlight where funding and training is best targeted (e.g. to areas that use these powers the least). In addition, the difficulties of identifying land suitable for Meanwhile Use 335 DCLG, Community Right to Reclaim Land, www.gov.uk/ and the Community Right to Reclaim Land (for example, due to lack of data) government/policies/giving- hampers community groups’ ability to take greater responsibility for their local people-more-power-over-what- happens-in-their-neighbourhood/ area. As argued in our Park Land report, providing a simple, searchable map of supporting-pages/community- urban green spaces is a critical step forward in increasing community interest in, right-to-reclaim-land, 2014. and engagement with, urban green spaces. Taking this a stage further by allowing 336 DCLG, Communities to be given a Right to Reclaim Land, communities to identify potentially available land in the local area could help www.gov.uk/government/news/ increase engagement further. The power of providing communities with data communities-to-be-given-a-right- to-reclaim-land, 2011. on their local environment is illustrated with Birmingham City Council’s maps 337 Annemarie Naylor, of ecosystem service provision across the city. When provided to the residents Community Futures Director, Personal Communication, of one district as part of a pilot study, residents raised a total of £1.5 million of July 2014. external funding through seven different community-led funding bids to improve 338 Birmingham City Council, their neighbourhoods.338 This demonstrates the determination of communities to Green Living Spaces Plan, 2013. improve their local environments and the ability of communities to access sources 339 DCLG, First Public Property Map – Councils of funding unavailable to local authorities if they are given the right incentives. Could Save Billions, www. A ‘demo’ map of public sector assets, from 87 councils and central government, gov.uk/government/news/ first-public-property-map- was published in 2011 by DCLG. However, it was discontinued in December 2012 councils-could-save-billions, 2011. and is no longer available to view, although the data behind the map remains 340 Cabinet Office,Central 339 Government Property and Land available to download. More up-to-date Central Government data on land and including Welsh Ministers estate, property information is available to download as spreadsheets from the data. http://data.gov.uk/dataset/ 340,341 epims, 2014. gov.uk website, and to view as an online map. However, this data does not
341 Cabinet Office,Find me some include local authority owned assets. Government Space, www.epims. The new Local Authority Transparency Code requires local authorities to ogc.gov.uk/FMSGSPublic/Home. aspx, 2014. “publish details of all land and building assets”. However, it only recommends
74 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 97 Community Action
that they “publish all the information possible on [the] Electronic Property Information Mapping Service” (a database of Central Government properties and land).342 As a result, this data tends to be located on local authority websites, and can be difficult to find. For example, Lancashire County Council holds a list of its own surplus land and properties under the Environment section of its website, whilst four of Lancashire’s district councils hold this data under the Business or Property for Sale sections of their websites.343 There is therefore a need for a publicly accessible centralised database of both Central Government and local authority property and land assets, in spreadsheet and interactive map formats. This would enable communities to more readily identify public sector land suitable for Meanwhile Use, the Right to Bid, Asset Transfer or the Right to Reclaim Land. Recommendation: The Local Government Transparency Code 2014 should be amended to mandate local authorities to submit land and property data to the Government’s Electronic Property Information Mapping Service as a mandatory requirement, rather than on a voluntary basis.
A new community right The existing community planning, consultation, management and ownership powers described in the previous section are important tools for community engagement with their local green spaces. However, with the exception of the Right to Challenge (and potentially asset transfer if it includes an endowment), none of these powers involves the transfer of local authority green space maintenance budgets to communities. Yet, since many green spaces are unlikely to generate enough income to be self-sufficient (see Chapter 2), the transfer of local authority maintenance budgets could be crucial in making sure communities have genuine power over how they look after green space and enough money to ensure they have a fair chance of maintaining its quality. Whilst the Right to Challenge is an important new community right and entails lower risk for community groups than, for example, asset transfer, it is relatively inflexible. For example, it does not allow for a public sector service to be run for a 342 DCLG, Local Government trial period, and the formal procurement process must comply with public sector Transparency Code 2014, 2014. 344 343 Lancashire County Council, and EU procurement rules, since it involves bidding on the open market. It also Surplus Public Sector Land and does not require the community group to be involved in the design of the service Buildings, www.lancashire.gov.uk/ 345 corporate/web/?siteid=6116&pag specification. These factors may help to explain the low take-up of the Right to eid=36821&e=e, 2014.
Challenge by communities. However, a new scheme for social housing tenants has 344 Enfield Council, Right to the potential to provide a useful new model. Challenge, www.enfield.gov.uk/ info/200003/council_contracts_ and_procurement/1922/ Community Cashback right_to_challenge, 2014. 345 John Raine and Catherine Social housing tenants have access to an additional selection of Community Staite, The World Will Be Rights. The most important, in the context of green space management, is the Your Oyster? (University of 346 Birmingham, Institute of Local voluntary Community Cashback scheme. This involves the tenants’ group Government Studies, 2012). identifying a service that costs less than £170,000 that they wish to run, for 346 DCLG, Putting example to better meet community needs or to achieve efficiency savings. Communities in Control: Giving Social Tenants More Power, Services could include maintaining shared green spaces or carrying out repairs. www.gov.uk/government/news/ The group then approaches the landlord with a service delivery proposal, and putting-communities-in-control- giving-social-tenants-more-power, demonstrates community backing for it. 2013.
Page 98 policyexchange.org.uk | 75 Green Society
The landlord and the tenants’ group enter into a Community Cashback Agreement, based on what the landlord would normally pay for the service. Any savings generated by the tenants’ group are reinvested to deliver local improvements and/or community benefits. Small start-up grants of up to £3,000 are available, through DCLG, to support scheme establishment, for example through advice and training.347 In order to participate, groups must demonstrate that they are competent to manage health and safety risks. The issue of insurance can be dealt with either through the landlord or through the tenants’ group itself. The advantage of this model is that it requires no up-front fundraising for communities, and so is suitable for those in more deprived areas. Some of the benefits of transferring urban green space budgets to local communities can be seen in Box 27 and Figure 10. Figure 11 illustrates how Community Cashback fits in with other existing community powers.
Box 27: Penn Road Gardens, London Borough of Islington In 2003, the Islington Borough Council’s Parks Team renegotiated its grounds maintenance contract. The new contract allowed the Council to add or remove entire parks, certain areas within parks, or particular services within parks from the contract at any time. In 2005, the Penn Road Residents Association signed an agreement with the Council to undertake some horticultural work in the gardens.348 The Council pay the Association the same price as would have been paid to the grounds maintenance team for the horticultural work (see Figure 10). Key to this initiative was the signing of the Friends Charter, an agreement between the Council and Friends groups.349 It requires Friends groups to be as inclusive and transparent as possible in their membership and activities, and to work in partnership with the Council, for example by informing it of events. In return, groups will gain benefits, such as: public liability insurance for practical work on site; no site hire charges for community events; and loan of tools and equipment. 347 National Federation of Tenant Management Organisations, Community Figure 10: Photographs of Penn Road Gardens before Cashback, www.nftmo. (left) and after (right) the Service Level Agreement between com/content/content. numo?ida=5&idas=37, 2014. Islington Borough Council and the Penn Road Residents
348 Jerry Gutwin, Islington Association Borough Council Performance & Improvement Manager, Personal Communication, May 2014.
349 Islington Borough Council, Friends of Parks, www. islington.gov.uk/services/ parks-environment/parks/ getting_involved/Pages/friends_ of_parks.aspx, 2014.
350 Community Green Flag Award, Field Assessment Comments, www.pennroadn7. co.uk/download/i/mark_ dl/u/4012540214/4607383453/ Before the Service Level Agreement was After the Service Level Agreement PennRoadGardensFeedback%20 signed, the Gardens were “unloved”.350 was signed, horticultural complexity 2011.doc, 2012. This photograph was taken in 2004.351 increased and the site was given a 351 Provided by Jerry Gutwin, Green Flag Community Award in 2011/12. Islington Borough Council This photograph was taken in 2014. Performance & Improvement Manager, June 2014.
76 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 99 Community Action
Recommendation: The Community Cashback scheme should be extended to community groups wishing to manage and maintain local urban green spaces. Constituted community groups (subject to similar conditions to tenants’ groups) should be able to agree urban green space maintenance budgets with local authorities, with any savings generated used for community benefit. This would allow greater flexibility than the existing Right to Challenge, and potentially act as a stepping stone towards greater management responsibilities and other community rights. In conclusion, there is a suite of existing community powers to engage communities in their local green spaces, from consultation and planning to ownership (Figure 11). However, the evidence base to evaluate these community powers is lacking, and local authority building and land data is not readily available to the public. In addition, few existing community powers involve the transfer of local authority green space maintenance budgets, which may require the creation of a new Community Right.
Figure 11: Existing schemes for community management and ownership of public sector assets
LEVEL OF COMMUNITY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL NEW COMMUNITY POWERS ENGAGEMENT
Consultaon Neighbourhood Parcipatory & planning planning budgeng
Green space Right to Community Meanwhile use management challenge cashback
Green space Asset transfer Right to bid Right to ownership reclaim land
However, whilst the 2007 Quirk Review identified that there are “no substantive impediments to the transfer of assets to community management and ownership”, it also found that “…people…are often not sufficiently equipped to understand, assess and manage the risks that are inherent in the process of asset 352 transfer and asset management.” These risks include the risk of injury on site 352 Barry Quirk, Stephen Thake, and the risk of the community group failing. and Andrew Robinson, Making Assets Work: The Quirk Review of Community Management and Risk of injury Ownership of Public Assets, 2007. 353 Natalie Low et al., A 2007 survey found that 47 per cent of people who would like to start volunteering Helping Out: A National Survey are worried about risk and liability.353 A key way to encourage greater involvement of Volunteering and Charitable Giving (Cabinet Office, 2007). by community groups in managing and owning their local green spaces, therefore, 354 Catherine Fairbairn is to allay fears surrounding liabilities in the case of injury. Should the Social Action, and John Woodhouse, Social Responsibility and Heroism Bill become law, for example, this would provide Action, Responsibility and Heroism Bill (House of Commons 354 community groups with some security from lawsuits. Library, 2014).
Page 100 policyexchange.org.uk | 77 Green Society
Where local authorities are unwilling to offer insurance to community groups, there are community insurance schemes available. For example, Endsleigh offer insurance packages for members of the National Federation of Community Organisations (with a minimum premium of £250 per year).355,356 In addition to bespoke insurance packages for small charities and community groups (costing from £100 per year), Zurich Insurance also offers a free online toolkit that offers guidance on legal, health and safety, insurance and planning issues, and allows the creation of a personalised starter pack.357,358 Insurance does, therefore, require some time, thought and expense for community groups, but is not an insurmountable barrier to community management or ownership of green spaces.
Risk of the community group failing Local authorities may be unwilling to transfer green space budgets, management or ownership to communities because of the risk of a community group failing, for example if key individuals move away or if the group is captured by unrepresentative interest groups.359,360 Without effective management, parks and 355 Endsleigh Not-for-Profit Team, Personal Communication, green spaces can become a liability requiring potentially costly intervention from June 2014. the local authority. However, a DCLG report highlighted that “Not transferring 356 Community Matters, an asset to a community-based organisation may mean that the local community Insurance, www. communitymatters.org.uk/ risks missing out on the social, economic and environmental benefits that can content/351/Insurance, 2014. result.”361 The Quirk Review made pragmatic suggestions for managing these risks 357 TCV, Community using existing local authority powers, including: Group Insurance, www. tcv.org.uk/community/ join-community-network/ zz Local authorities should signpost community groups to organisations that can community-group-insurance, 2014. provide support and advice, for example in developing a sound business plan; 358 Zurich Insurance, zz Covenants and ‘asset lock’ to ensure the asset is used for the public interest; My Community Starter, www.mycommunitystarter.co.uk/, zz Incremental asset transfer (for example giving communities control of a 2014. playground within a park before giving them control of the entire park) to 359 Kazuaki Tsuchiya et al., give groups time to adjust and raise further funding; “The Potential Of, and Threat To, the Transfer of Ecological zz Transfer asset/s to a larger organisation (such as a community land trust) Knowledge in Urban Areas: on behalf of smaller community-based organisations, which can intervene if The Case of Community-Based Woodland Management in Tokyo, necessary (instead of the local authority); Japan,” Ecology and Society 19, z no. 2 (2014): 25. z Assets could be transferred with an endowment for long term maintenance
360 Quirk, Thake, and Robinson, (see Chapter 2). Making Assets Work: The Quirk Review of Community Management and Ownership Another strategy for reducing the risk of community groups failing is to offer of Public Assets, 2007. a series of options with different degrees of community involvement.362 This 361 DCLG, Managing Risks approach is being taken by Lambeth Borough Council as part of its Cooperative In Asset Transfer: A Guide, 2008. Parks programme (see Box 28). 362 Asset Transfer Unit and CABE Space, The risk of community groups failing and green spaces declining can also be Community-Led Spaces: A Guide for Local Authorities reduced through partnerships. These can develop in many different ways between and Community Groups. varying combinations of local authorities and civil society. For example, the 363 Telford Green Spaces Friends Charter described in Box 27 is a formal partnership agreement between Partnership, About TGSP, www.tgsp.org.uk/about.html, Friends groups and Islington Borough Council, whilst Telford & Wrekin Borough 2014. Council has encouraged existing Friends groups to form the Telford Green 364 John Trubshaw, Friends of Spaces Partnership and plays an active, though informal, role in the Partnership Telford Town Park Chair, Personal 363,364 Communication, March 2014. (Councillors are on the committee of all of Telford’s Friends groups).
78 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 101 Community Action
Box 28: Cooperative Parks Programme, Lambeth Borough Council Lambeth Borough Council manage 60 parks and open spaces, with a net budget of £4.6 million. However, the parks and open spaces budget must find £400,000 of savings by the start of the 2014/15 financial year, with a potential requirement for further savings in line with the decline in public sector expenditure. To achieve this, the Council is deliberately seeking greater community involvement with their parks and green spaces. In 2013, the Council launched a consultation to determine community interest in three different levels of park management:
zz Council-led management exists in the majority of Lambeth’s parks and green spaces and involves little community involvement in decision-making or service delivery. zz Cooperative management would involve a partnership between the Council and a civil society group, with shared decision-making responsibilities. The civil society group would “be responsible for setting outcomes, raising sponsorship and funding and assessing where funding is and should be allocated” zz Community-led management is the most devolved model, where the Council would retain ownership of the green space, but would set and monitor standards,
and intervene if necessary. A local board would be solely responsible for the 365 Natalie Thomsen, budgets and maintenance of the park.365 Lambeth Cooperative Parks Programme: Information Booklet (Lambeth Borough Council, 2013), 1,400 responses were received, with 89 per cent of respondents supporting greater www.lambeth.gov.uk/ consultations/cooperative-parks. 366 use of community decision-making. The Council also received 19 expressions of 366 Lambeth News, Lambeth interest from community groups to take over at least some green space management Set to Approve Plan for UK’s first Cooperative responsibilities. For example, Woodmansterne Primary School is interested in managing Parks, http://lambethnews. the Stockport Playing Fields, and the Streatham Common Cooperative may be wordpress.com/2013/12/04/ lambeth-set-to-approve-plan- 367 commissioned to manage the Rookery, Streatham Common and Memorial Gardens. for-uks-first-cooperative-parks/, These ideas will be further developed with the Council.368 2013. The Council also launched the Lambeth Parks Challenge in 2014. This is an interactive 367 Natalie Thomsen, Cooperative Parks Programme online tool that allows members of the public to design a new park and make (Lambeth Borough Council, 2013), http://moderngov. maintenance decisions for it. As well as informing the public about the maintenance lambeth.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails. decisions that have to be made, the designs and comments will be used to inform future aspx?ID=3250. park and green space planning.369 368 Angela Li, Lambeth Borough Council Senior Parks Officer, Personal Communication, The private sector can also play an important role in green space partnerships February 2014. 369 Love Lambeth, Love your and collaborations. A good example is the Jealott’s Hill Community Landshare Park? Try Running One with (see Box 29). The private sector has the potential to play a much greater role the Lambeth Parks Challenge, http://love.lambeth.gov.uk/ in supporting the maintenance of urban green spaces. A 2011 survey of 350 love-your-park-try-lambeth-parks- real estate developers, investors, consultants and public sector workers across challenge/, 2014. Europe found that 95 per cent “not only believe good open space adds value 370 Gensler and Urban Land Institute,Open Space: to commercial property, but are prepared to pay at least 3% more to be in close An Asset without a Champion?, proximity to it”.370 Business Improvement Districts are an important mechanism 2011, www.gensleron.com/ cities/2011/3/9/who-will- for capturing this (see Chapter 6). champion-open-spaces.html.
Page 102 policyexchange.org.uk | 79 Green Society
Box 29: Jealott’s Hill Community Landshare, Berkshire A television documentary on young offenders and gardening inspired an employee from Syngenta, an agriculture research and technology firm, to release part of its Jealott’s Hill site for a community landshare scheme. The site ownership remains with Syngenta but the community now has access to it to grow fruit, vegetables and other plants. In collaboration with Bracknell Town Council and others, public meetings were organised to determine local interest. The local authority made a capital donation of £7,700, but there is no guarantee of long-term funding. The group was able to complete the equivalent of around £50,000 of construction work for nothing, by attracting private sector volunteers as well as the public. A range of companies also provided materials including fencing, a polytunnel and new saplings. In 2013, the Jealott’s Hill Community Landshare won a National Certificate of Distinction at the RHS Britain in Bloom UK Finals Awards.
Lack of knowledge and skills Taking on even a minimal level of responsibility for parks and other green spaces needs confidence and a certain range of skills. This either requires considerable time or is the serendipitous result of the existing skills, social connections and experience of a community.371 As a result, there is a danger that more disadvantaged communities will be left behind.372 Formal training may be one solution to this problem. For example, a 2014 report on the impact of volunteering with TCV (see Box 12) found that the greatest improvements in health and wellbeing were reported by those volunteers provided with training and who progressed into 371 Coin Street Community 373 Builders, About Us, positions of responsibility. http://coinstreet.org/who-we- Formal training is important, but there is some evidence that small community are/about-us/, 2014. groups also learn from similar groups and social networks, and that relationships 372 Julian Dobson, Community Assets: Emerging Learning, tend to develop between community groups and individuals, rather than the Challenges and Questions (Joseph organisations those individuals belong to.374 Local authorities could therefore Rowntree Foundation, 2011). play a key role as a convener by helping to develop connections between similar 373 Mike King, Volunteering Impacts (The Conservation community groups, as well as linking community groups with key individuals Volunteers, 2014). within the local authority and relevant NGOs. 374 Angus McCabe and Jenny Phillimore, Seeing and Doing: Learning , Resources and Social Incentivising community engagement Networks Below the Radar (Third Sector Research Centre, 2012). The provision of knowledge and skills through training and community networks
375 Ipsos MORI, Do the (see the previous section) will help to overcome the perception that risk of Public Really Want to Join the injury, risk of failure, or lack of community powers are considerable barriers Government of Britain?. to community involvement with local green spaces. However, there is potential 376 Beat the Street, www.beatthestreet.me/, 2014. for incentives (not necessarily financial) to help harness the additional skills 377 HMG, The Honours System, and resources of the 1.5 million people wanting more active involvement in www.gov.uk/honours/overview, 375 2014. local services, such as green space management. As part of this research, we
378 HMG, New UK Points of investigated Beat the Street, the range of existing volunteer recognition systems Light Award Names Flood Heroes (such as the honours system and Points of Light awards), community payback, as First Winners, www.gov.uk/ 376,377,378 government/news/new-uk- and time banking. However, while worthy and helpful, we consider that points-of-light-award-names- there are few policy opportunities associated with these initiatives. As a result, the flood-heroes-as-first-winners, 2014. focus of this section is on council tax rebates.
80 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 103 Community Action
Council Tax rebate Local authorities offer a number of important incentives to encourage volunteering and involvement in community life, For example: Since 2013, Southampton City Council applied a 100 per cent council tax discount to residents who serve as Special Constables within Southampton.379 Northampton Borough Council’s ‘Community Contribution Priority Scheme’ recognises the importance of volunteering when deciding housing allocations. Council housing applicants who volunteer (with a not-for-profit organisation or charity for at least 10 hours a month for 6 months prior to application and point of offer) are given increased priority for a home, so long as the applicant already has ‘Reasonable Preference’ status.380 A similar incentive could be offered for volunteers who work as part of constituted Friends, or other community, groups to improve their local green spaces. This could help prevent Friends groups being established only in response to threats to green spaces, such as housing development (there is anecdotal evidence that this can result in a long term adversarial structure that limits entrepreneurial ability).381 A council tax rebate could also encourage segments of the population that are not currently well represented in Friends groups to become more involved (Friends groups tend to be dominated by white people over the age of 35). Recommendation: Local authorities should offer council tax rebates for active members of civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, who do a large amount of voluntary activity in parks. This could be based on hours spent volunteering or other measures.
Conclusions This chapter has identified and evaluated the main existing tools for community 379 Southampton City Council, Council Tax Discounts management and ownership of their local urban green spaces (dependent For Persons Over The Age Of on the extent to which communities are willing and able to take on greater 65 And Special Constables, www.southampton.gov.uk/ responsibility). We propose the extension of the Community Cashback scheme moderngov/mgIssueHistoryHome. to the general public to fill a gap in existing mechanisms. The chapter has also aspx?IId=9637&Opt=0, 2013. 380 Northampton Borough identified the barriers preventing communities from taking up existing tools Council, The Housing and preventing local authorities from encouraging community action, which Allocation Policy Explained, www.northampton. can primarily be overcome through the provision of publicly accessible data. gov.uk/info/200183/ This would allow the uses of the different community powers to be determined applying-for-housing/1713/ the-housing-allocation-policy- and evaluated, and allow communities to identify land suitable for Meanwhile explained/10, 2014.
Use and the Community Right to Reclaim Land. Incentives for community 381 Emma Frost, LLDC engagement are also discussed, with a proposal for local authorities to offer a Regeneration and Community Partnerships, Personal council tax rebate for active green space volunteers. Communication, December 2013.
Page 104 policyexchange.org.uk | 81 Summary and Conclusions
Urban green spaces are a critical part of community life in our cities. They improve our mental health and provide a free outdoor space for exercise, socialising and relaxation. However, this report has identified that there is inequality in access to the social benefits that urban green spaces offer, in terms of where green spaces are, the state they are in, and who uses them. In addition, our Park Land report identified that long term maintenance funding for urban green spaces is at risk as a result of local authority budget cuts. One critical tool to ensure that existing spending is more effectively targeted would be the creation of a crowdsourced urban green space map, as recommended in our Park Land report. However, this alone will not be sufficient to ensure that all communities can benefit fully from their local urban green spaces. This report therefore examined the potential for new sources of public sector, private sector and civil society funding to help ensure high quality urban green space maintenance. It also investigated existing and new methods for encouraging community engagement with their local urban green spaces.
Summary of recommendations
Local authority funding
zz All local authorities should conduct a review to determine whether endowments would be a suitable model for the sustainable funding of any of their existing green spaces. zz New green spaces (for example planned as part of a built development) should be required to include a long term funding plan, which could include endowments part funded by developer contributions, as part of the planning application. zz DCLG should require each local authority to contribute to a central open access register of CIL payments and expenditure, to improve transparency and public confidence in the planning system. This will require an amendment to The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. zz Levies raised specifically for green space maintenance that are currently collected as part of council tax should instead be collected as a separate charge alongside council tax (for example, similarly to the Business Improvement District levy described in Chapter 6). This may require a change in legislation. This would ensure that local authorities are not penalised for freezing Council Tax when levy rates increase.
82 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 105 Summary and Conclusions
zz Local Authorities should be required by DCLG to act as Accountable Body for community projects supported by Lottery or Central Government funding, where requested by communities, to ensure that VAT does not have to be paid. All such community project funding programmes should include capacity building support, such as that provided by the Community Spaces programme facilitators, to ensure successful completion of projects.
Other public sector sources of funding zz The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) should conduct a social prescribing audit to determine what models are currently being used. This would help publicise the use of social prescribing amongst GPs and CCGs, enable learning from previous experience and determine which areas should be targeted for the introduction of new schemes. zz NICE should conduct and evaluate trials to determine whether investing in improvements in green space access, quality, facilities and/or activities delivers measurable public health outcomes. This would also help to identify which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits. zz NICE and CCGs should determine the success of existing green prescribing schemes. Based on the results, run green prescribing prescription trials should be run to identify which schemes are most successful and why. All trials should be fully evaluated for their health outcomes. zz Registers of local green prescription providers should be established by Health and Wellbeing Boards. These should include information on skills, training and expertise, location, which groups of patients they are able to support, and cost. This would allow GPs to match patients with local providers that are able to support their particular needs. It would also allow existing providers to identify ‘gaps’ in patient support, potentially encouraging further training, as well as additional and/or more cost-effective service provision. zz Police and Crime Commissioners should allow communities and local authorities to apply for funding to help support park keepers for those green spaces identified as particular hotspots of crime. zz Future Police and Crime Commissioner guidance documents should increase awareness amongst PCCs that well designed and maintained urban green space can help reduce crime. zz DfE should provide guidance to schools on how to green their open spaces safely, make best use of them, and increase public access outside of school hours. DfE should also provide guidance for schools interested in working with local authorities and Clinical Commissioning Groups to help maintain local green spaces. zz Central Government should create a website for Local Nature Partnerships, similar to that available to Local Enterprise Partnerships. This would enable them to share knowledge and resources, such as examples of effective collaboration with LEPs and local authorities.
Page 106 policyexchange.org.uk | 83 Green Society
Public sector spending
zz The Government should establish a new competition, similar to the Nature Improvement Areas competition. This would ask for proposals to increase connectivity between urban green spaces at a city-wide level, as well as improve public access to urban green spaces. Like the NIA competition, this would require partnership working, drawing on local authority Green Space Strategies, nature conservation organisation expertise, Natural England and the Environment Agency, the private sector and the public. zz In line with our Park Land report, a crowdsourced, freely publicly accessible urban green space map should be created, to which local authorities and other public sector bodies can add their data. This will enable more accurate analysis of where resources should be directed to improve green space quality and provision and help inform local authority commissioning.
Civil society and private sector funding
zz Government should pilot the creation of Park Improvement Districts to help fund the long term maintenance and improvement of local environments and urban green spaces. zz The Treasury should introduce Charitable Remainder Trusts and ensure that charities supporting green space maintenance and regeneration are eligible as beneficiaries. zz Central government should extend the Gift Aid scheme to community civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, to incentivise community investment in their local area, including green spaces. We estimate that this would cost the Treasury £7–15 million a year. zz DCLG and the Treasury should pilot the creation of Park Improvement Districts to help fund the long term maintenance and improvement of local environments and urban green spaces. zz A crowdsourced urban green space map, as recommended in our Park Land report, should be created. DCLG should encourage local authorities to add data on the funding available for each green space. This could, for example, take the form of an hourglass that shows the remaining funding for the financial year. This could then be linked to a crowdfunding platform to enable either one-off or regular donations to particular green spaces.
Community action
zz DCLG should conduct a randomised control trial of green spaces under community and local authority control to determine what impact this has on green space quality and what factors contribute to improvements or reductions in quality. zz Local authorities should offer council tax rebates for active members of civic improvement groups, such as Friends groups, who do a large amount of voluntary activity in parks. This could be based on hours spent volunteering or other measures.
84 | policyexchange.org.uk Page 107 Summary and Conclusions
zz The Community Cashback scheme should be extended to community groups wishing to manage and maintain local urban green spaces. Constituted community groups (subject to similar conditions to tenants’ groups) should be able to agree urban green space maintenance budgets with local authorities, with any savings generated used for community benefit. This would allow greater flexibility than the existing Right to Challenge, and potentially act as a stepping stone towards greater management responsibilities and other community rights. zz DCLG should require Local Authorities to publish all uses of the different community powers under the Local Government Transparency Code 2014. DCLG should then aggregate this data to form a publicly accessible central database of all uses of the different community powers. This would enable full evaluation of their effectiveness and highlight where funding and training is best targeted (e.g. to areas that use these powers the least). zz The Local Government Transparency Code 2014 should be amended to mandate local authorities to submit land and property data to the Government’s Electronic Property Information Mapping Service as a mandatory requirement, rather than on a voluntary basis.
Page 108 policyexchange.org.uk | 85 Our urban green spaces provide free outdoor areas where we can relax, exercise, and socialise. They help clean our air, cool our cities in the summer, support biodiversity and reduce flooding. Green spaces also help make our cities attractive places to live in, visit and work in.
Yet reductions in funding, the loss of green space institutions and the lack of data on green space quality and location means that our urban green spaces are at riskof deteriorating.
Our first report in this series, Park Land, examined the state of urban green space data and recommended the creation of a crowdsourced urban green space map and the release of existing datasets from expensive paywalls.
This report explores existing methods of public sector funding, such as endowments, and how they can be improved. It also identifies new potential public sector funding sources, including public health budgets. New ways of civil society contributing to green space funding are described, such as Living Legacies. Finally, we explore how communities can be encouraged to become more involved with their local green spaces.
£10.00 ISBN: 978-1-907689-80-2
Policy Exchange Clutha House 10 Storey’s Gate London SW1P 3AY www.policyexchange.org.uk
Page 109 This page is intentionally left blank 25 Year Environment Plan
A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment
Page 111
1 25 Year Environment Plan
Photo - Front cover - View from Mam Tor, Peak District National Park - Daniel_Kay / ThinkStock
Photo Page 15 - Brown Hare - Natural England/Allan Drewitt
Photo Page 31 - Common Sea-lavender - Natural England/Julian Dowse
© Crown copyright 2018
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected].
Some photographs may be subject to copyright and you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications.
Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: Defra, 25 Year Environment Plan, Area 1C, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London, SW1P 3JR. Email: [email protected].
Page 112 2 25 Year Environment Plan
Contents
Foreword from the Prime Minister ...... 4
Foreword from the Secretary of State ...... 6
Executive summary ...... 9
Introduction: Our new approach to managing the environment ...... 15
The actions we will take ...... 31
Chapter 1: Using and managing land sustainably ...... 32
Chapter 2: Recovering nature and enhancing the beauty of landscapes ...... 56
Chapter 3: Connecting people with the environment to improve health and wellbeing...... 71
Chapter 4: Increasing resource efficiency and reducing pollution and waste ...... 83
Chapter 5: Securing clean, healthy, productive and biologically diverse seas and oceans ...... 104
Chapter 6: Protecting and improving our global environment ...... 110
Putting the Plan into practice ...... 128
Page 113 3 25 Year Environment Plan
Foreword from the Prime Minister
1O DOWNING STREET LONDON SW1A 2AA
Our natural environment is our most The success of the 5p plastic bag charge precious inheritance. The United in reducing the use of carrier bags by Kingdom is blessed with a wonderful 83% shows the difference which variety of natural landscapes and habitats government action can make, and and our 25 Year Environment Plan sets demonstrates that protecting our out our comprehensive and long-term environment is a job for each one of us. approach to protecting and enhancing This is a national plan of action, with them in England for the next generation. international ambition. As well as setting Its goals are simple: cleaner air and an example for others to follow in our treatment of the countryside, rivers, water; plants and animals which are coastlines and air, we will also bring the thriving; and a cleaner, greener country for us all. We have already taken huge United Kingdom’s international influence strides to improve environmental to bear in pursuit of a cleaner and safer protections, from banning microbeads world. which harm our marine life to improving From reducing our carbon emissions and the quality of the air we breathe to building resilience against the extreme 1O DOWNING STREET improving standards of animal welfare. LONDON SW1A 2AA weather associated with climate change, This plan sets out the further action we to leading international action to protect will take. endangered species, the UK is an By using our land more sustainably and international champion for the protection creating new habitats for wildlife, of our planet and we will build on our record in the years ahead. including by planting more trees, we can arrest the decline in native species and When the United Kingdom leaves the improve our biodiversity. By tackling the European Union, control of important scourge of waste plastic we can make our areas of environmental policy will return oceans cleaner and healthier. Connecting to these shores. We will use this more people with the environment will opportunity to strengthen and enhance promote greater well-being. And by the protections our countryside, rivers, making the most of emerging coastline and wildlife habitats enjoy, and technologies, we can build a cleaner, develop new methods of agricultural and greener country and reap the economic fisheries support which put the rewards of the clean growth revolution. environment first.
Page 114 4 25 Year Environment Plan
We hold our natural environment in trust for the next generation. By implementing the measures in this ambitious plan, ours can become the first generation to leave that environment in a better state than we found it and pass on to the next generation a natural environment protected and enhanced for the future.
The Prime Minister
Page 115 5 25 Year Environment Plan
Foreword from the Secretary of State
It is this Government’s ambition to leave We need to replenish depleted soil, plant our environment in a better state than we trees, support wetlands and peatlands, rid found it. We have made significant seas and rivers of rubbish, reduce progress but there is much more to be greenhouse gas emissions, cleanse the done. The 25 Year Environment Plan that air of pollutants, develop cleaner, we have published today outlines the sustainable energy and protect steps we propose to take to achieve our threatened species and habitats. ambition. Previous Governments, here and in other Environment is – at its roots – another nations, have made welcome strides and word for nature, for the planet that driven environmental improvement. Yet sustains us, the life on earth that inspires as this 25 Year Plan makes clear, there is wonder and reverence, the places dear to much more still to do. We must tread us we wish to protect and preserve. We more lightly on our planet, using value those landscapes and coastlines as resources more wisely and radically goods in themselves, places of beauty reducing the waste we generate. Waste is which nurture and support all forms of choking our oceans and despoiling our wildlife. landscapes as well as contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and scarring Respecting nature’s intrinsic value, and habitats. The success of the 5p plastic the value of all life, is critical to our bag charge in reducing the use of carrier mission. For this reason we safeguard bags by 83% shows the difference which cherished landscapes from economic government action can make, and exploitation, protect the welfare of demonstrates that protecting our sentient animals and strive to preserve environment is a job for each one of us. endangered woodland and plant life, not to mention the greening of our urban The Plan outlines ways to reduce the use environments. of plastics that contribute to pollution, and broader steps to encourage recycling and But we also draw from the planet all the the more thoughtful use of resources. raw materials we need to live – food, Over the lifetime of this Plan, we want to water, air and energy for growth. So eliminate all avoidable plastic waste. protecting and enhancing the environment, as this Plan lays out, is The Government’s Clean Growth about more than respecting nature. It is Strategy – the sister document to this critical if the next generation is to flourish, Environment Plan – sets out how we will with abundant natural resources to draw deliver the clean, green growth needed to on, that we look after our and their combat global warming. inheritance wisely.
Page 116 6 25 Year Environment Plan
We will do what is necessary to adapt to We will work with nature to protect the effects of a changing climate, communities from flooding, slowing rivers improving the resilience of our and creating and sustaining more infrastructure, housing and natural wetlands to reduce flood risk and offer environment. valuable habitats.
Population growth and economic Beyond our coastlines, we must do more development will mean more demand for to protect the seas around us and marine housing and this Government is wildlife. Leaving the EU means taking committed to building many more homes. back control of the waters around these However, we will ensure that we support islands. We will develop a fishing policy development and the environment by that ensures seas return to health and embedding the principle that new fish stocks are replenished. We will also development should result in net extend the marine protected areas environmental gain – with neglected or around our coasts so that these stretches degraded land returned to health and of environmentally precious maritime habitats for wildlife restored or created. heritage have the best possible protection. Most of our land is used, however, for agriculture not housing. The new system Internationally, we will lead the fight of support that we will bring in for farmers against climate change, invest to prevent – true friends of the earth, who recognise wildlife crime, pursue a ban on sales of that a care for land is crucial to future ivory, and strengthen partnerships to rural prosperity – will have environmental tackle illegal wildlife trade beyond enhancement at its heart. borders, including investigating the feasibility of an anti-poaching taskforce. We will support farmers to turn over fields to meadows rich in herbs and wildflowers, We will underpin all this action with a plant more trees, restore habitats for comprehensive set of environmental endangered species, recover soil fertility principles. To ensure strong governance, and attract wildlife back. We will ensure we will consult on plans to set up a world- broader landscapes are transformed by leading environmental watchdog, an connecting habitats into larger corridors independent, statutory body, to hold for wildlife, as recommended by Sir John Government to account for upholding Lawton in his official review. environmental standards. We will regularly update this Plan to reflect the Our plan for a new Northern Forest, to changing nature of the environment. which we are contributing more than £5 million, will be accompanied by a new While this 25 Year Environment Plan review of National Parks and Areas of relates only to areas for which HMG is Outstanding Natural Beauty. responsible, we will continue to work with the devolved administrations on our Planting more trees provides not just new shared goal of protecting our natural habitats for wildlife – it also helps reduce heritage. carbon dioxide levels and can reduce flood risk. Page 117 7 25 Year Environment Plan
These actions will, we hope, ensure that this country is recognised as the leading global champion of a greener, healthier, more sustainable future for the next generation.
The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP
Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Page 118 8 25 Year Environment Plan
Executive summary
This 25 Year Environment Plan sets out We will champion sustainable government action to help the natural development, lead in environmental world regain and retain good health. It science, innovate to achieve clean growth aims to deliver cleaner air and water in and increase resource efficiency to our cities and rural landscapes, protect provide benefits to both our environment threatened species and provide richer and economy, and keep our pledge to wildlife habitats. It calls for an approach to hand over our planet to the next agriculture, forestry, land use and fishing generation in a better condition than that puts the environment first. when we inherited it.
The Plan looks forward to delivering a We will also set gold standards in Green Brexit – seizing this once-in-a- protecting and growing natural capital – lifetime chance to reform our agriculture leading the world in using this approach and fisheries management, how we as a tool in decision-making. We will take restore nature, and how we care for our into account the often hidden additional land, our rivers and our seas. benefits in every aspect of the environment for national wellbeing, health Our ambitious proposals will tackle the and economic prosperity, with scientific growing problems of waste and soil and economic evidence to the fore. degradation – issues that affect our urban areas as well as our countryside. They Since the UK Government is responsible seek to improve social justice by tackling for a number of policies and programmes the pollution suffered by those living in which affect sectors across the UK and less favourable areas, and by opening up internationally, some aspects of the Plan the mental and physical health benefits of will apply to the UK as a whole. In other the natural world to people from the areas where environmental policy is widest possible range of ages and devolved and responsibility rests with the backgrounds. Scottish Government, Welsh Government and Northern Ireland Executive, the We also set out how we will tackle the proposals in this Plan apply to England effects of climate change – still perhaps only. the most serious long-term risk to the environment given higher land and sea More broadly, we will work with the temperatures, rising sea levels, extreme Devolved Administrations as we leave the weather patterns and ocean acidification, EU to uphold environmental standards which harms marine species. and go further to protect our shared natural heritage. We will continue to work The UK Government has a role in with the Devolved Administrations on protecting and improving the environment areas where common frameworks will both at home and abroad. We will show need to be retained in the future. This leadership on conservation, climate Plan does not pre-empt these change, land use, sustainable global food discussions. supplies and marine health. Page 119 9 25 Year Environment Plan
Our 25-year goals Our policies
By adopting this Plan we will achieve: We will take action on a number of fronts, 1. Clean air. looking to join up policies in a way that maximises benefits and value for money. 2. Clean and plentiful water. We have identified six key areas around which action will be focused. These are: 3. Thriving plants and wildlife. Using and managing land sustainably 4. A reduced risk of harm from environmental hazards such as (chapter 1). flooding and drought. Recovering nature and enhancing the 5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficiently. beauty of landscapes (chapter 2). 6. Enhanced beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural Connecting people with the environment. environment to improve health and In addition, we will manage pressures on wellbeing the environment by: (chapter 3). 7. Mitigating and adapting to climate change. Increasing resource efficiency, and 8. Minimising waste. reducing pollution and waste
9. Managing exposure to chemicals. (chapter 4).
10. Enhancing biosecurity. Securing clean, productive and biologically diverse seas and oceans (chapter 5).
Protecting and improving the global environment (chapter 6).
Page 120 10 25 Year Environment Plan
Putting the Plan into practice
This Plan is a living blueprint for the We will report on progress annually and environment covering the next quarter of refresh the Plan periodically to make sure a century. It is an ambitious project, made that our actions continue to target the even more so by our use of a natural right improvements and make a real capital approach, a world first. difference. Although the Plan is government-led, everyone in society can As recommended by the Natural Capital play their part in improving the natural Committee, making the vision of a world, recognising its full value to all. healthier environment a reality requires solid foundations: comprehensive, The Plan sits alongside two other reliable data; strong governance and important government strategies. The accountability; a robust delivery Industrial Strategy sets out how we will framework, and everyone to play a role. boost productivity across the UK through five foundations – ideas, people, Leaving the EU presents a unique infrastructure, business, environment, opportunity to set in motion the and places. Clean Growth is one of the behavioural and institutional changes four Grand Challenges laid out in the necessary to build sustainable, enduring strategy that will put the UK at the growth as well as an improvement in our forefront of industries of the future, wellbeing. Critical to delivering the ensuring that it takes advantage of outcomes we want to see is an effective transformational global trends. governance structure underpinned by environmental principles – on which we The Clean Growth Strategy sets out the will consult early in 2018. We will develop UK’s reaffirmed ambition to promote the a set of metrics to assess progress ambitious economic and environmental towards our 25 year goals. policies to mitigate climate change and deliver clean, green growth.
Page 121 Durdle Door, Dorset 11 25 Year Environment Plan
A summary of our policies
Chapter 1: Using and managing land sustainably
1. Embedding an ‘environmental net gain’ principle for development, including housing and infrastructure 2. Improving how we manage and incentivise land management i. Designing and delivering a new environmental land management system ii. Introducing new farming rules for water iii. Working with farmers to use fertilisers efficiently iv. Protecting crops while reducing the environmental impact of pesticides 3. Improving soil health and restoring and protecting our peatlands i. Developing better information on soil health ii. Restoring vulnerable peatlands and ending peat use in horticultural products by 2030. 4. Focusing on woodland to maximise its many benefits i. Supporting the development of a new Northern Forest ii. Supporting larger scale woodland creation iii. Appointing a national Tree Champion 5. Reducing risks from flooding and coastal erosion i. Expanding the use of natural flood management solutions ii. Putting in place more sustainable drainage systems iii. Making ‘at-risk’ properties more resilient to flooding
Chapter 2: Recovering nature and enhancing the beauty of landscapes
1. Protecting and recovering nature i. Publishing a strategy for nature ii. Developing a Nature Recovery Network iii. Providing opportunities for the reintroduction of native species iv. Exploring how to give individuals the chance to deliver lasting conservation v. Improving biosecurity to protect and conserve nature 2. Conserving and enhancing natural beauty i. Reviewing National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Page 122 12 25 Year Environment Plan
3. Respecting nature in how we use water i. Reforming our approach to water abstraction ii. Increasing water supply and incentivising greater water efficiency and less personal use
Chapter 3: Connecting people with the environment to improve health and wellbeing 1. Helping people improve their health and wellbeing by using green spaces i. Considering how environmental therapies could be delivered through mental health services ii. Promoting health and wellbeing through the natural environment 2. Encouraging children to be close to nature, in and out of school i. Helping primary schools create nature-friendly grounds ii. Supporting more pupil contact with local natural spaces 3. Greening our towns and cities i. Creating more green infrastructure ii. Planting more trees in and around our towns and cities 4. Making 2019 a Year of Action for the environment i. Helping children and young people from all backgrounds to engage with nature and improve the environment. ii. Supporting the 2019 Year of Green Action
Chapter 4: Increasing resource efficiency and reducing pollution and waste 1. Maximising resource efficiency and minimising environmental impacts at end of life. i. Achieving zero avoidable plastic waste by the end of 2042 ii. Reducing food supply chain emissions and waste iii. Reducing litter and littering iv. Improving management of residual waste v. Cracking down on fly-tippers and waste criminals vi. Reducing the impact of wastewater 2. Reducing pollution i. Publishing a Clean Air Strategy ii. Curbing emissions from combustion plants and generators iii. Publishing a Chemicals Strategy
Page 123 13 25 Year Environment Plan
iv. Minimising the risk of chemical contamination in our water v. Ensuring we continue to maintain clean recreational waters and warning about temporary pollution
Chapter 5: Securing clean, healthy, productive and biologically diverse seas and oceans 1. Introducing a sustainable fisheries policy as we leave the Common Fisheries Policy 2. Achieving good environmental status in our seas while allowing marine industries to thrive Chapter 6: Protecting and improving our global environment 1. Providing international leadership and leading by example i. Tackling climate change ii. Protecting and improving international biodiversity 2. Helping developing nations protect and improve the environment i. Providing assistance and supporting disaster planning ii. Supporting and protecting international forests and sustainable global agriculture 3. Leaving a lighter footprint on the global environment i. Enhancing sustainability ii. Protecting and managing risks from hazards iii. Supporting zero-deforestation supply chains
Putting the Plan into practice Consulting on setting up a new independent body to hold government to account and a new set of environmental principles to underpin policy-making. Developing a set of metrics to assess progress towards our 25-year goals. Refreshing the 25 Year Environment Plan regularly to ensure that collectively we are focusing on the right priorities, using the latest evidence, and delivering better value for money. Strengthening leadership and delivery through better local planning, more effective partnerships and learning from our four pioneer projects. Establishing a new green business council and exploring the potential for a natural environment impact fund. Work closely with a large range of stakeholders over the coming year to identify their contribution to the goals set out in this Plan.
Page 124 14 25 Year Environment Plan
Introduction: Our new approach to managing the environment
We are blessed with magnificent and diverse landscapes, coastlines and seas. The environment is one of our most valuable assets and helps define us as a nation.
The uplifting sights, sounds and smells of our natural and urban environments are integral to our daily lives. More fundamentally, the environment is life- giving. It nourishes and nurtures all life, human, animal or plant. We rely on our blue and green spaces for food, water and the air we breathe. Each vital element is a gift from a healthy, well- functioning planet. In turn, we are healthier and feel better the more time we spend out and about in the natural world.
Our environment underpins our wellbeing and prosperity…
This is not the whole story of what our environment gives us. The natural world also underpins our nation’s prosperity and wellbeing. We often talk of being ‘enriched’ by our environment. In recent years we have come to realise that the environment does indeed deliver calculable economic benefits.
Page 125 15 25 Year Environment Plan
Initiatives to protect and improve our …and helps bring about a natural world and cultural heritage are acts of stewardship by which we fairer society discharge our debt to it, and so are moral A healthier environment also helps deliver imperatives in themselves, but they are social justice and a country that works for also economically sensible. A healthy everyone. For example, pollution affects environment supports a healthy economy. us all but it is the most disadvantaged in That is why this 25 Year Environment society who suffer more. The poorer you Plan builds on our Industrial Strategy and are, the more likely it is that your house, Clean Growth Strategy, to transform and your children’s school and productivity across the country and drive playground are close to highly-polluted green innovation. roads, and the less likely you are to enjoy 1 The UK is not alone in grappling with ready access to green spaces. these challenges. By taking a leading role, and developing the technologies, skills and services needed to manage our relationship with the natural world more thoroughly, we can also grow our economy by exporting our expertise around the world.
The economic benefits that flow from the natural world and our natural heritage have begun to take a greater prominence in policy-making, thanks in part to the We want everyone to benefit from getting close to ground-breaking work of Professor Dieter nature (Photo: Forestry Commission / John Helm’s Natural Capital Committee (NCC). McFarlane). We see these benefits in increased productivity from our natural resources Through this Plan we want to ensure an and a lessening of the demands placed equal distribution of environmental on them. We see them in the boost to our benefits, resources and opportunities. At mental and physical wellbeing. present, children from minority ethnic backgrounds and lower income homes are the least likely to visit our countryside. This should change, so that everyone has the chance to benefit from getting close to nature and appreciating all it has to offer. In turn, they will want to protect and enhance the world around them.
1 The term “green space” is used in a broad sense broad set of blue infrastructure, including canals, in this document, and includes a range of rivers, streams, ponds, lakes and their borders as environments known as “green infrastructure”, well as features of the coastline that provide including parks, playing fields, woodland, street people with access to the coast. trees, rights of way, allotments, canal towpaths, green walls and roofs. Blue spaces include a Page 126 16 25 Year Environment Plan
We face big challenges in The effects on wildlife and habitats are stark. We are in danger of presiding over conserving and improving our massive human-induced extinctions when natural world… we should instead be recognising the intrinsic value of the wildlife and plants Our landscapes – our hills, valleys and that are our fellow inhabitants of this plains – were created by age-old planet. Furthermore, human-induced geological processes but the way our climate change threatens unpredictable rural and urban environment looks now and potentially irreversible damage to our owes as much to the work of people as planet. nature. Down the centuries, we have shaped and adapted our rural and urban It is in everyone’s interest to be part of landscape to suit our purpose, not always the solution. Over the next 25 years we aware of the lasting effects of our actions must safeguard the environment for this – for good or ill – on the appearance and generation and many more to come. We health of the environment. plant trees knowing that it will not be us, but our children and grandchildren, who The scale of human impact on the planet get to enjoy their shade. In the same way, has never been greater than it is now. At we should take a long view of how our a global level, the 20th century brought stewardship today can lead to a healthier many technological benefits and changes and culturally richer planet tomorrow. We to our way of life, but we have also have already set out our plans to better experienced unprecedented expansion in conserve our heritage assets2. population, consumption, energy use, waste and pollution, and the conversion We all have a stake in our environment. of land to agriculture. Everyone can play a part, because government and environmental organisations cannot achieve the necessary improvements on their own.
Conversion of land to agriculture. Tea plantation, Malaysia.
2 The Heritage Statement 2017, Department for Digital, Culture Media and Sport, 2017 Page 127 17 25 Year Environment Plan
Industrial Strategy and the 25 Year Environment Plan
Our Industrial Strategy, published in November 2017, and our 25 Year Environment Plan set out our approach to safeguarding our environment and future-proofing our economy for generations to come. They are complementary approaches that reinforce one another given the relationship between the environment and the economy. The Industrial Strategy sets out our approach to boosting productivity across the country, raising living standards and improving the quality of life for all our citizens, through strengthening the five foundations of productivity: innovation, people, infrastructure, places and the business environment. It sets out Grand Challenges to put the United Kingdom at the forefront of the industries of the future, directing the focus of government and engaging the private sector to ensure we take advantage of major global trends, and improve people’s lives and the country’s productivity. The four Grand Challenges are:
Artificial Intelligence and Data Economy – putting the UK at the forefront of the artificial intelligence and data revolution.
Clean Growth – maximising the advantages of UK industry from the global shift to clean growth.
Future of Mobility – becoming a world leader in the way people, goods and services move.
Ageing Society – harnessing the power of innovation to help meet the needs of an ageing society.
Environmental protection is at the heart of the strategy, as our Clean Growth Grand Challenge shows, and is also evident in our investment in clean innovation, the support for zero-emission vehicles, and measures to tackle local air pollution. Similarly, the 25 Year Environment Plan will help boost the productivity by enhancing our natural capital – the air, water, soil and ecosystems that support all forms of life – since this is an essential basis for economic growth and productivity over the long term.
Page 128 18 25 Year Environment Plan
Long-term action is needed, not just at sequestration – the process by which home but abroad too. Pollution, whether trees lock-up and store carbon from the in our oceans or airborne in our cities, atmosphere. does not respect national borders. This country has much to be proud of with a What is natural capital? record of global environmental leadership. This Plan sends a message Natural capital is the sum of our that the UK intends to take on an even ecosystems, species, freshwater, more prominent international role in land, soils, minerals, our air and our protecting the planet. seas. These are all elements of nature that either directly or indirectly bring …and a natural capital value to people and the country at approach will help us meet large. They do this in many ways but them chiefly by providing us with food, clean air and water, wildlife, energy, wood, Long-term action requires us to take recreation and protection from hazards. difficult choices, some with considerable economic consequences, about conservation. In the past, our failure to understand the full value of the benefits offered by the environment and cultural heritage has seen us make poor choices. We can change that by using a natural capital approach. When we give the environment its due regard as a natural asset – indeed a key contributor – to the overall economy, we will be more likely to give it the value it deserves to protect and Only 10% of the value of the services woods and enhance it. This is why, as signalled in forests provide is through timber. our Industrial Strategy, over coming years This value is not captured by traditional the UK intends to use a ‘natural capital’ accounting methods and is too often approach as a tool to help us make key ignored in management and policy choices and long-term decisions. decisions.
The value of natural capital is routinely But when we use a natural capital understated. If we look at England’s approach, we are more likely to take woods and forests, for example, as a better and more efficient decisions that national asset, using a natural capital can support environmental enhancement approach, the value of the services they and help deliver benefits such as reduced deliver is an estimated £2.3bn. Of this long-term flood risk, increases in wildlife, sizeable sum, according to a recent and a boost to long-term prosperity. study, only a small proportion – 10% – is in timber values. The rest derives from other benefits provided to society, such as human recreation and carbon Page 129 19 25 Year Environment Plan
It is an approach that can improve our A natural capital approach is equally decisions at every level – from relevant for those making decisions international agreements to everyday involving the use of significant public decisions by individuals. Individual small funds. choices – which coffee to buy and in which kind of cup; whether to drive to Over the next 25 years, our policy work or take the train – add up to a big choices will be better-informed with a impact on the environment. natural capital approach. Not all aspects of natural capital – the contribution of wildlife, for example – can be robustly valued at present and we do not always need to know a monetary value to know that something is worth protecting. For this reason we regard it as a tool, not an absolute arbiter. It is just one tool among many in the formation of policy but a very powerful one in ensuring that we think of our responsibility to future generations to hand on a country, and a planet, in a better state than we found it. Small individual choices add up to a big impact on the environment (Image: WRAP).
Page 130 20 25 Year Environment Plan
We have already made progress…
Measures we have taken over recent decades to bolster and protect our environment mean that:
Our rivers, beaches and air are cleaner than they were 50 years ago;
Since 1970, emissions of potentially damaging sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides have fallen by 96% and 69% respectively and since 1980 ammonia emissions have fallen by 10%;
The UK was at the forefront of international efforts that have phased out 98% of ozone depleting substances globally, under the UN Montreal Protocol. We also played a leading role in amending the Protocol in 2016 to deliver a phase down of hydrofluorocarbons (potent GHGs) by 85% globally by 2036;
Since 1990, greenhouse gas emissions have been cut by 42%;
Household recycling levels have almost quadrupled since the turn of the century;
We have more stringent protection at national and international level for our most precious landscapes;
Since 2010, our flood defence programme has been protecting more homes, with 250,000 homes better protected;
35% of England’s seas are now within designated marine protected areas, safeguarding important and vulnerable habitats and species;
Over 95% of our terrestrial and freshwater protected sites in England are now in good condition, or have management in place to ensure that they are recovered;
Populations of animals have been successfully recovered or reintroduced: there are now over 2,000 breeding pairs of red kites in the UK; otters are now found in every English county and we are testing the waters with the Eurasian beaver in Devon and the Forest of Dean.
Page 131 21 25 Year Environment Plan
This progress is the result of many …so we will work across different policies, plans, Commissions, commitments and regulations and we are society to secure lasting grateful to the vital players who have change contributed; our farmers, fishers, businesses, and environmental and Momentum for positive change is growing conservation groups among many others. and in government as well as society as a whole we must harness this in coming …but all of us have much more months and years. Government will help bring about change in a variety of ways, still to do… using both incentives and regulation where necessary, to make sure that This Plan sets out policies which will responsible attitudes towards the protect and enhance the environment but environment become the norm. Many also urges all of us to think about how we businesses are also playing their part. can contribute. Fast-food outlets are introducing Tiny changes in our daily decisions can segregated recycling bins with separate make a tangible and immediate sections for paper cups, plastics and difference, such is the power of group liquids. Other retailers are swapping action – whether it is the bags we use to plastic straws for paper ones, and carry groceries, the fuel we burn to keep replacing plastic coffee stirrers with warm, or the transport we use to get wooden ones. around. We will work with all parts of society and all sectors of the economy as we implement the 25 Year Environment Plan to leave the environment in a better state than we found it.
We will invite bodies and people to reduce the environmental impact of their actions, and do more to help communities and individuals to engage with nature and enhance what they find there. Changes in our daily decisions can make a tangible and immediate difference The illustration below sets out the goals and main policy areas to work towards reducing pressures on the environment and increase the key benefits that it provides.
Page 132 22 25 Year Environment Plan
Page 133 23 25 Year Environment Plan
What we want to achieve
Below, we set out goals and targets for Some of the targets derive from our each of the environmental benefits and membership of the EU while others go pressures we have identified. We will further than EU rules require. Some are refresh them regularly to make sure they already legally-binding while others are are sufficiently ambitious and reflect the not. latest evidence. We are committed to consulting on how We will work with leading scientists, the government should be held to economists and environmentalists, account for environmental outcomes by a including the Natural Capital Committee new independent, statutory body. This (NCC), to develop, by the end of 2018, a consultation, to be launched early in set of metrics that will chart our progress 2018, will consider the best way to ensure towards a better environment, ensuring government fulfils its environmental transparency and accountability. obligations and responsibilities. Further information is provided in later sections.
Goals and targets
Increasing the benefits from the environment
Using the natural capital framework set out by the NCC, we have framed our goals for environmental improvement over the next 25 years around six primary goods and benefits offered by a healthy environment.
1. Clean air
We will achieve clean air by:
Meeting legally binding targets to reduce emissions of five damaging air pollutants. This should halve the effects of air pollution on health by 2030.
Ending the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2040.
Maintaining the continuous improvement in industrial emissions by building on existing good practice and the successful regulatory framework.
Page 134 24 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Clean and plentiful water
We will achieve clean and plentiful water by:
Improving at least three quarters of our waters3 to be close to their natural state4 as soon as is practicable by:
o Reducing the damaging abstraction of water from rivers and groundwater, ensuring that by 2021 the proportion of water bodies with enough water to support environmental standards increases from 82% to 90% for surface water bodies and from 72% to 77% for groundwater bodies.
o Reaching or exceeding objectives for rivers, lakes, coastal and ground waters that are specially protected, whether for biodiversity or drinking water as per our River Basin Management Plans.
o Supporting OFWAT’s ambitions on leakage, minimising the amount of water lost through leakage year on year, with water companies expected to reduce leakage by at least an average of 15% by 2025.
o Minimising by 2030 the harmful bacteria in our designated bathing waters and continuing to improve the cleanliness of our waters. We will make sure that potential bathers are warned of any short-term pollution risks.
Minimising the amount of water lost through leakage (Photo: Severn Trent)
3 75% target reflects current River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) analysis of where benefits outweigh costs; waters includes rivers, lakes, groundwater aquifers, estuaries and coastal waters
4 As set out in international benchmarks and defined in statutory guidance to the Environment Agency provided for its work in developing RBMPs
Page 135 25 25 Year Environment Plan
3. Thriving plants and wildlife
We will achieve a growing and resilient network of land, water and sea that is richer in plants and wildlife.
At sea, we will do this by: Reversing the loss of marine biodiversity and, where practicable, restoring it.
Increasing the proportion of protected and well-managed seas, and better managing existing protected sites.
Making sure populations of key species are sustainable with appropriate age structures.
Ensuring seafloor habitats are productive and sufficiently extensive to support healthy, sustainable ecosystems.
On land and in freshwaters, we will do this by: Restoring 75% of our one million hectares of terrestrial and freshwater protected sites to favourable condition, securing their wildlife value for the long term.
Creating or restoring 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside the protected site network,5 focusing on priority habitats as part of a wider set of land management changes providing extensive benefits.
Taking action to recover threatened, iconic or economically important species of animals, plants and fungi6, and where possible to prevent human- induced extinction or loss of known threatened species in England and the Overseas Territories.
Increasing woodland in England in line with our aspiration of 12% cover by 2060: this would involve planting 180,000 hectares by end of 2042.
5 We will develop more detailed targets as part of our post 2020 strategy for nature. We will focus restoration and creation on protected or priority habitats (habitats of principal importance under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act)
6 For example bees and other pollinating insects
Page 136 26 25 Year Environment Plan
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazards
We will reduce the risk of harm to people, the environment and the economy from natural hazards including flooding, drought and coastal erosion by:
Making sure everyone is able to access the information they need to assess any risks to their lives and livelihoods, health and prosperity posed by flooding and coastal erosion.
Bringing the public, private and third sectors together to work with communities and individuals to reduce the risk of harm.
Making sure that decisions on land use, including development, reflect the level of current and future flood risk.
Ensuring interruptions to water supplies are minimised during prolonged dry weather and drought.
Boosting the long-term resilience of our homes, businesses and infrastructure.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficiently
We will ensure that resources from nature, such as food, fish and timber, are used more sustainably and efficiently. We will do this by: Maximising the value and benefits we get from our resources, doubling resource productivity7 by 2050.
Improving our approach to soil management: by 2030 we want all of England’s soils to be managed sustainably, and we will use natural capital thinking to develop appropriate soil metrics and management approaches.
Increasing timber supplies.
Ensuring that all fish stocks are recovered to and maintained at levels that can produce their maximum sustainable yield.
Ensuring that food is produced sustainably and profitably.
7 Simply put, resource productivity is a measure of the value (in terms of GDP) we generate per unit of raw materials we use in the economy
Page 137 27 25 Year Environment Plan
6. Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environment
We will conserve and enhance the beauty of our natural environment, and make sure it can be enjoyed, used by and cared for by everyone. We will do this by:
Safeguarding and enhancing the beauty of our natural scenery and improving its environmental value while being sensitive to considerations of its heritage.
Making sure that there are high quality, accessible, natural spaces close to where people live and work, particularly in urban areas, and encouraging more people to spend time in them to benefit their health and wellbeing.
Focusing on increasing action to improve the environment from all sectors of society.
Managing environmental pressures
As well as maximising the benefits of a healthier environment we also need to manage the growing pressures on the environment that are the result of human actions.
Page 138 28 25 Year Environment Plan
7. Mitigating and adapting to climate change
We will take all possible action to mitigate climate change, while adapting to reduce its impact. We will do this by:
Continuing to cut greenhouse gas emissions including from land use, land use change, the agriculture and waste sectors and the use of fluorinated gases. The UK Climate Change Act 2008 commits us to reducing total greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050 when compared to 1990 levels.
Making sure that all policies, programmes and investment decisions take into account the possible extent of climate change this century.
Implementing a sustainable and effective second National Adaptation Programme.
8. Minimising waste
We will minimise waste, reuse materials as much as we can and manage materials at the end of their life to minimise the impact on the environment. We will do this by:
Working towards our ambition of zero avoidable waste by 2050
Working to a target of eliminating avoidable plastic waste by end of 20428.
Meeting all existing waste targets – including those on landfill, reuse and recycling – and developing ambitious new future targets and milestones.
Seeking to eliminate waste crime and illegal waste sites over the lifetime of this Plan, prioritising those of highest risk. Delivering a substantial reduction in litter and littering behaviour.
Significantly reducing and where possible preventing all kinds of marine plastic pollution – in particular material that came originally from land.
8 Avoidable means what is Technically, Environmentally and Economically Practicable.
Page 139 29 25 Year Environment Plan
9. Managing exposure to chemicals
We will make sure that chemicals are safely used and managed, and that the levels of harmful chemicals entering the environment (including through agriculture) are significantly reduced. We will do this by:
Seeking in particular to eliminate the use of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by 2025, in line with our commitments under the Stockholm Convention.
Reducing land-based emissions of mercury to air and water by 50% by 2030.
Substantially increasing the amount of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) material being destroyed or irreversibly transformed by 2030, to make sure there are negligible emissions to the environment.
Fulfilling our commitments under the Stockholm Convention as outlined in the UK’s most recent National Implementation Plan.
10. Enhancing biosecurity
We will enhance biosecurity to protect our wildlife and livestock, and boost the resilience of plants and trees. We will do this by:
Managing and reducing the impact of existing plant and animal diseases; lowering the risk of new ones and tackling invasive non-native species.
Reaching the detailed goals to be set out in the Tree Health Resilience Plan of 2018.
Ensuring strong biosecurity protection at our borders, drawing on the opportunities leaving the EU provides.
Working with industry to reduce the impact of endemic disease.
Page 140 30 25 Year Environment Plan
Section 1 - The actions we will take
Through history we have taken too much from our natural world and put back too little, in part because the many benefits that the environment provides are not fully understood or measured.
In this section we set out the actions we will take to put that right and deliver the goals described above.
The lifespan of this Plan is a quarter of a century – a deliberate decision that extends it far beyond the five-year Parliamentary cycle and thus takes account of the longer-term needs of the environment. Not every proposal will – or needs to – take immediate effect, but in this Plan we lay the foundations for lasting future improvements to our natural world.
Page 141 31 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 1: Using and managing land sustainably
At a glance
We will: Embed an ‘environmental net gain’ principle for development, including housing and infrastructure. Improve the way we manage and incentivise land management, including designing and delivering a new environmental land management system. Improve soil health, and restore and protect peatlands – this will include developing a soil health index and ending the use of peat in horticulture. Expand woodland cover and make sure that existing woodlands are better managed to maximise the range of benefits they provide – this will include supporting the development of a new Northern Forest and appointment of a national Tree Champion to support our approach.
Take action to reduce the risk of harm from flooding and coastal erosion including greater use of natural flood management solutions.
As we leave the EU, we have a once-in- 1. Embedding an a-generation chance to change our approach to managing our land so that ‘environmental net gain’ we secure and enhance the benefits of principle for development the environment far into the future. including housing and The new approach will recognise good infrastructure practices that build up and bolster natural and heritage assets. It will also take This Plan recognises the government’s account of the negative effects of a range ambitions for a major increase in of land uses and activities. It will require a housebuilding (300k extra homes a year balance of incentives and regulations – by the middle of the next decade) and influencing decisions so that we use land infrastructure investment, and the in a way that supports cost-effective, importance that these have for people’s sustainable growth. lives and economic growth. We want to put the environment at the heart of planning and development to create better places for people to live and work.
Page 142 32 25 Year Environment Plan
We will seek to embed a ‘net Some local authorities, major private environmental gain’ principle for developers and infrastructure companies development to deliver environmental have already implemented a net gain improvements locally and nationally. approach. Our immediate ambition is to This will enable housing development work in partnership with other without increasing overall burdens on Government bodies, local planning developers. authorities and developers to mainstream the use of existing biodiversity net gain We want to establish strategic, flexible approaches within the planning and locally tailored approaches that system, update the tools that underpin recognise the relationship between the them and reduce process costs on quality of the environment and developers. We have already development. That will enable us to implemented an innovative, strategic achieve measurable improvements for approach to great crested newt licensing the environment – ‘environmental net in the planning and development process gains’ – while ensuring economic and will look to build on and further growth and reducing costs, complexity streamline protected species licensing. and delays for developers. In future, we want to expand the net gain Current policy is that the planning system approaches used for biodiversity to should provide biodiversity net gains include wider natural capital benefits, where possible. We will explore such as flood protection, recreation and strengthening this requirement for improved water and air quality. Those planning authorities to ensure approaches will sit alongside existing environmental net gains across their regulations that protect our most areas, and will consult on making this threatened or valuable habitats and mandatory – including any exemptions species. They will enable local planning that may be necessary. This will enable authorities to target environmental those authorities to develop locally-led enhancements that are needed most in strategies to enhance the natural their areas and give flexibility to environment, creating greater certainty developers in providing them. We will and consistency and avoiding increased explore the ways in which new data, tools burdens on developers, including those and strategies can support development pursuing small-scale developments. We that brings wider environmental would expect this should have a net improvement, including linking with fresh positive impact on overall development. initiatives, such as the Nature Recovery Network into the planning system (see later sections).
Page 143 33 25 Year Environment Plan
Actions we will take include:
Making sure that existing Producing stronger new requirements for net gain for standards for green biodiversity in national infrastructure. planning policy are strengthened, including Exploring ways in which consulting on whether they national spatial data and should be mandated alongside strategies could support and any exemptions that may be improve the benefits achieved necessary through environmental net gain. Working with interested parties to reduce costs to developers Exploring the potential for by expanding the net gain district protected species approaches used for wildlife to licensing to be expanded and also include wider natural include more species, capital benefits such as flood delivering better outcomes for protection, recreation and wildlife and a more streamlined improved water and air quality process for development. - streamlining environmental Exploring, through ongoing process, whilst achieving net MHCLG-led reforms of environmental gains. developer contributions, how Working with interested parties tariffs could be used to steer to improve and expand the development towards the least range of tools and guidance environmentally damaging that support biodiversity net areas and to secure gain approaches, including investment in natural capital. through the future Determining appropriate incorporation of natural capital locations to pilot a revolving measures. land bank for rural areas. Working with MHCLG and development professionals to explore ways in which design can contribute to
environmental improvements, leading to better places in which to live and work and a reduced environmental footprint.
Page 144 34 25 Year Environment Plan
Housing and planning
Around 11% of land in England is developed. New building takes place on an average of 17,000 hectares of undeveloped land each year. About 12% of land in the United Kingdom is designated as Green Belt land, and we remain committed to protecting it. The Green Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl through the planning process Used positively, the planning system can protect key natural and historic assets and encourage high-quality green infrastructure in urban areas. Environmental protections already enshrined in national planning policy will be maintained and strengthened.
New development will happen in the right places, delivering maximum economic benefit while taking into account the need to avoid environmental damage. We will protect ancient woodlands and grasslands, high flood risk areas and our best agricultural land.
High environmental standards for all new builds. New homes will be built in a way that reduces demands for water, energy and material resources, improves flood resilience, minimises overheating and encourages walking and cycling. Resilient buildings and infrastructure will more readily adapt to a changing climate.
Enhancement of the Green Belt to make this land ‘breathing space’ for our urban populations to enjoy, and our diverse wildlife to flourish, while delivering the homes this country needs. Positive environmental outcomes can help reduce local opposition to development, shorten the planning process, cut operating costs for infrastructure and increase the desirability of new homes.
Page 145 35 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Improving how we manage In calling for everyone to work together to improve the land for our environment we and incentivise land recognise that there is a complex picture management of land ownership in England, with over 40% of farmland being tenanted. We will The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) work with all of those who shape our land has been one of the main drivers of land to design our future policy. use and management over the last 45 years, and has caused significant Research and innovation are part of the environmental damage. As we deliver a answer. Agri-tech developments can Green Brexit that puts environmental significantly improve farm performance, in policy at the heart of England’s domestic terms of both profits and the environment. and international priorities, farming and Properly implemented precision farming, agricultural policy is a key area of focus. resource efficiency, and better livestock and crop management can achieve more £3.2bn is spent in the UK under the CAP. effective sustainable productivity growth. £2.59bn of this is spent under ‘Pillar 1’ – An example from the Agri-tech Catalyst the ‘basic payment scheme’ (BPS). This programme is Saturn Bioponics’ and pays farmers according to the amount of ValeFresco’s successful trial of a vertical land they own, rather than the outcomes hydroponic growth system for Pak Choi at they achieve. It concentrates money in a polytunnel operated by ValeFresco. the hands of those who already have This has demonstrated between a three- significant private wealth, without and four-fold increase in crop yield on the improving environmental outcomes. same land area, with reduced input There have been efforts to improve this requirements (water, fertiliser and by ‘greening’ one third of BPS payments pesticides) and improved crop quality. – but scholars have recently found these Saturn Bioponics has received a to be largely ineffective. Just £0.64bn – government productivity award for its 20% of the total – is spent on work. environmental stewardship programmes under ‘Pillar 2’. i. Designing and delivering a One of the first challenges we face is how to optimise sustainable food new environmental land production. We will seek to support truly management system sustainable productivity growth. For example, planting over-winter cover crops Leaving the CAP means we can do much (grown between periods of regular crop more for our environment. After a period production) can increase yield and also of stability to ensure a smooth transition, improve soil health. Other measures we will move to a system of paying include reducing soil compaction through farmers public money for public goods. subsoiling or effective crop rotation. We The principal public good we want to also know that small copses, hedgerow invest in is environmental enhancement. trees and individual trees play an important role in breaking up monocultures of arable crops.
Page 146 36 25 Year Environment Plan
We will introduce a new environmental on a framework that works for the whole land management system to deliver this. of the UK and reflects the needs and It will incentivise and reward land individual circumstances of Scotland, managers to restore and improve our Wales, Northern Ireland and England. As natural capital and rural heritage. It will part of this, we will continue to engage also provide support for farmers and land regularly with all the devolved managers as we move towards a more administrations to explore options on the effective application of the ‘polluter pays’ design and appropriate extent of the principle (whereby for costs of pollution lie forthcoming Agriculture Bill. with those responsible for it).
A new environmental land management Actions we will take include: scheme will help us deliver more for the environment (including mitigation of and Working with land managers adaptation to the effects of climate and others to consider the role change) and provide flexibility, putting of a new environmental land more management decisions in the hands management scheme that of farmers. encourages broad participation and secures environmental In the past, such schemes have improvements. supported the creation of nesting and food resources for nationally scarce Retaining and further improving farmland bird and pollinator species, targeted support for more increased breeding populations of cirl complex environmental buntings, stone curlews and the marsh improvements, backed up by fritillary butterfly. They have also help to specialist advice. conserve important heritage assets. Exploring new and innovative For future schemes, we will aim to keep funding and delivery bureaucracy to a minimum, as well as mechanisms as part of a new design a more user-friendly application environmental land process. We will continue to invest in management system. These technical advice to support farmers and may include private payments land managers in delivering the outcomes for eco-system services, reverse and to help them to work together to auctions and conservation achieve benefits at landscape and covenants (see later section). catchment level. We will also explore where capital grants could support the adoption of long-term sustainable land As we implement the new environmental management practices. land management system, we will monitor and evaluate its effectiveness in We will set out our proposals for a new delivering our ambition for a sustainable system in a Command Paper later this farming sector. spring and consult widely with farmers and other stakeholders. We will work closely with the devolved administrations
Page 147 37 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Introducing new farming The new rules will require every farmer to identify and manage risks to water on rules for water their land and start taking precautions to reduce ammonia emissions, thereby Farming can be a powerful force for reducing pollution and soil erosion, and environmental enhancement but it improving resource efficiency. currently generates too many externalities such as emissions from livestock and pollution from fertilisers and pesticides. Overall, farming is now the most Actions we will take include: significant source of water pollution and of ammonia emissions into the Enforcing regulations for new atmosphere in the UK. It accounts for farming rules for water from April 25% phosphate, 50% nitrate and 75% 2018. sediment loadings in the water environment, which harms ecosystems.9 Reviewing the progress of the new rules after three years. Last year, we published new simplified rules for all land managers designed to reduce water pollution from agriculture. These new rules come into force on 2 April 2018.
Farming can be a powerful force for environmental enhancement but currently generates pollution from fertilisers and pesticides
9 The impact of agriculture on the water environment: summary of the evidence, Defra, 2014
Page 148 38 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Working with farmers to use Actions we will take include: fertilisers efficiently Putting in place a robust By ensuring fertilisers are used efficiently, framework to limit inputs of we can cut the air and water pollution that nitrogen-rich fertilisers such as harms public health and the environment, manures, slurries and chemicals and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. to economically efficient levels, Poor storage of manure and slurry can and make sure they are stored lead to the release of harmful chemicals and applied safely. and gases such as ammonia (in 2015, more than four-fifths of ammonia Introducing clear rules, advice emissions in the UK stemmed from and, if appropriate, financial agriculture). This can cause acid rain, support. combine with pollution from traffic and industry to form smog, and harm soils Working with industry to and vegetation. encourage the use of low- emissions fertiliser, and Ammonia is also disseminated through reviewing the levels of take-up the poor storage of manure and slurry, using data from the British deposit of manure, and the spreading of Fertiliser Practice Survey. manures, slurries and mineral fertilisers. This pollution could be substantially reduced through consistent use of good nutrient management practices. We have already taken action.
Through the Farming Ammonia Reduction Grant Scheme, we have provided practical help for farmers by funding slurry store covers, which can reduce emissions during storage by up to 80%.
Page 149 39 25 Year Environment Plan iv. Protecting crops while For too long, IPM has simply been viewed as good practice for farmers to do reducing the environmental voluntarily. By making IPM central to our impact of pesticides approach we will encourage wider investment in research and development. We must protect people and the By reducing the use of pesticides in the environment from the risks that pesticides round and deploying them in a more can pose. At the same time, farmers need targeted way, it is possible to reduce the to protect their crops. We should put impact on the environment while keeping Integrated Pest Management (IPM) at the open a sufficient diversity of options to heart of an in-the-round approach, using avoid the build-up of resistance and the pesticides more judiciously and need for higher doses. supplementing them with improved crop husbandry and the use of natural We recently announced that the UK predators. More can be done in the way supports further restrictions on the use of we breed our plants for traits beyond neonicotinoid pesticides because of the productivity, making better use of growing weight of scientific evidence they genetics and the resources held in gene are harmful to bees and other banks to ensure their natural resilience to pollinators. Unless the scientific evidence pests and diseases. changes, the Government will maintain these increased restrictions after we leave the EU.
Farmers need to protect their crops. Potato crop, Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire Wolds (Photo: Amanda Riley) Page 150 40 25 Year Environment Plan
Independent research shows an overall decline in the UK’s wild bee diversity over Actions we will take include: the last 50 years. Pesticides are Ensuring that the regulation of recognised as one of the potential pesticides continues to develop pressures in the Government’s national with scientific knowledge and is pollinator strategy, first published in 2014, robust and fit for purpose, so as which sets out a collaborative plan to to protect people and the improve the state of bees and other environment. We will maintain pollinators. this direction after exiting the EU. We will develop our existing strong regulation of pesticides and work with Putting Integrated Pest others on different approaches to Management (IPM) at the heart minimise the impacts of pesticide use in of a holistic approach, by farming. The Government will review the developing and implementing UK National Action Plan for the policies that encourage and Sustainable Use of Pesticides in 2018. support sustainable crop protection with the minimum use of pesticides.
Reviewing the UK National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides in 2018.
Supporting further restrictions on neonicotinoid pesticides, in line with scientific evidence. Any continuing use should be limited and permitted only where the environmental risks are shown to be very low.
Page 151 41 25 Year Environment Plan
Farming
Our farms provide so much more than just food. They provide recreational activities to an estimated value of £200m for farms and nearly £300m a year for woods. Furthermore, the way farmland and woodland filter the air is valued at £182m and £794m per annum.10 But, agriculture is still a major source of water pollution. It is the primary cause of 30% of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in England being in an unfavourable condition. Our traditional farmland birds have declined by more than half since 1970. A natural capital approach will help us build a new environmental land management system which values the benefits of the environment and uses the most effective incentives. We can learn from current agri-environment schemes. Broadly accessible schemes such as Entry Level Stewardship combine environmental protection with conservation objectives and can be applied throughout the country. They fit easily into a farm business. Targeted schemes focus on environmentally sensitive sites. They generally require management for protected species or habitats and are supported with specialist advice. In England, land managers undertake this type of management through Higher Level Stewardship or Higher Tier Countryside Stewardship agreements. These schemes have helped populations of marsh fritillary butterfly and the short haired bumblebee to recover, particularly on sites of special scientific interest; enabled improvements in water quality; and protected and restored landscape and heritage assets, including blanket bogs which are major carbon stores. An example of a success story from Higher Level Stewardship comes from EJ Barker and Sons, a family-owned partnership based in North Suffolk. They demonstrate how high quality and high yielding crop production and farmland biodiversity can be successfully integrated. Their work has allowed species such as grey partridge, great crested newt, turtle dove, yellowhammer, linnet, skylark, brown hare and the barn owl to thrive. Species-rich grassland, wild bird seed mix and pollen and nectar mixes have been established on non-profitable 'marginal' areas of farmland. They manage 30 ponds and 43km of hedgerows for the benefit of bird and insect species.
10 UK Natural Capital: ecosystem accounts for freshwater, farmland and woodland, ONS, 2017 Figures adjusted for 2017 prices
Page 152 42 25 Year Environment Plan
3. Improving soil health and At the moment, data on soil health is held piecemeal by different institutions and restoring and protecting our businesses. It is not easy to access or peatlands use. Defra will invest at least £200,000 to help create meaningful metrics that will Healthy and fertile soil is the foundation allow us to assess soil improvements, for farming and forestry. The quality and and to develop cost-effective and type of the soil, in part determined by innovative ways to monitor soil at farm underpinning geology, also influences the and national level. distribution of plant species and provides a habitat for a wide range of organisms. Working with a range of academic and other partners we will build on the best We need to ensure healthier soils by available existing knowledge, such as the addressing factors in soil degradation programme of soil monitoring in the such as erosion, compaction and the Countryside Survey. We will seek out decline in organic matter. ways to work with farmers to achieve good soil management practices, The Common Agricultural Policy has including appropriate tillage choices, encouraged the kind of farming that too reintroducing grass leys into arable often leads to poorer soil health. We see rotations and the use of cover crops. this in poorer productivity owing to nutrient depletion, declines in levels of humus, and erosion and compaction of soils. We currently lack sufficient data to Actions we will take include: know just how badly our soil has been Working with the industry to affected and this Plan aims to correct update the 2001 guidance on that. crop establishment and optimal tillage choice. i. Developing better information on soil health Defra will invest at least £200,000 to help develop soil Farmers and land managers can struggle health metrics and test them on to monitor the quality of their soil, which in farms across the country. turn makes it difficult to improve. We will develop a soil health index (including We will investigate the potential indicators such as the level of humus and for research and monitoring to biological activity in the soil) that can be give us a clearer picture of how used on farms to check whether their soil health supports our wider actions are having the desired effect. environment goals.
Page 153 43 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Restoring our vulnerable While peatlands are our largest terrestrial carbon store, drained peatlands release peatlands and ending peat use their carbon, adding greenhouse gases to in horticultural products by the atmosphere. Organic or peat soils 2030. make up 11% of England’s total land area, over 70% of which are drained or in Our peat bogs and fens are important poor condition. Although our drained habitats that provide food and shelter for lowland peatland makes up only a small wildlife, help with flood management, proportion of the agricultural land in improve water quality and play a part in England, these are among our most climate regulation. Most peat soils fertile soils and play an important part in support ecosystems that are sensitive to the nation’s food supply. Conventional human activities including drainage, agricultural production using current grazing, liming and afforestation. This techniques on drained peatland is, makes them susceptible to degradation if however, inherently unsustainable. poorly managed. In view of this, we intend to create and Over the last 200 years, we have lost deliver a new ambitious framework for 84% of our fertile peat topsoil in East peat restoration in England. Where it is Anglia. The fens there could lose the not appropriate to restore lowland peat, remainder in just 30-60 years given we will develop new sustainable current land management practices and a management measures to make sure that changing climate11. the topsoil is retained for as long as possible and greenhouse gas emissions are reduced.
11 Managing the land in a changing climate, CCC, 2013
Page 154 44 25 Year Environment Plan
We will also pursue work already under way to restore peatlands. Funding for Actions we will take include: peatland projects over three years will Announcing successful bids for become available in April 2018, the result the peatland grant scheme in of a £10m peatland grant scheme February 2018, with funding launched in July 2017. made available in April. The scheme will improve the condition of peatlands in England, cutting carbon Publishing an England Peat emissions and delivering a slew of Strategy in late 2018. environmental benefits. Continuing to jointly fund In 2011 we introduced a voluntary target research with the industry to for amateur gardeners to phase out the overcome the barriers to peat use of peat by 2020 and a final voluntary replacement in commercial phase-out target of 2030 for professional horticulture. This will report in growers of fruit, vegetables and plants. If 2020. by 2020 we have not seen sufficient movement to peat alternatives, we will Continuing to support the look at introducing further measures. industry as it puts the Responsible Sourcing Scheme for Growing Media into practice.
Hair's-tail Cottongrass, an important plant of peat bogs seen here on the Humberhead Peatlands NNR (Photo: Natural England/Peter Roworth). Page 155 45
25 Year Environment Plan
Maintaining soil health in farming
Making appropriate tillage or rotation choices are just two of a range of beneficial practices that can improve soil health, maintain good soil structure and in turn increase crop yields and reduce the risk of environmental damage. This positive impact is, however, entirely dependent on understanding the suitability of each practice for particular locations, soil types and crops, and when and how they should be carried out.
Government is already helping farmers to select location-appropriate management practices, through outcome-based soils rules and through both the Farming Advice Service and the Catchment Sensitive Farming Service. Government has also worked with Research Councils to improve our understanding of soil condition and resilience, the results of which are feeding into advice to farmers. Case study: G’s Cambs Farms, Cambridgeshire
For the last 40 years, G’s farms have followed an intensive farming model where crop managers were focused on the field for that one year, as part of the rotation. A strategy was pursued to crop the land for everything they could harvest so artificial fertiliser and pesticides were used. Yield remained flat for 30 years on high performing land.
Five years ago the farm began to explore a longer term approach to growing crops, setting ambitious targets to increase yields, reduce the need for artificial fertilisers and pesticides and work more closely with the local environment. They applied a consistent approach to cropping, reduced tillage, compost, cover cropping and focus on improving soil health.
As a result, the farms have seen increases in yield increase of as much as 10% in crops, with a very quick development in soil ability and health. The farm now grows around 750 hectares of cover crops, which are being grazed by sheep over winter, up from 50 hectares five years ago. The next step is for the farms to further develop their understanding of the link between soil health, plant health, animal health and ultimately human health.
G’s Cambs Farms, Cambridgeshire
Page 156 46 25 Year Environment Plan
4. Focusing on woodland to i. Supporting the development maximise its many benefits of a new Northern Forest
We will increase tree planting by creating We will support the planting of a forest new forests, and incentivising extra that crosses the country in a belt of trees, planting on private and the least using the M62 corridor as its spine. With productive agricultural land, where £5.7 million of government funding, we appropriate. This will support our ambition will support the existing partnership of the to plant 11m trees. Community Forests and the Woodland Trust to accelerate and further develop We will take the opportunities of other the Northern Forest. This will deliver landscape scale interventions, including accessible community woodland to a when scoping a Nature Recovery large swathe of England and at the same Network, to drive extensive woodland time help us to meet our statutory carbon planting while enhancing our distinctive budget requirements. This area has an landscapes. We will also work with increasing population, meaning that industry and support Grown in Britain to future generations will benefit from this increase the amount of home grown new forest. timber used in England in construction, creating a conveyor belt of locked-in carbon in our homes and buildings. A wide range of economic and environmental benefits will flow from commercial afforestation to meet the growing demand for timber.
We will not focus solely on planting, however; we will also support increased protection of existing trees and forests. Pests and diseases threaten the wide Looking up into the crown of an Ash tree (Photo range of benefits we derive from trees Forestry Commission / Isobel Cameron) and plants. We want to make sure our trees can withstand future threats. We will make sure that landowners, farmers and key forestry stakeholders Beyond the economic benefits, the help lead the work, and that it balances Government recognises the significant the various environmental, social and heritage value and irreplaceable economic benefits of forestry. We will character of ancient woodland and explore the best use of innovative forms veteran trees. We are committed to of private sector finance, including ensuring stronger protection of our philanthropic, social and commercial ancient woodlands, making sure they are investment. sustainably managed to provide a wide range of social, environmental, societal and economic benefits.
Page 157 47 25 Year Environment Plan
Through new approaches to We will also increase the long-term environmental land management we will supply of English grown timber, by support extra woodland creation, enabling industry to plant sustainable, incentivising more landowners and productive woodland and forestry that farmers to plant trees on their land, meets the highest standards of design including for agroforestry and bio-energy and management. production purposes. We intend that this continued support of the Public Forest Estate will protect and enhance it. We want our continuing Actions we will take include: promotion of large scale woodland Working with landowners, creation to give investors the confidence farmers, key stakeholders and to renew and expand wood-processing local people to identify and target capacity, thereby securing the supply of areas most suitable for and likely current wood products and stimulating to benefit most from woodland further innovation with new products such creation. as cross-laminated timber used in construction. Supporting Community Forests We will provide the policy framework to so that they can play a leading enable a long-term programme of forestry role in urban tree planting, both and woodland expansion, helping us as part of the Northern Forest move towards the pathway for carbon and in wider partnerships to reduction set out in the Clean Growth bring trees and green Strategy. We will strengthen domestic infrastructure to towns and cities carbon offset mechanisms to encourage across England. private sector investment and develop
markets for domestic carbon reduction. Promoting the Northern Forest This will encourage more businesses to as a key contributor to the offset their emissions in a cost-effective ‘Northern Powerhouse’ initiative. way, through planting trees. We will also explore how we might extend this approach to other land activities. ii. Supporting larger scale As a start, we will introduce a reporting woodland creation framework for businesses to drive demand for Domestic Offset Units or We want to increase the long-term supply Credits. We will also introduce a Forest of English-grown timber, given strong Carbon Guarantee scheme, using the current and projected demand. We will existing Woodland Carbon Code. Given maintain our Public Forest Estate, strengthening domestic demand for keeping it in trust for the nation, reflecting domestically grown timber, this risk- the value of the social and environmental sharing mechanism will help to attract benefits it provides so that future investors. generations continue to enjoy them.
Page 158 48 25 Year Environment Plan
We will encourage larger-scale woodland and forest creation, and direct Actions we will take include: commercial investment in new productive Designing a new woodland planting towards Forestry Investment creation grant scheme, involving Zones, using an inclusive approach to landowners, farmers and key their selection. This will help to create the forestry stakeholders in the conditions associated with increased process. We want landowners to carbon sequestration, greater confidence plant trees on their marginal in domestic timber supply and associated land, while encouraging economic benefits. A wide range of agroforestry. environmental benefits will flow from productive forestry planting: these will be Exploring how this new grant maximised if investment zones are scheme could specifically developed and planned at a landscape incentivise larger scale scale, consistent with catchment-based afforestation to meet carbon approaches to flood risk management. goals and wider environmental As for forestry, while 58% of woodland in benefits at a landscape scale. England is already in active management, the UK imports around 80% of the wood it With BEIS and MHCLG, working consumes so there is a clear opportunity with stakeholders and the for UK wood - particularly in extracting Cumbria catchment pioneer, hardwoods from our broad leafed engaging with Local Enterprise woodlands. The availability of domestic Partnerships to identify suitable softwood is set to decline owing to a lack areas for large scale woodland of conifer planting over the last 20 years. creation, and promoting Forestry Pests, diseases and overpopulations of Investment Zones to attract deer and grey squirrels are a major threat community, commercial and to trees that prevent woodland from landowner investors. realising its full potential. Our commitment to increasing hardwood timber supplies, Working with our partners to means we will focus particularly on develop new public/private increasing the proportion of broadleaf partnership models of investment woodlands that are sustainably managed. for research into the healthy environment, including for research on plant and tree health.
Working with industry and supporting Grown in Britain to increase home grown timber used in England in construction.
Page 159 49 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Appointing a national Tree The Tree Champion will encourage joined-up thinking on issues for trees and Champion will support the mitigation and management of the impact of pests and We will appoint a national Tree Champion diseases on the extent, connectivity and to promote the unique blend of social, condition of the nation’s tree-scape. He or economic and environmental benefits she will also explore opportunities to offered by trees and forests and make further strengthen protection for ancient sure that the right trees, in terms of woodland. biosecurity, value for money, air quality impact and biodiversity among other criteria, are planted in the right places, in line with the UK Forestry Standard. Actions we will take include:
By bringing together key players across Working with the Tree Champion national and local government and the and the Forestry Commission to sector, the Tree Champion will help to design and develop a future drive a step change in tree planting. grant scheme aimed at larger scale afforestation to meet The role will also involve supporting our carbon reduction goals and wider manifesto commitments and national environmental benefits. targets, including the delivery of one million urban trees and a further eleven Asking the Tree Champion to million trees. draw on the Mackinnon review of forestry in Scotland.
We will drive extensive woodland planting while enhancing our distinctive landscapes. (Photo: Michael Gibbs). Page 160 50 25 Year Environment Plan
5. Reducing risks from flooding Between 2015 and 2021 we are investing £2.6bn in more than 1,500 flood defence and coastal erosion projects to make 300,000 homes more resilient. Since April 2015, this investment Flooding and coastal erosion cannot be has already provided 350 new flood and eliminated but they can be managed, to coastal erosion schemes, providing better protect lives, communities and economic protection for 100,000 further homes. growth – for example through town centre regeneration and tourism. Climate The situation, however, is likely to change is increasing the risk of flooding intensify as temperatures continue to rise: and coastal erosion, and population a warmer atmosphere can hold more growth means more people are likely to moisture, leading to heavier rainfall; live in affected areas. Ensuring the oceans are likely to become more acid, effective and safe economic use of land polar ice reduce and sea-levels rise. can unlock productivity improvements, a key aim of our Industrial Strategy. Without any further investment in flood defences, the number of properties at In recent years we appear to be seeing medium or high risk could rise from 0.75 greater incidents of flooding. Across million to 1.29 million in 50 years. Europe, the number of people affected by floods rose dramatically in the latter half We will take further steps to reduce our of the 20th Century; in England, vulnerability and exposure to the growing December 2015 was the wettest calendar risks and potential impact of flooding. month overall since records began in 1910. In 2019, we will update the national flood and coastal erosion risk management strategy, looking to strengthen joint delivery across organisations. We will look at current partnership arrangements ahead of a review of funding needs beyond 2021, seeking to attract more non-public sector investment, and make sure all relevant agencies are able to respond quickly and effectively to support communities if and when flooding does occur. Climate change is increasing the risk of flooding and coastal erosion – Waves break over Marine The Environment Agency will use its role Drive, Scarborough. in statutory planning consultations to seek to make sure that new developments are Between 2010 and 2015, government flood resilient and do not increase flood invested more than £1.7bn on improving risk. We will look to strengthen the flood defences for more than 250,000 relevant protections in the National homes, more than 28,000 commercial Planning Policy Framework. properties and more than 800,000 acres of agricultural land.
Page 161 51 25 Year Environment Plan
In addition, we will also focus on: areas of greatest risk or in the face of the most significant flood events. Good i) Using more natural flood management integrated flood management will see solutions where appropriate; these incorporated alongside more traditional defences. ii) Increasing the uptake of sustainable drainage systems, especially in new We are investing £15m up to 2021 to further explore the use of Natural Flood developments; and Management, whose wider benefits iii) Improving the resilience of properties include better wildlife habitats, recreation at risk of flooding and the time it takes opportunities and water quality. These them to recover should flooding occur. were set out in the Environment Agency’s evidence directory, published in 2017, which included 65 case studies on i. Expanding the use of natural working with natural processes from a flood management solutions flooding and coastal risk management perspective.12 By working with natural processes, we can better protect ourselves from hazards such as flooding. Natural Flood Actions we will take include: Management involves the use of a variety of measures including tree planting, river Learning from the £15m Natural bank restoration, building small-scale Flood Management funding to woody dams, reconnecting rivers with develop our knowledge, their flood plains and storing water identifying and promoting temporarily on open land. practical solutions for local implementation. We should not expect that such measures alone will offer protection in
12 Working with natural processes to reduce flood risk, Environment Agency, 2017
Page 162 52 25 Year Environment Plan
Working with natural processes and natural flood management
Natural flood management can play an important role in flood and coastal risk management. Techniques such as building leaky debris dams can reduce soil erosion and trap sediment, protect water courses and manage water flow. Hills to Levels Project, Somerset
The drained, farmed landscape of the Somerset Levels provides a testing case for working with natural process, one which local partners have risen to address. Work is underway to ‘slow the flow’ of water from the hills to the Levels, across a large catchment (2,871km2). The project’s measures are working to improve infiltration of rainfall into soils, intercept runoff by diversion and attenuation, slow the flow in-stream and attenuate flood water on re-connected floodplains. So far this has helped protect properties in the upper catchment that suffer from surface water flooding and 150 properties in and around the Somerset Levels. The project has provided approximately 15,000m³ of floodwater storage in water attenuation features alone.
Page 163 53 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Putting in place more Actions we will take include: sustainable drainage systems Amending Planning Practice Surface water flooding poses a significant Guidance to clarify construction and increasing risk, which can lead to and ongoing maintenance sewer flooding and environmental arrangements for SuDS in new pollution. We will look at improving how developments, tightening links Lead Local Flood Authorities, water and with planning guidance for water sewerage companies, highways quality and biodiversity. authorities and other risk management authorities work together to manage it. Considering changes to the National Planning Policy Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), Framework and Building such as permeable surfaces, storage Regulations in the longer term to tanks and ponds, reduce the risk of encourage SuDS. surface water flooding. People and wildlife enjoy improved surroundings in Improving existing arrangements urban areas, and water quality is better. for managing surface water SuDS can also help communities adapt to flooding, and the outcomes climate change. delivered by Lead Local Flood Water and sewerage companies can Authorities and other risk also help to improve surface water management authorities, management. The Government’s including water companies. strategic priorities and objectives for Ofwat, the water industry regulator, set out how we expect companies to be challenged to develop a mix of solutions to meet current and future water management needs. This includes improved partnership working with local authorities to manage flood risk and adoption and maintenance of SuDS.
Page 164 54 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Making ‘at-risk’ properties sector in developing a voluntary Code of Practice to encourage consumers and more resilient to flooding businesses to make properties more flood resilient by the end of 2018. Not all flooding can be prevented.
Properties at risk should be more resilient, and better equipped to prevent water coming in and to deal with it more Actions we will take include: quickly if it does. Effective measures include flood barriers, non-return valves Supporting an industry-owned on wastewater pipes, airbrick covers, and voluntary code of practice to flood-resistant coatings on walls. promote consumer and business confidence in measures to A government and industry action plan reduce the impact of flooding on from 2016 showed that consumers lacked buildings, and on those who live confidence in these measures. We will and work in them. support the insurance and construction
Page 165 55 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 2: Recovering nature and enhancing the beauty of landscapes
At a glance
We will: Develop a Nature Recovery Network to protect and restore wildlife, and provide opportunities to re-introduce species that we have lost from our countryside.
Conserve and enhance the natural beauty of our landscapes by reviewing National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) for the 21st century, including assessing whether more may be needed.
Respect nature by using our water more sustainably.
We know how much the countryside and South Downs, in 2010, the creation of scenery mean to people: nearly 60% of designated landscapes – which also adults surveyed in 2015 said these were include Areas of Outstanding Natural what made them most proud of Britain.13 Beauty (AONBs) – has been among the outstanding environmental achievements 226 million visits were made to the public of the past 100 years. They provide a 14 forest estate in 2016, while the patchwork of stunning, and protected, estimated 95 million people who visit landscapes. National Parks and surrounding areas each year spend more than £4bn and In England, a quarter of our landscape is support 68,000 jobs15. Our goal is to designated in this way, around 10% as make sure that our policies balance the National Parks and 15% as AONBs. We needs of a growing, vibrant society with will make sure they continue to be the ability to access green space. conserved and enhanced, while recognising that they are living From the confirmation of the first National landscapes that support rural Park in the Peak District in 1951, to communities. England’s youngest National Park, the
13 Taking part survey 2014/15, Department for 15 Valuing England’s National Parks, National Digital Culture Media and Sport, 2015 Parks England, 2013
14 Natural Capital Account 2016-17, Forest Enterprise England, 2017
Page 166 56 25 Year Environment Plan
As planning authorities, National Parks We will also improve the overall status of can shape the way development is used declining species groups, such as to contribute to their social, economic and butterflies and other pollinating insects, environmental enhancement. While birds, bats and wildflowers. development is not prohibited in National Parks or AONBs, major development Pressures on nature are felt across the should take place only in exceptional world. Our actions contribute to significant circumstances. global efforts in line with UN Sustainable Development Goal 1516, which calls on us Protected sites (including our National to ‘recover sustainable use of terrestrial Nature Reserves, Special Areas of ecosystems, halt and reverse land Conservation, Special Protection Areas degradation and halt biodiversity loss. and Sites of Special Scientific Interest) have safeguarded many of our best wildlife habitats, but the wider 1. Protecting and recovering environment needs to be considered too. nature Extensive data on species and ecological communities across terrestrial, freshwater We will support nature’s recovery and and coastal habitats in the UK shows restore losses suffered over the past 50 significant losses over the last 50 years, years. We will develop a strategy for driven in large part by historic land use nature to tackle biodiversity loss, develop change and pollution. a Nature Recovery Network to complement and connect our best wildlife In order to help leave the environment in sites, and provide opportunities for a better condition for the next generation, species conservation and the we need to restore and create areas of reintroduction of native species. We will wetland, woodland, grassland and coastal also explore introducing conservation habitat, to provide the greatest covenants. These actions will help us opportunity for wildlife to flourish and to create a healthier and richer natural promote the wider economic and social environment. benefits that healthy habitats offer.
Taking this approach will help us improve the overall status of threatened species, such as hen harrier and curlew, and will help prevent extinction, as well as providing opportunities for reintroduction of species such as beavers. We will give priority to species in England that are threatened either globally or in the UK, or those that are internationally significant.
desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, 16 UN Sustainable Development Goal 15: halt biodiversity loss. Sustainably manage forests, combat Page 167 57 25 Year Environment Plan i. Publishing a Strategy for Nature Actions we will take include: Working with our partners to We place the utmost importance on our learn lessons from the existing commitments to biodiversity and nature strategy, Biodiversity 2020, in conservation under international developing our new strategy. agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
Biological diversity, or ‘Biodiversity’, is ii. Developing a Nature simply the variety of life on Earth – the Recovery Network variety of ecosystems or habitats, of species and of the genetic diversity they Through changes in the way we manage contain. We value wildlife in its own right our land, we will develop a Nature but biodiversity also underpins much of Recovery Network providing 500,000 the economic and social benefit we gain hectares of additional wildlife habitat, from nature. more effectively linking existing protected sites and landscapes, as well as urban To implement our international green and blue infrastructure. commitments at home we will publish a new strategy for nature, building on our Such a network will deliver on the current strategy, Biodiversity 2020. This recommendations from Professor Sir will coordinate our action in England with John Lawton17: recovering wildlife will that of external nature conservation and require more habitat; in better condition; academic partners, as well as farmers in bigger patches that are more closely and land managers. We will ensure the connected. strategy joins up with other plans and As well as helping wildlife thrive, the strategies, including on the marine Nature Recovery Network could be environment, pollinators and peatland. designed to bring a wide range of Where appropriate, we will continue to additional benefits: greater public work with the devolved administrations to enjoyment; pollination; carbon capture; coordinate action across the UK. water quality improvements and flood The strategy will help us protect our most management. important wildlife sites and species and draw in new investment alongside government funding. It will demonstrate best practice at home and help us to deliver on our ambition to lead international action against the degradation of habitats and loss of species.
17 Sir John Lawton is author of Making Space for Nature, 2010
Page 168 58 25 Year Environment Plan
The network could contain a range of Voluntary partnerships and private sector land cover types, including new woodland sponsorship will help broaden the funding and coastal habitats. Other parts of the base for this exciting network. We will network covering peatland, grassland or also continue to work with partners scrub will lend themselves to around our National Nature Reserves environmentally sensitive farming and encouraging wildlife to brim over and livestock management, within a wider colonise new sites. patchwork of agricultural activity.
We will identify what a network could look like and the steps that are needed to Actions we will take include: make this happen. For example, we will investigate putting in place up to 25 new Investigating how we roll out a catchment or landscape scale nature Nature Recovery Network which recovery areas to significantly expand will provide an additional wildlife habitat. These would help build 500,000 hectares of wildlife resilience to climate change, and provide habitat building on other plans opportunities for species and ecosystem for landscape-scale recovery for recovery, and for the reintroduction of peatland, woodlands and natural formerly native species, as well as for flood management. local community engagement and business development. Considering how landscape- scale restoration of wildflower- We will look initially at opportunities for rich grassland, meadows and nature recovery through peatland heathlands could be part of the restoration, natural flood management Nature Recovery Network to and woodland planting. We will also look provide better access for people at establishing wildflower recovery areas. alongside improved habitat for This would make it easier for people to pollinating insects. visit flower-rich meadows, grasslands and heathland close to their homes. These Considering delivery options for could be linked to new and existing green the Nature Recovery Network infrastructure to extend wildlife corridors over the next two years, as we into towns and cities, and provide develop and pilot our new opportunities for conserving wildflowers environmental land management and insect pollinators. system and investigate the use We want to see local communities and of other new and innovative businesses more involved. Data and funding mechanisms. mapping tools under development will help us come up with proposals that offer Evaluating the wider economic the maximum wildlife, economic and and social benefits as we social gain. develop the network.
Page 169 59 25 Year Environment Plan
The role of landscape-scale restoration in recovering nature
A new Nature Recovery Network will require input from a range of stakeholders. Benefits will extend beyond wildlife to recreation, carbon capture and water management, attracting more support and securing a wider range of funding. We will develop maps and advice to show where actions to improve and restore habitats would be most effective. We can learn from previous initiatives that have delivered landscape-scale change. Examples include Nature Improvement Areas; areas of up to 50,000 hectares which brought local groups together to improve both rural and urban environments, creating new habitat for wildlife to thrive and ensuring people will enjoy them for generations to come. Similar but smaller scale is the bottom-up farmer cluster concept, helping farmers collectively deliver greater benefits for soil, water and wildlife at a landscape scale, developed by the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust with Natural England. Another interesting example is Sir Charles Burrell’s Knepp Estate, where he has allowed free-roaming animals to shape the land into a mixture of habitats from grassland and scrub to open-grown trees and wood pasture. Turtle doves, rare bats, 2% of the UK’s population of nightingales and a vast population of purple emperor butterflies now thrive there. We will encourage dynamic management of nature to augment our network of protected sites. We will also build on opportunities for wildlife from peatland restoration or woodland planting, and continue to work with partners around our National Nature Reserves and other important sites, or on externally funded projects such as the ‘Back from the Brink’ species recovery programme, to allow wildlife to recover, brim over and colonise new sites. The result will be an expanding patchwork of high value habitats, as well as sympathetically-managed farmland, woodland and urban greenspace.
Puffin (Photo: Laurence Fitt-Savage). Page 170 60 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Providing opportunities for We will also provide opportunities for species recovery and reintroduction as the reintroduction of native we develop our Nature Recovery species Network. Natural England will continue to work with partners and local communities Conservation efforts to date have focused on species reintroduction and recovery on safeguarding our most precious or projects that support nature conservation threatened species. The condition of and help towards meeting economic and protected sites has started to improve social goals. over the last decade, and we have seen some of our threatened species start to recover. Actions we will take include: However, we have still lost many formerly Developing and consulting in native species from England - such as the 2018/19 on a code and best white-tailed eagle, the orange-spotted practice guidance for assessing emerald dragonfly and the beaver. the merits and risks of species As well as lost species, others, such as reintroduction projects, taking the pine martin, fen orchid or hen harrier, account of their contribution to are found in only a few sites within their global and domestic former range. Their reintroduction, when conservation priorities, carefully planned and managed, can community engagement and enrich our natural environment and wider social and economic provide wider benefits for people. impacts.
We will develop a code, building on Publishing the code and International Union for Conservation of guidance to sit alongside existing Nature guidelines18, to make sure international guidelines to inform proposals provide clear economic or future funding and consenting social benefit and are alive to any risk to decisions on reintroduction public, the environment or to business. projects.
18 IUCN Guidelines for reintroductions and other conservation translocations, International Union for Conservation of Nature, 2013
Page 171 61 25 Year Environment Plan iv. Exploring how to give v. Improving biosecurity to individuals and organisations protect and conserve nature the chance to deliver lasting Ash trees are among more recent victims conservation of biosecurity hazards, proof of the devastation that can be wreaked by We will assess the potential role of disease that spreads swiftly from country conservation covenants to enable to country. Ash dieback is a chronic landowners to create a legally-binding fungal disease that has already ravaged obligation with respect to their land that ash trees across Europe, and could lead delivers lasting, conservation benefits for to the loss of over 90% of one of our most future generations. common broadleaved trees. Covenants would be overseen by a responsible body to maintain standards, and could allow landowners to protect treasured features on their land such as trees or woodland for purely altruistic reasons. In some cases, they might also be used in a business context to secure the long-term maintenance of existing or newly created wildlife or heritage assets.
Actions we will take include: Ash dieback disease - leaf desiccation, wilting and blackening caused by infection, contrasted with Following the Law Commission healthy ash leaves (Photo: Forestry Commission / report into conservation Ben Jones). covenants, assessing the demand and potential for these Disease outbreaks affect communities to secure long-term benefits from and our ability to trade with other investment in nature countries, as well as harming animal conservation and other welfare. By strengthening biosecurity we environmental outcomes, as well can better protect the nation’s animals, as the need for safeguards. cultivated crops, wild plants, trees and forests from pests and diseases. Working with landowners, conservation groups and other Disease is not the only threat to native stakeholders we will review and plant and animal species: invasive non- take forward the Law native species can also cause them to Commission’s proposals for a decline. This can lead to the threat of statutory scheme of conservation extinction, and costly and lasting damage covenants in England. to the character of rare natural habitats.
Page 172 62 25 Year Environment Plan
The proliferation of invasive non-native By adopting a policy of early and effective species can also prompt unwelcome intervention, we can save time and changes in the wider ecosystem that money, and spare the environment from climate change might further exacerbate. greater impacts from breaches in bio- security.The prompt eradication of the Quagga mussels are an example of a extremely invasive water primrose in supremely successful invader. These Great Britain, for example, is estimated to filter feeders multiply at such a rate that provide a cost saving of approximately they strip phytoplankton and nutrients £240m compared to late stage from freshwater systems, significantly eradication. altering the food web and habitat. They also block pipes and filters, causing Strengthening biosecurity around problems that water companies must pay livestock will mean healthier animals, and to resolve. The zebra mussel, a similarly in turn more productive farming. This then invasive species, is now widespread leads to a reduction in both greenhouse across England. gas emissions and the consumption of antimicrobials: helping tackle the effects of climate change and the risk of antimicrobial resistance.
In following the recommendations made by Lord O’Neill in the Independent Review of Anti-Microbial Resistance, we have already worked with industry to reduce the use of antibiotics in animals, achieving a 27% reduction in sales of antibiotics for use in livestock and fish farmed as food between 2014 and Zebra mussel (Photo: Paul Beckwith BWW) 2016.19
Where it is not feasible to eradicate these We already have in place strong species because they are too widely protections, including stringent border established, we will seek to neutralise measures. Our Plant Health Inspectors their threat by managing them effectively. consistently make more interceptions of harmful organisms than in any other EU Member State. Even so, the threats to plants and animal health is increasing, driven by the movement of goods and people.
19 Veterinary Antimicrobial Resistance and Sales Surveillance Report, Veterinary Medicines Directorate, 2016
Page 173 63 25 Year Environment Plan
In future we will continue to lead the way internationally on tighter biosecurity. The Actions we will take include: newly appointed Tree Champion will work Developing plans to reduce the closely with Defra’s Chief Plant Health risk from all high priority Officer to drive the protection of tree pathways for invasive non-native health across England. Our revised Plant species introduction into Health Biosecurity Strategy in 2020 will England. set out the strategic framework to protect plant health and we will continue to Working with partners to raise deliver the GB Invasive Non-native awareness of invasive non- Species Strategy (2015) in order to native species and the need for protect natural capital in England from strong biosecurity. invasive non-native species.
We will continue to take early, pre- Maintaining an alert system to emptive action based on evidence of a detect high priority invasive non- threat to stop pests and disease arriving native species and implement here. contingency plans to rapidly eradicate them where feasible.
Engaging with industry as we develop proposals to drive improvements in animal health. We will work with the devolved administrations and stakeholders to develop policies.
Publishing a Tree Health Resilience Plan later in 2018 to protect against tree pest and diseases and improve resilience of trees to withstand threats.
Working with industry to place biosecurity at the centre of buying practices – including encouraging the development of a biosecure supply chain for woodland creation.
Page 174 64 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Conserving and Over the next 25 years we want to make sure they are not only conserved but enhancing natural beauty enhanced. Many of the policies set out in the rest of the Plan will contribute to Some of England’s most beautiful making all areas more beautiful. In this landscapes and geodiversity are section, we focus mainly on the protected via a range of designations designated areas. including National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs). Some landscapes are also internationally i. Reviewing National Parks recognised through UNESCO World Heritage Site and Global Geoparks and Areas of Outstanding status (for example the Lake District, Natural Beauty the Cornwall and West Devon mining landscape and the North Pennines). The UK’s first National Parks were Collectively, they comprise some of our created by an Act of Parliament in 1949 unique, most cherished and valuable following the government’s 1947 natural assets. Hobhouse Report, which remains the basis for most protected landscape designation in England today.
Sunset at Newlands Corner within the Surrey Hills AONB (Photo: Rich Lukey). Page 175 65 25 Year Environment Plan
Now, 70 years on, the Government will commission a review for the 21st Actions we will take include: Century. This will consider coverage of Commissioning a 21st Century designations, how designated areas ‘Hobhouse’ Review of National deliver their responsibilities, how Parks and AONBs. designated areas are financed, and whether there is scope for expansion. It Working with National Park will also consider opportunities to Authorities to continue to deliver enhance the environment in existing the 8-Point Plan for National designations, and expand on the existing Parks 2016-2020. National Park eight-point plan for National Parks to Authorities have already met the connect more people with the natural target to engage directly with environment. over 60,000 young people a year
in schools’ visits, and will double this figure.
Working with National Park Authorities and AONB Partnerships and Conservation Boards to deliver environmental enhancement, including through demonstrator projects, and engaging with communities through their statutory management plans.
Identifying opportunities for environmental enhancement in all of England’s 159 National Character Areas and monitoring indicators of our landscape’s character and quality to improve landscapes for people, places and nature.
Page 176 66 25 Year Environment Plan
Promoting landscape quality and natural beauty
Westmorland Dales Hidden Landscapes Project
The Westmorland Dales includes the largest area of limestone pavements in the UK and is within the area that was designated as a further part of the Yorkshire Dales National Park in 2016. Parts of the area are also designated as a Special Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a National Nature Reserve. It contains a unique assemblage of cultural heritage including a remarkably intact pattern of historic settlements and associated earthworks, prehistoric stone circles, cairns, and burial mounds. The Coast to Coast path and the Pennine Bridleway also cross the Dales.
The Westmorland Dales Hidden Landscapes project, located within the Yorkshire Dales National Park, is an example of an approach which could be applied to the wider countryside or urban environments. It aims to engage the local community and develop skills, increasing understanding of the area’s significant natural and cultural heritage.
Initial approval for a £3.5m grant to unlock and reveal the hidden heritage and landscape of the Westmorland Dales has been given by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) through its Landscape Partnership programme. HLF funding is enabling Friends of the Lake District and the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority to develop detailed plans with a wide range of partners. Initial ideas include grassland restoration and woodland projects, flood mitigation and the safeguarding of important archaeological heritage. The goal is to engage people in the natural beauty and unique heritage of their local landscape.
Walkers on the Orton Fells (looking south to the Howgills), Westmorland Dales HLF project
Page 177 67 25 Year Environment Plan
3. Respecting nature in how we Our indicators suggest that as many as one-in-five of our surface waters are use water over-abstracted. This leads to physical changes that, along with other changes It is vital that we maintain sustainable we make to watercourses, risk reducing supplies of water for future generations. the diverse range of plant and animal We recognise that this will require both life. While we will support abstractors to reducing demand and increasing supply. access the water they need to operate
efficiently, we will continue to amend i. Reforming our approach to licences in cases of unsustainable water abstraction abstraction and support and encourage innovation. One way of improving Abstraction is the process of taking access to water is to encourage water water from source, either temporarily or trading and storage where it is needed permanently, with most being used for most, and we intend to reform our irrigation or drinking water. Groundwater approach here. We aim to introduce supplies and rivers are refilled naturally more low flow controls to protect the by rainfall and snow melt. If too much environment and replace seasonal water is extracted too fast, supplies may constraints to allow extra abstraction at become depleted: ‘over-abstracted’. high flows. Groundwater sources can, in some cases, take decades to recharge if they are emptied.
Page 178 68 25 Year Environment Plan
We will develop a stronger catchment focus that brings together the Actions we will take include: Environment Agency, abstractors and Making sure that water catchment partnerships to address companies take a leading role in unsustainable abstraction and to addressing unsustainable improve access to water. These local abstraction as part of the Water solutions will be captured in updated Industry National Environment abstraction licensing strategies. To help Programme, due in March 2018. abstractors make the best use of water and protect the environment we will Regulating all significant modernise the abstraction service to abstractions that have been provide real-time information on water historically exempt to make sure availability. We will report to Parliament that they also play a part in in 2019 on progress made on protecting the water environment abstraction reform. This will include by 2022. updates on these actions and the actions we have set out in our water abstraction plan20 Updating ten abstraction licensing strategies by 2021 and all remaining strategies by 2027 to capture agreed solutions to environmental pressures in catchments.
20 Water abstraction plan 2017, Defra, 2017
Page 179 69 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Increasing water supply and Actions we will take include: incentivising greater water efficiency and less personal Consulting in 2018 on a National Policy Statement for water use resources that will streamline the planning process for new large Water companies must develop and infrastructure schemes, leading implement robust long-term plans that to net environmental benefits, as develop new water resources where set out in the Industrial Strategy. needed. New supplies will include large infrastructure, such as reservoirs and Working with the water industry water transfers, which are needed to and its five-year business make sure the water industry can provide planning cycles to make sure it sufficient water for homes and puts in place long-term strategies businesses and reduce abstraction from to increase resilience, and some sources to protect the environment. manage supply and demand (for Two factors tend to affect demand on the further details, please see our public water supply: efficiency of use and strategic steer to Ofwat). leakage control. Water companies must take bold action to reduce water Working with the industry and demands, both now and for the future. the group led by the NGO Waterwise to improve water We want to see water use in England fall efficiency and customer - the average person currently consumes involvement to explore the 140 litres per day. With the average bath impact of introducing new water using around 80 litres and each flush of efficiency measures. an old-fashioned toilet using up to 13 litres, there is action we can take to Taking forward measures that ensure we are using our water supply will make significant water most efficiently. We will work with the savings where practical and cost industry to set an ambitious personal effective to do so. consumption target and agree cost- effective measures to meet it. We will work with industry to determine appropriate targets for We also want to see the amount of personal water consumption and treated water lost through leakage the measures needed to achieve continue to fall, year-on-year. All water them. companies will need to match the levels of leakage reduction achieved by the sector’s top performers.
Page 180 70 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 3: Connecting people with the environment to improve health and wellbeing.
At a glance
We will: Help people improve their health and wellbeing by using green spaces including through mental health services.
Encourage children to be close to nature, in and out of school, with particular focus on disadvantaged areas.
‘Green’ our towns and cities by creating green infrastructure and planting one million urban trees.
Make 2019 a year of action for the environment, working with Step Up To Serve and other partners to help children and young people from all backgrounds to engage with nature and improve the environment.
Spending time in the natural environment A wide range of activity is under way to – as a resident or a visitor – improves our help people experience these benefits. mental health and feelings of wellbeing. A number of outdoor sports and leisure It can reduce stress, fatigue, anxiety and organisations, green space managers, depression. It can help boost immune environmental organisations and schools systems, encourage physical activity and encourage people to participate in may reduce the risk of chronic diseases activities in green spaces. such as asthma21. It can combat loneliness and bind communities The forest school approach encourages together. children to explore nature and have a relationship with the outdoors. The new science and geography curriculum and qualifications encourage pupils to undertake fieldwork as part of their course of study.
spaces and health, World Health Organisation 21 Evidence Statement on the links between Regional Office for Europe, 2016, 9-10. natural environments and human health, University of Exeter and Defra, 2017; Urban green Page 181 71 25 Year Environment Plan
Farms in both rural and urban locations of contact with nature to promote good host groups of school children and share mental health or support early their knowledge about the environment interventions for mental health problems and where food comes from. are often overlooked.
Some health professionals have adopted This Plan sets out ways in which we will a practice known as ‘green prescribing’, a make it easier for more people, from type of social prescribing where nature- every background, to enjoy nature. based interventions are used to treat people with health conditions. Examples 1. Helping people improve their of interventions include gardening, conservation, care farms22 and green health and wellbeing by using gyms. green spaces
We are fortunate to have accessible Our aim is for more people, from all natural spaces in every county, mostly backgrounds, to engage with and spend free to enter, and a network of public time in green and blue spaces in their rights of way. everyday lives. The Industrial Strategy Grand Challenge for an Ageing Society One of the most ambitious ways we are sets out our aim to help older citizens opening up the natural world is through lead independent fulfilled lives, continuing the England Coast Path. When it is to contribute to society. A thriving and complete (by 2020) it will be the longest healthy environment is a vital part of this, such path in the world, giving hikers, and a powerful tool for combatting walkers and joggers public access rights isolation and loneliness. to foreshore, beaches, dunes and cliffs for a distance of 2,700 miles.
However, there is more to do. The number of people who spend little or no time in natural spaces is too high. Recent data from the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment survey tells us that some 12% of children do not visit the natural environment each year.
In the most deprived areas of England, people tend to have the poorest health Different generations enjoying the Peak District and significantly less green space than (Photo: Pippa Langford). wealthier areas.
In healthcare and school settings, and despite some excellent examples of pioneering practice, the possible benefits
individuals from one or a range of vulnerable 22 Care farms are working farms that provide groups. health, social or educational care services for Page 182 72 25 Year Environment Plan
Through existing commitments made in i. Considering how Sporting Future – a New Strategy for an Active Nation, and in line with our environmental therapies could ambition to reduce childhood obesity, the be delivered through mental Government supports programmes that health services encourage physical activity, including in outdoor settings. We will consider how NHS mental health providers in England can establish new We will scope out how we could connect working arrangements with environmental people more systematically with green voluntary sector organisations to offer space to improve mental health, using the appropriate therapies – such as natural environment as a resource for gardening, outdoor exercise and care preventative and therapeutic purposes. farming – in natural settings to people This will be in line with the Prevention with mild to moderate mental health Concordat for Better Mental Health and conditions and who may be struggling to support the Government’s new overcome loneliness and isolation. commitments on children’s mental health. This work will build on the pioneering Our ambition includes encouraging work of South West Yorkshire Trust and mental health service providers to explore the Rotherham, Doncaster and South the potential offered by environmental Humber NHS Trust, working in therapies and doing more to spread the partnership with Voluntary Action word about the benefits of nature. The Rotherham, who have developed social Government will promote collaboration prescribing alongside traditional mental between the health and environment health services. The Rotherham project sectors, at national and local level. was recently shortlisted for a Health Service Journal award.
Page 183 73 25 Year Environment Plan
As part of a development of social ii. Promoting health and prescribing across England, specialist social prescribing teams could help to wellbeing through the natural connect patients with environmental environment support. In support of this work, the Personalised Care Group in NHS We will launch a three-year ‘Natural England will explore how its own Environment for Health and Wellbeing’ universal model supports people who programme, focused on supporting local would benefit from community and authorities, health organisations, health environmental programmes. professionals, teachers and planners in promoting the natural environment as a pathway to good health and wellbeing. Mental health problems and early Actions we will take include: interventions will be an initial area of Considering how NHS mental interest, however the programme will be health providers in England charged with considering other health could work with environmental issues, such as obesity, where children voluntary sector organisations to and adults would benefit from better offer mental health therapies. access to nature. To make sure that it reaches as many people as possible, we Sharing lessons learned from would welcome the programme being existing social prescribing replicated at local level. Ideally, we would programmes widely so others like access to the natural environment put can adopt best practice. at the heart of all local Health and Wellbeing Board strategies. Developing standardised tools for service providers to support the roll-out of social prescribing Actions we will take include: across England. We will do this by seed-funding a project, led by Establishing a cross- The Conservation Volunteers government alliance on and supported by NHS England. environment and health to design and oversee the ‘Natural Environment for Health and Wellbeing’ programme.
Supporting the alliance to review evidence, develop tools and support local authorities, commissioners, and professionals.
Page 184 74 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Encouraging children to be i. Helping primary schools close to nature, in and out of create nature-friendly grounds school We will launch a Nature Friendly Schools Playing and learning outside is a Programme to help more communities fundamental part of childhood, and helps create the kind of school grounds that children grow up healthy. Some children support learning about the natural world are lucky enough to have a family garden; and also keep children happy and others will not and it is important that we healthy. find other ways to give them better The government will provide support for access to the great outdoors. We know schools in our most disadvantaged areas that regular contact with green spaces, that wish to create nature friendly such as the local park, lake, or grounds and to design and run activities playground, can have a beneficial impact that support pupil’s health and wellbeing on children’s physical and mental health. through contact with nature. The initiatives we outline below are designed to encourage and support outdoor activities, particularly where a Actions we will take include: child has no access to a family garden. Developing a Nature Friendly Government will make available £10m of Schools programme for schools funding to support these initiatives. in our most disadvantaged areas with input from stakeholders that can be opened to schools from autumn 2018.
Junior botanist - Castor Hanglands NNR near Peterborough (Photo: Justin Tilley). Page 185 75 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Supporting more pupil 3. Greening our towns and contact with local natural cities spaces Green and blue spaces in our built We want to make it easier for schools and environment are essential to health and Pupil Referral Units to take pupils on trips happiness. Yet urban greenspace is to natural spaces on a regular basis unequally distributed. The provision of where they can combine learning with more and better quality green 23 feeling healthier and happier. This might infrastructure, including urban trees, will involve class visits to a city farm, a local make towns and cities attractive places to nature reserve, woodland or National live and work, and bring about key long- Park. In cases of individual need, a pupil term improvements in people’s health. might go to a care farm on a bespoke Better green infrastructure will promote itinerary. local social interaction and help to develop strong community networks through participation and shared achievements. Actions we will take include: We want to encourage more investment, Developing a programme to in part by doing a better job of explaining support schools and Pupil what ‘good’ green infrastructure actually Referral Units in our most looks like. We will do this by defining a disadvantaged areas in set of standards in close consultation with establishing progressive stakeholders, including the Parks Action programmes of nature contact Group. for their pupils, which can be opened to schools from autumn 2019.
Supporting the expansion of school outreach activities delivered by community forests.
Supporting a national expansion of care farming by 2022, trebling the number of places to 1.3m per year for children and adults in Green and blue spaces in our built environment are essential to health and happiness (Photo: England. Forestry Commission / John McFarlane).
infrastructure and retro-fitting of new green 23 This can include green infrastructure in new infrastructure in areas where provision is poor. developments, upgrading of existing green Page 186 76 25 Year Environment Plan i. Creating more green Actions we will take include: infrastructure Supporting the Parks Action Our aim is to improve existing green Group in its work to help infrastructure by encouraging more England’s public parks and investment while making sure there is a green spaces meet the needs of presumption for sustainable development. communities now and in the Initially, we will focus on areas where we future. know that there is not enough accessible green infrastructure, or that what is there Continuing our ground-breaking is of poor quality. work with Exeter University to update the world-leading We will draw up a national framework of Outdoor Recreation Valuation green infrastructure standards, ensuring Tool (ORVal) in 2018. that new developments include accessible green spaces and that any Establishing a cross-government area with little or no green space can be project, led by Natural England, improved for the benefit of the that reviews and updates community. This will involve finding out existing standards for green what local authorities, developers and infrastructure by summer 2019. other stakeholders think is most important, and where good practice is Supporting Local Authorities to being demonstrated. There is likely to be assess green infrastructure some cross-over with the work of the provision against these new Parks Action Group, whose members’ standards. knowledge will be captured and shared.
Consistent with the Industrial Strategy we Working with the Ministry of will make sure the important contribution Housing, Communities and Local made to economic growth by high-quality Government to see how our environmental assets and green commitments on green infrastructure are taken into account infrastructure can be when we make decisions. incorporated into national planning guidance and policy.
Page 187 77 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Planting more trees in and One of the advantages of the NFC has been that by planting in urban fringes around our towns and cities these woodlands have maximised the beneficial value of public access and Having more trees in and around our enjoyment. We will also draw on the town and cities, close to where people existing network of forests in and around live and work, brings people closer to our largest towns and cities under nature and improves air quality, with England’s Community Forest programme, consequent positive health impacts. which was set up in 1990 as a series of In urban areas, we will work with partnerships between local authorities, stakeholders to plant one million new the Forestry Commission and Natural trees. This is in addition to the 11 million England. trees we will plant across the country and will help with a number of other environmental challenges. Actions we will take include:
In determining our approach to meeting Continuing to work with the aspiration of 12% overall tree cover stakeholders to develop and by 2060, we will consider how to bring implement a programme to plant woodland creation closer to where people one million trees in England’s live. We will review approaches such as towns and cities by 2022. the National Forest Company (NFC) in the East Midlands, in which local Working with stakeholders to authorities work to increase tree and develop and implement a manual woodland cover and provide one-to-one for local authorities and other advice to landowners. The NFC model urban tree-planting organisations has led to more than 8.5 million trees to shape their procurement and being planted and has attracted over maintenance practices for urban £1bn of inward investment over the past trees. 25 years. Introduce new requirements to ensure councils properly consult if they are considering removing street trees.
Page 188 78 25 Year Environment Plan
Green infrastructure in urban areas
Urban residents prize the parks, playing fields, woods, street trees and footpaths that make their district an attractive place. People in greener surroundings have longer and healthier lives. Green infrastructure brings wider benefits, including sequestering carbon, absorbing noise, cleansing pollutants, absorbing surface water and reducing high temperatures. The number and condition of green spaces has declined and current investment is confined to specific projects. We risk losing more good quality green spaces. As we build more homes, preserving and creating green spaces in towns is more important than ever. Local authorities and developers need to take account of all the benefits when deciding how much land to allocate as green space. The Canal & River Trust, supported by the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation and People’s Postcode Lottery, successfully implemented a three-year ‘Community Roots’ partnership project around the Huddersfield Narrow and Rochdale canals to encourage more visitors. Local people, many of whom do not normally visit the canals, took part in creating art trails, paddle boarding, healthy walks and angling tasters, as well as ecological surveys, canal clean-ups and dredging. Now the canals are cleaner and more attractive. The project attracted more than 1,200 new volunteers, many of which now have new conservation skills.
Out and about in the Mersey Forest (Photo: Ian Southerin)
The Mersey Forest programme in the North West is creating green spaces. As England’s largest Community Forest, the Mersey Forest partnership have planted more than nine million trees creating a 1,300km² network of woodlands, open spaces, urban gardens and street trees in some of the most disadvantaged areas of Merseyside and Cheshire. Its planting schemes deliver a wide range of benefits including increased flood resilience, enhanced biodiversity and improved health and wellbeing for local people. Its award winning ‘Nature4Health’ programme encourages local communities at risk of developing health problems such as diabetes, obesity or depression, to get out into the Forest through conservation activities, mindful walking and forest schools, significantly improving their physical and mental health.
Page 189 79 25 Year Environment Plan
4. Making 2019 a year of action i. Helping children and young for the environment people from all backgrounds to engage with nature and Our goal is to see more people from all backgrounds involved in projects to improve the environment improve the natural world. We will make 2019 a year of action for the environment, Working with Step Up to Serve, #iwill putting children and young people at its campaign partners, and other youth and heart. This year of green action will environmental partners, we will develop provide a focal-point for organisations an environment theme for the #iwill that run environmental projects, and will campaign in 2019 (the 2018 theme is th encourage wider participation. health, linked to the 70 anniversary of the NHS). Evidence suggests that while many people are already keen to get out there and help the environment, we should aim for many more to do so. Among younger people alone, and across all kinds of social action, the government-funded National Youth Social Action survey of 2016, found that in a group of 10-20 year olds, 42% of young people participated in meaningful social action, whilst another 42% took no part in social action24. Drawing leaves (Photo: Forestry Commission / John McFarlane).
the environment, such as fundraising, 24 Defined in the National Youth Social Action campaigning, tutoring/mentoring and giving time Survey 2016 as ‘practical action in the service of to charity. others to create positive change’ and covers a wide range of activities that help other people or Page 190 80 25 Year Environment Plan
The #iwill campaign is a movement led by all sectors that by 2020 aims to make Actions we will take include: involvement in meaningful social action a In partnership with Step Up to part of life for all 10-20 year olds. We will Serve, supporting the 2019 #iwill work with partners from the environment-themed year, with environmental and youth sectors to design input from young people. promote environmental opportunities that attract young people from all backgrounds. As part of this, we will work Evaluating progress in increasing with the National Citizen Service (NCS) young people’s environmental Trust, to enable more participants to have social action, including #iwill contact with and improve natural campaign activity in 2019, and environments both during the NCS sharing lessons to sustain good experience and afterwards. practice.
We will engage young people in the At the same time, exploring with design of this programme. Legacy youth sector partners the partnerships will sustain opportunities for potential for piloting a natural young people to engage with the environment programme with environment into the future. youth groups that encourages use of natural environments In 2019 a wide range of engagement through social action. This would activities will be planned to coincide with aim to reach more young people the 70th anniversary of National Parks from disadvantaged and the centenary of the Forestry backgrounds. Commission.
Page 191 81 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Supporting the 2019 year of green action Actions we will take include: Drawing together targeted Government will build on the 70th activities to make it easier for anniversary of National Parks and the people to get involved in centenary of the Forestry Commission improving the natural world and and #iwill campaign activities in 2019 to spread the word about encourage adults and children to take environmental issues. positive steps to help the natural environment. We will focus on the simple Working with partners from the things that people can do, and how these business and voluntary sectors also support good health. to make these activities happen.
A series of public engagement activities Scoping out an evidence-based for 2019 will link to initiatives on waste behaviour change strategy to reduction, cleaner air or other aspects of enable further actions by pro-environmental behaviour. We will look individuals, communities, to get the business community and businesses and government voluntary sectors involved in these beyond 2019. activities, and urge them, with the education sector, to develop their own initiatives throughout the year to engage communities and raise awareness.
We expect 2019 to be the foundation of a five-year programme that will help turn the commitments in this 25 Year Environment Plan into action.
Page 192 82 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 4: Increasing resource efficiency and reducing pollution and waste
At a glance
We will: Make sure that resources are used more efficiently and kept in use for longer to minimise waste and reduce its environmental impacts by promoting reuse, remanufacturing and recycling.
Work towards eliminating all avoidable waste by 2050 and all avoidable plastic waste by end of 204225.
Reduce pollution by tackling air pollution in our Clean Air Strategy and reduce the impact of chemicals.
Dealing with waste and pollution costs We need to stop producing so much businesses and householders millions of waste in the first place. We can do this by pounds each year and causes significant being more ‘resource efficient’, which not environmental and wildlife damage. only eases pressure on the environment and our stocks of natural resource but Pollution is a form of waste that pervades reduces costs too, boosting productivity. the environment: the atmosphere, water, land and oceans. Sustainable growth can go hand in hand with less waste and a smarter use of Over the next 25 years, we must resources. We know that well-designed significantly cut all forms of pollution and and delivered regulation, taxes and ease the pressure on the environment. charges contribute to cleaner growth: the We must ensure that noise and light landfill tax has been instrumental in pollution are managed effectively. reducing the amount of waste dumped in the ground by 44% since 2000. The aggregates levy has hugely incentivised use of recycled aggregate.
25 Avoidable means what is Technically, Environmentally and Economically Practicable.
Page 193 83 25 Year Environment Plan
We must also ensure that we are not Energy and materials are essential simply exporting waste to other countries. contributions to the production of goods Better intelligence about criminal activity and services, and a healthy economy and targeted inspections are estimated to depends on a healthy environment. We have cut illegally-exported electrical and want more efficient production processes household waste from England by 17% and better designed products that reduce between 2014 and 2016, saving the UK waste (cutting material costs) and use economy £2.75m over the two years.26 recycled/reused materials wherever possible. We will improve and develop our regulatory framework so that it provides strong environmental protection and standards while promoting economic growth: providing certainty for investment, stimulating markets and innovation, and setting a baseline for all.
1. Maximising resource efficiency and minimising environmental impacts at end We want products that reduce waste and use of life. recycled/reused materials wherever possible. We need to make data more available to We are committed to working towards our support processes such as industrial goal of zero avoidable waste by 2050 and symbiosis – i.e. where two or more doubling resource productivity over the industrial facilities or companies join up lifetime of this Plan. In order to do this, and the wastes or by-products of one and to maximise the value we get from become the raw materials of another. We our resources during their lifetime, we must also develop business models that need to look at their whole life-cycle – challenge inefficient production practice from production, to usage and what we and on this we will work with industry to do with them at the end of their lives. We explore options for making waste tracking have committed to develop a new data universally digitised. national Resources and Waste strategy to achieve this. We are committed to supporting comprehensive and frequent waste and Our Industrial Strategy promotes the recycling collections which protect local move towards a regenerative, circular amenity and ensure that products are economy. The economy exists within the recycled as much as possible, returning natural world, and cannot be separated high quality materials back to the from it. economy.
26 Regulating for people, the environment and growth, Environment Agency, 2017
Page 194 84 25 Year Environment Plan
This will help stimulate internal UK markets and support strong secondary Actions we will take include: materials markets as well as exports Publishing a new Resources and abroad. Waste strategy in 2018 aimed at The government will shortly set out plans making the UK a world leader in for a Bioeconomy Strategy which will resource efficiency. It will set out build on the UK’s strengths to ensure we our approach to reducing waste, can develop a world-class bio-based promoting markets for secondary economy by removing our dependence materials, incentivising on finite fossil resources. Bioscience and producers to design better biotechnology has the potential to create products and how we can better new solutions that are economically and manage materials at the end of environmentally sustainable as well as life by targeting environmental resource-efficient. impacts. This will not only increase productivity but will also enable clean growth across all our towns, cities and communities
As a package, these actions will see us manage resources more sustainably and divert more waste away from landfill, reducing the associated environmental impacts.
Page 195 85 25 Year Environment Plan i. Achieving zero avoidable Urgent action to reduce plastic waste in the marine and open environment is plastic waste by end of 2042 needed and is vital for the future of our planet and a considerable economic Plastic is an incredibly versatile material opportunity, including for developing that forms a key component of many countries that stand to benefit from more products we use today. As a packaging productive land, healthier seas, and material, it is safe, secure, hygienic and ecotourism. cheap. It is tough and long-lasting, which is why it is also a disaster for the Re-using and recycling plastics is critical, environment. Production of most virgin and also reduce our reliance on fossil plastics requires fossil fuels, and when fuels for the production of virgin plastics. we have finished with them, they are These changes would also stem the difficult to dispose of in a way that does damaging flow of plastics into the not harm the natural world. environment, where they devastate wildlife and the wider natural It is estimated that 8.3 billion tonnes of environment. Reducing the plastic flow plastic have been produced since the into our seas would also reduce the risk 1950s 27. Without urgent action to cut of toxins being transferred up the food demand, this is likely to be 34 billion chain. To address this issue we will work tonnes by 2050, the majority of which will to eliminate all avoidable plastic waste end up in landfill or polluting the world’s over the lifetime of this Plan through a continents and oceans. In the UK alone, four point plan taking action at each stage during its recent Great British Beach of the product lifecycle – production, Clean Up the Marine Conservation consumption and end of life. Society found 718 pieces of litter for every 100m stretch of beach surveyed. Of this, rubbish from food and drink made up at least one fifth.
27Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made, Geyer, et al. Science Advances. Vol 3, no.7, 2017
Page 196 86 25 Year Environment Plan
Actions we will take include: Building on our microbeads ban by exploring whether we can ban Looking across the whole other problematic materials lifecycle, launching a call for where suitable alternatives exist. evidence in 2018 seeking views on how the tax system or Analysis by Innovate UK shows charges could reduce the that we have invested amount of single use plastics approximately £54m of public waste. research and development money on plastics innovation in 1. At the production stage, we will the past seven years but we encourage producers to take must accelerate the pace of more responsibility for the research to ensure a higher environmental impacts of their proportion of plastic is re-usable, products and rationalise the recyclable and recycled and that number of different types of British companies are at the plastic in use by: forefront in developing this technology – a key ambition of Working with industry to the Clean Growth Grand rationalise packaging formats Challenge. We will therefore and materials formats to make work with BEIS, Innovate UK, sure that more plastics can be Research Councils and industry easily recycled and the quality of to bring forward a bid for the next collected recycled plastics is round of Industrial Strategy improved. Challenge Fund awards later in 2018 to help develop a pipeline Reforming our Producer of new, more sustainable Responsibility systems (including materials that will have a lower packaging waste regulations) to environmental impact. incentivise producers to take greater responsibility for the Encouraging the development of environmental impacts of their bio-based, biodegradable and products. This will include environmentally-friendly plastic exploring extending producer through the Bioeconomy responsibility requirements to Strategy. plastic products not currently covered by our existing regimes to create a better market for recycled plastic.
Page 197 87 25 Year Environment Plan
2. At the consumption stage, we Continuing to support the will reduce the amount of plastic industry led on-pack recycling in circulation through reducing labelling system and encourage demand for single-use plastic by: all brands and retailers to use this systems to provide Removing all consumer single information to householders. use plastics from the central government estate offices. Continuing to implement the Extending uptake of the highly Litter Strategy to reduce plastic successful 5p plastic bag charge litter and littering behaviour. to small retailers, exploring whether compulsory options are Implementing voluntary and needed if voluntary agreements regulatory interventions that can prove ineffective. cut the amount of commonly littered items, and improve Supporting water companies, recycling and packaging reuse. high street retailers, coffee shops This includes considering advice and transport hubs to offer new from the Voluntary & Economic refill points for people to top-up Incentives Working group (set up water bottles for free in every under the Litter Strategy), which major city and town in England. is currently looking at measures The water industry plans to to reduce littering and promote create a nationwide network of recycling of drinks containers. refill points, and an app to help people find the nearest place to 4. At the end of life/waste refill their bottles with water free management stage, we will of charge. improve the rate of recycling
Through the Framework for Working with retailers and the Greater Consistency, WRAP is Waste and Resources Action working with industry and local Programme (WRAP) to explore authorities to ensure that a introducing plastic-free consistent set of materials are supermarket aisles in which all collected by all local authorities. the food is loose. We want to accelerate this shift to consistency in the materials 3. At the end of use stage, we will collected. make it easier for people to recycle by: Working with the waste management industry and re- processors to significantly increase the proportion of plastic packaging that is collected and
recycled.
Page 198 88 25 Year Environment Plan
ii. Reducing food supply chain
We will work with the Research emissions and waste Councils to help develop a The Government is working to make the standard for biodegradable way we eat and drink in this country more plastic bags as part of emerging sustainable. The aim is to cut by one fifth work on a national Bioeconomy the greenhouse gas intensity of food and Strategy (while also recognising drink consumed in the UK, and also per the need to avoid microplastics capita UK food waste by 2025. This will pollution). set the UK on a path to meet an even Collaborative industry action: more ambitious UN target – halving per capita global food waste at retail and WRAP is working to develop a consumer levels by 2030. new cross-sector (business, government and NGOs) The work is being done through The commitment to tackle plastic Courtauld Commitment 2025, a bold waste. This will align with the voluntary agreement involving Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s organisations along the agri-food supply New Plastic Economy and have chain from producer to consumer. The an initial focus on plastic commitment addresses key issues, packaging. including reducing waste from consumers by for example rolling out guidance on Demonstrating international applying ‘Use By’ dates only where there leadership: is a food safety reason to use it, and looking across supply chains to find We will do more to help efficiencies. Reductions achieved will be developing nations tackle measured using global best practice pollution and reduce plastic methodology.28 waste, including through UK aid. Contracting parties – including food Work through the UN, G7 and businesses and local authorities – are G20 to tackle marine plastics also guided by elements of the Plan for pollution at an international level. Public Procurement and Catering Services, including the ‘balanced scorecard’ which ranks a range of Work with the International relevant criteria (sustainability in Maritime Organization to address production, health and nutrition, resource the control and prevention of efficiency, social-economic value and ship-source pollution. so on).
28 Courtauld Commitment, 2025
Page 199 89 25 Year Environment Plan
These criteria will help to deliver real environmental improvements, including Actions we will take include: entrenching UK production standards, Continuing to work closely with reducing food waste, encouraging the WRAP, food businesses, local use of seasonal fresh produce and authorities and other encouraging menus to identify and organisations to meet Courtauld celebrate the provenance of the food 2025. on offer. Recycling food waste is also a key Ensuring that as food and priority. We will work towards no food catering contracts come up for waste entering landfill by 2030. Many renewal, central government local authorities have introduced separate departments and their agencies collection of food waste and we will work adopt the balanced scorecard to support an increase in numbers so that approach to deliver benefits to the amount of food waste sent to landfill the environment, consumers and continues to decline. We will also take businesses alike. action to support the redistribution of unsold edible and nutritious surplus stock Funding for charities who from food businesses to individuals in redistribute surplus food from need. As a starting point, WRAP food businesses to those in announced at the end of last year a new need. £0.5m fund for charities who redistribute surplus food from food businesses to those in need.
PageRecycling 200 food waste is also a key priority (Illustration: WRAP). 90
25 Year Environment Plan iii. Reducing litter and littering Finally, we will seek to improve the infrastructure in place for people to The Litter Strategy for England sets out dispose of litter. Working with Highways our aim to clean up the country and cut England we will tackle litter on the both litter and littering behaviours by Strategic Road Network and update the means of better education, enforcement Code of Practice on Litter and Refuse to and ‘binfrastructure’ (the design, number clarify expected standards. We will and location of public litter bins and so produce new guidance on ‘binfrastructure’ on). to help local areas reduce levels of litter, as set out in our Litter Strategy for The Litter Strategy also sets out a England. We are committed to compelling economic case for all encouraging the use of behavioural businesses to invest in anti-litter activities insights to develop and test new ways to – perhaps by adopting voluntary reduce litter. We have also launched a measures that aim to increase recycling new ‘litter innovation fund’ to pilot and and reduce litter, or through product evaluate small scale local research design, behavioural research and projects that have the potential for wider investment in campaigns. We will also application. work with relevant industries to tackle particular red flags such as discarded fast-food packaging, smoking-related litter and chewing gum. Actions we will take include:
We will deliver a new national anti-litter We will continue to implement the Government’s Litter Strategy for campaign and work on developing a culture that teaches young people not to England, including: litter. Introducing new regulations to improve local authorities’ We will take stronger action against those enforcement powers, supported who litter. Subject to parliamentary by new guidance on its approval, new regulations will give proportionate use. councils outside London the power to fine keepers of vehicles from which litter is Developing a national anti- thrown, and we have laid new regulations littering campaign, led by the to increase fixed penalties for littering and government and funded by the related offences. We will provide private sector. improved guidance on the appropriate and proportionate use of these powers, Distributing a £450,000 litter and encourage councils to be transparent Innovation Fund to pilot, about enforcement activity. implement and evaluate small scale local research projects that could be replicated more widely.
Page 201 91 25 Year Environment Plan
Tackling marine litter
Turtles choke on plastic bags because they mistake them for a jellyfish. Dolphins drown, tangled up in discarded plastic packaging. Albatrosses somehow find floating rice bags in the furthest reaches of the South Atlantic, far from human populations, and unwittingly feed them to their hungry chicks on the island of South Georgia. Millions of single-use bottles jostle their way around the oceans, carried on the currents even to the remotest and most fragile Pacific atolls. Latest estimates suggest that around 12 million tonnes of plastics enter the oceans each year.29 The annual cost of marine plastic pollution is estimated to be at least $4.7 billion to the consumer goods industry alone.30 The UK is committed to leading efforts to protect the marine environment. To tackle marine pollution, we will pursue a sustainable, international and transboundary approach that prioritises reducing global reliance on plastics, increases economically viable recycling processes, and promotes maritime practices that prevent harmful matter entering the seas.
An estimated 12 million tonnes of plastics enter the oceans each year (Photo: Surfers against sewage)
Tackling marine litter requires coordinated global and regional strategies. At present, more is needed to enforce existing programmes, regulations and standards at every level. In many cases, better waste management on land will prevent waste reaching the sea – this is why we need a joint land/marine approach. We need more information on what works well in terms of preventative measures and what will fundamentally change human behaviour.
Page 202 92 25 Year Environment Plan
Better waste collection and management, together with a more sustainable plastics life cycle, are key to solving the issue. Since plastic marine litter presents significant risks to business, the private sector can play a major role in addressing it. It also presents opportunities: at present, $80-120 billion in annual economic value is lost to the global economy because single-use plastic packaging is not captured after use31/32. Solutions to the marine plastics problem range from industry innovations and government regulations to partnerships between stakeholders. Recent examples of government actions include the 5p plastic bag charge and the ban on the manufacture and sale of rinse-off personal care products containing microbeads. The challenge is how to scale up these efforts. We will work with waste management services and producers to support policies that deliver high quality and quantity recycling, minimise environmental impact and ensure well-functioning secondary material markets (the use of recycled material in preference to virgin raw materials). This will allow us to divert more waste from landfill, manage resources more sustainably and design products that promote a more resource efficient economy. More detail will be set out in the Resources and Waste Strategy. We should be bold not only about plastics but also about other marine pollution and muster international support for action. We will promote the use of port reception facilities and champion laws which concern dumping wastes and other matter at sea. Finally, we should prioritise, where feasible, a clean-up of the marine environment where litter poses a threat to human health, biodiversity, wildlife or sustainable use without harm to associated ecosystems, as agreed at the 2017 United Nations Environment Assembly – Toward a pollution free planet.
29 Stemming the Tide: Land-based strategies for a plastic-free ocean, Ocean Conservancy & McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015 30 Plastics and Sustainability: A Valuation of Environmental Benefits, Costs and Opportunities for Continuous Improvement, Trucost, 2016 31 The New Plastics Economy — Rethinking the future of plastics, World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company, 2016
32 The ocean economy’s output is measured in terms of the ocean based industries’ contribution to economic output and employment. Source: The trillion dollar ocean, OECD, 2016 Insights: Jolly, C. and Stevens, B
Page 203 93 25 Year Environment Plan iv. Improving management of residual waste Actions we will take include: Exploring different infrastructure options for managing residual Since 2000 we have diverted significant waste beyond electricity, quantities of residual waste – i.e. waste including the production of that cannot be reused or recycled – from biofuels for transport and landfill through the development of emerging innovative energy from waste (EfW) facilities. These technologies. generally recover energy from the waste to produce electricity. In 2016/17, some Looking at ways to increase the 38% of waste collected by Local use of heat produced at waste Authorities went to EfW compared with facilities through better 16% that went to landfill. More can be connections to heat networks. done however. We want to make sure The facilities will become more that materials ending up in the residual efficient and emit less carbon waste stream are managed so that their dioxide. full value as a resource is maximised and the impact on the environment of treating Investigating ways to cut carbon them is minimised. dioxide emissions from EfW We will continue to encourage operators facilities by managing the to maximise the amount of energy amount of plastics in the residual recovered from residual waste while waste stream. We will link this minimising the environmental impact of with any opportunities to recycle managing it, for example by utilising the more plastics or reduce the heat as well as electricity produced. The amount used. actions set out in this Plan will help us build on this to ensure that the value of residual waste as a resource is fully realised and that emissions of carbon dioxide during the energy recovery process are kept as low as possible. We must bear in mind that any infrastructure must be able to adapt to future changes in the volume and make-up of residual waste generated and developments in technology. That way, waste is not locked into residual waste treatment processes when it could be reused or recycled.
Page 204 94 25 Year Environment Plan
v. Cracking down on fly-tippers and waste criminals Actions we will take include: Seeking to eliminate waste crime Waste crimes have a long-term impact on and illegal waste sites over the the natural environment – they pollute air, lifetime of this Plan, prioritising water and land. Fly-tipping and poorly-run those of highest risk. waste sites lead to problems with fumes, dust, vermin and insect infestations. Working with industry to explore Furthermore, waste fires can cause options to introduce electronic significant disruption to roads, railways tracking of waste. and schools, making lives a misery. As part of our Resources and The Environmental Services Association Waste Strategy, to be published (ESA) estimated that waste crime cost in 2018, developing a new the UK economy between £568m and strategic approach to prevent, £808m in 2013; in 2015, it cost the detect and deter waste crime. English economy at least £604m. It undermines legitimate businesses, evade Taking a partnership approach to taxes and run up clearing-up costs for the deal with the issue with industry, public sector running into millions of regulators and local authorities. pounds. The cost to local authorities of clearing fly-tipped waste was £57.7m33 in 2016/17; these figures do not take in the cost borne by other landowners forced to deal with illegal waste disposal.
33Fly-tipping statistics for England, Defra, 2017
Page 205 95 25 Year Environment Plan
vi. Reducing the impact of wastewater Actions we will take include:
If it is not properly collected and treated, Working with industry to create a wastewater (i.e. water from residential more robust wastewater planning premises, industrial wastewater and and investment process that will contaminated rainwater) causes harm to help provide better outcomes for the water environment. both customers and the environment. In its strategic policy statement to Ofwat, the government makes it clear that we Continue to support the Thames expect the regulator to challenge water Tideway Tunnel project to and sewerage companies to improve the achieve significant environmental way they manage wastewater to meet the benefits allowing the River needs of customers while protecting the Thames’s biodiversity to flourish. environment. For example, the Thames Tideway Tunnel, a brand-new 15-mile long ‘super-sewer’ now being built, will help clean up the River Thames in London by capturing the large volumes of sewage pollution that currently overflow into it each year from the over-stretched sewer system.
We expect companies to provide robust and transparent plans for the 2019 price review using the available outputs from the Water UK-led 21st Century Drainage Programme and the emerging long-term planning methodology for drainage and wastewater management plans. These will provide a clear framework for engagement and consultation with key stakeholders and help deliver lasting resilient plans that provide clear benefits for customers and the environment.
Page 206 96 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Reducing pollution ammonia, nitrogen oxides, non-methane volatile organic compounds, fine We know that people who live in city particulate matter and sulphur dioxide – centres and near busy roads – often by 2020 initially, and by 2030 for a deeper those on the lowest incomes in society – cut. Our commitment to meeting these are most likely to be exposed to legally binding targets is not affected by dangerous levels of air pollution. the UK’s departure from the EU. Epidemiological studies reveal that long- Our goal is for everyone to tread more term exposure to this kind of pollution lightly on the natural environment. To reduces life-expectancy, mainly through achieve this we will need to expand on an increased risk of mortality from many of the initiatives set out in the Clean cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, Growth Strategy. and lung cancer.
We have long been at the forefront of To manage the risks of chemicals and global efforts to reduce pollution and promote their safe production, transport improve air quality. The first Clean Air and use, the chemicals industry is subject Act, in 1956, had a significant impact on to a number of regulations to address pollution in our towns and cities, potential impacts on both human health relegating ‘peasouper’ smogs to history. and the environment. Despite the rapid Our integrated approach to tackling growth in this industry these processes pollution from industry – ensuring industry are recognised as providing effective adopted the best practices available; controls and measures to prevent harmful involving industry in developing high substance release in the UK. standards – was truly innovative and has The UK is a signatory to four multilateral proved effective in reducing emissions. environmental agreements (MEAs) where Our international partners have since we are active participants, working adopted and built upon this approach. towards achieving our goals whilst also The quality of our air has also significantly supporting developing nations. By improved owing to our tough regulatory maintaining comprehensive emissions frameworks. Emissions of sulphur dioxide inventories we can demonstrate alone have fallen by nearly 95% since significant declines since 1990 of many 1990. Stringent pollution limits have harmful substances, including mercury prompted industry to invest in cleaner and all persistent organic pollutants processes and abatement technology. banned under the Stockholm Convention. Fuels and products have been We need to seek more ways to tackle the reformulated to reduce emissions at release of harmful substances in our air, source. There has been a welcome shift water and land. in fuel use away from coal towards cleaner forms of energy. To tackle air pollution we are already taking action to target both businesses The UK’s determination to improve air and individuals. We are bringing forward quality is reinforced by our commitment to legislation to cut industrial emissions from meeting ambitious, legally-binding targets medium combustion plants and to cut emissions of five pollutants – Page 207 97 25 Year Environment Plan generators. At present, these are We also announced that we will end the significant but largely unregulated sale of new conventional petrol and diesel sources of air pollution. We are also cars and vans by 2040. We published our working with Local Authorities and others plan to tackle roadside nitrogen dioxide to advise householders about the impact concentrations, and have made £475m of of the domestic burning of wood and new money available to support local house coal – which together account for authorities with the biggest pollution nearly 40%34 of total emissions of harmful problems to tackle hotspots in their areas particulates that can cause heart and lung – part of a wider £3.5bn spending damage. In September 2017, the ‘ready commitment to air quality and cleaner to burn’ wood certification scheme was transport. launched. This industry initiative supported by Defra persuades people to move away from wet, unseasoned wood to ‘ready to burn’ wood, which can halve emissions from this source.
Future of Mobility Grand Challenge
The transport sector is responsible for around 40% of the UK's final energy use, and contributes to local air quality issues. Through our ‘Future of Mobility’ Grand Challenge, announced in the Industrial Strategy, we will become a world leader in shaping the future of mobility, including the low carbon transport of the future.
We have identified four early priorities:
Establishing a flexible regulatory framework to encourage new modes of transport and new business models. Seizing opportunities and addressing the challenges of moving from hydrocarbon to zero emission vehicles. Preparing for a future of new mobility services, increased autonomy, journey- sharing and a blurring of the distinctions between private and public transport. Exploring ways to use data to accelerate the development of new mobility services and enable the more effective operation of our transport system.
34 National Atmospheric Emission Inventory, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, 2015
Page 208 98 25 Year Environment Plan
i. Publishing a Clean Air ii. Curbing emissions from Strategy combustion plants and generators We will publish a new Clean Air Strategy for consultation in 2018. This will set out Medium-sized combustion plants (MCPs), how we will continue to seek which are used to generate heat for large improvements to public health, protect the buildings and for power generation, are a environment, support clean growth, and largely unregulated source of emissions work towards our legally-binding ceilings of air pollutants. It is important that we on UK emissions of air pollution. It will control their impact on the environment. include looking at approaches to improve how farmers use fertilisers and reduce Similarly, the recent rapid growth of low- ammonia emissions to the air. It will set cost, small scale flexible power out how over the long term we will work generators poses significant risks without towards a shift away from using solid appropriate controls. These generators fuels to heat people's homes, to reduce are often fuelled by diesel and emit high air quality pollution. levels of nitrogen oxides, posing a threat to both local and national air quality. We will review the strategy regularly and report publicly on our progress in We are taking forward legislation to tackle reducing national emissions of air emissions from medium-sized pollution. combustion plants and generators. This will provide an estimated 43% of the sulphur dioxide emissions reduction, 9% Actions we will take include: of the reduction for particulate matter, and 22% of the nitrogen oxides emissions Publishing a Clean Air Strategy reduction required to meet our targets for in 2018. 2030. Additionally these controls will contribute to reducing urban nitrogen Exploring options to address dioxide concentrations. pollution from coal and wet wood.
Applying sulphur standards to Actions we will take include: smokeless fuels. Legislating to set limits on the levels of air pollutants that MCPs and generators can emit.
Page 209 99 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Publishing a Chemicals Strategy Actions we will take include: Publishing an overarching Chemicals Strategy to set out Chemicals provide substantial benefits to our approach as we leave the society but their widespread use in EU. industry, agriculture, food systems and homes has led in some cases to pollution Exploring options to consolidate of land, water, air and food. We will monitoring and horizon-scanning publish a new Chemicals Strategy to work to develop an early warning tackle chemicals of national concern that system for identifying emerging will build on existing approaches. This chemical issues. new strategy will set our priorities for action and detail how we will achieve our Considering how we will address goals. It will support collaborative work on tracking of chemicals in products human biomonitoring, address to reduce barriers to recycling combination effects of different chemicals and reuse whilst preventing a and improve the way we track chemicals risk from harmful chemicals. across supply chains.
Working internationally to strengthen the standardisation of methods that assess chemical safety in support of the mutual acceptance of data to identify and share information on emerging concerns and new approaches to risk assessments.
Page 210 100 25 Year Environment Plan iv. Minimising the risk of Greater transparency and a more systematic, cost-effective and common- chemical contamination in our sense approach, can yield impressive water results in protecting human health and wildlife. As with the PBDEs example, Chemicals get into our water via a wide stakeholders will be encouraged to take range of sources, including water ownership of problems. They will also be treatment plants, use of agricultural expected to take an active role in seeking pesticides, abandoned infrastructure such and adopting solutions to contamination as mines, atmospheric deposition and by chemicals of emerging concern. road runoff. We want to tackle risks from chemical contaminants in English waters, Decisions on managing risks will be including groundwater, and make sure proportionate and based on the weight of that levels of contaminants entering fresh evidence, so that for example a high level water bodies (which may be transported of certainty will be needed before a to coasts and seas) neither increase nor decision is made to invest in expensive give rise to pollution. treatment technology to reduce chemicals from treated wastewater effluents. The way we have approached the problem of polybrominated diphenyl As well as source control mechanisms ethers (PBDEs), used as flame retardants (regulations on chemical management or in home products, is a case in point. changes in individuals’ behaviour) actions These enter the aquatic environment to manage prioritised substances will through domestic wastewater treatment range from environmental interventions works. As a result of source control around the pathway-to-the-water measures such as banning their use in environment; point source (end-of-pipe) certain products, PBDE emissions have controls; and taking no further action notably declined, averting the need for where controls already exist that can more expensive water treatment. We plan address concerns and evidence shows to carry on enforcing source control they are effective. restrictions on harmful products and requiring water companies to monitor trends in their treated effluents.
Page 211 101 25 Year Environment Plan
We will look to the water industry and manufacturers of pesticides and other Actions we will take include: agri-sector industries to deliver these Implementing a strategy with a various approaches. They will be framework that prioritises current encouraged to develop good practices, issues such as antimicrobial and voluntary and catchment-based resistance, the presence of initiatives to protect drinking and/or pharmaceuticals and micro- groundwater resources. In addition, plastics. Our goal is to improve cleaning up pollution from abandoned water quality, reverse the metal mines will protect aquatic deterioration of groundwater, and organisms and deliver economic and reduce emissions of harmful environmental benefits for local substances. communities.
Working with stakeholders, including water companies and Blueprint For Water, to draw up a roadmap for individual (or groups of) chemicals that takes account of planning timelines for chemicals’ regulation, river basin management and the water industry.
Working with the agricultural sector on priority plant protection products, such as insecticides and herbicides of concern, to assess the progress that voluntary initiatives are making in dealing with them.
Engaging with national and international academic specialists, industry, policy makers and regulators to bring together robust evidence and to identify emerging priorities that merit further investigation.
Page 212 102 25 Year Environment Plan v. Ensuring we continue to Posing a lesser risk to health is one immediate benefit of cleaner bathing maintain clean recreational waters. Also valuable is the longer-term waters and warning about boost to local economies through temporary pollution increased tourism.
Swimmers and paddlers must be confident that the water they are entering Actions we will take include: is clean. We have identified ‘bathing Working with the Environment waters’ to give the public peace of mind, Agency and water companies to focusing on areas where we expect the continue to maintain our high greatest number of people to be. Over the standards of clean bathing water. last couple of decades we have significantly cleaned up our bathing Making sure that all those with waters: in 2017, a full 98.3% of waters a role to play take action to met our standards for clean water. improve water quality by, for example, removing misconnected plumbing, improving surface water drainage and land management, and maintaining private sewage systems to a high standard.
Continuing to develop the Environment Agency’s forecasting and warning system so that bathers are warned of a possible short-term pollution problem, perhaps owing to spill from overloaded sewers during heavy rain, or the tide overlapping land used for grazing. This will bolster public confidence in bathing waters.
Page 213 103 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 5: Securing clean, healthy, productive and biologically diverse seas and oceans
At a glance
We will: Implement a sustainable fisheries policy as we leave the Common Fisheries Policy.
Achieve good environmental status of our seas while allowing marine industries to thrive, and complete our ecologically coherent network of well-managed marine protected areas (MPAs).
Our seas and oceans are an integral part But too often human activity depletes of our history, economy and way of life. stocks more rapidly than they can recover Oceans supply nearly half of the oxygen and renew. we breathe, absorb over a quarter of the carbon dioxide we produce, play a vital Two of the major threats are ocean role in the water cycle and climate acidification (OA) and damage to coral system, and are critical for biodiversity reefs. and ecosystem services. Our marine OA is a direct result of CO emissions environment supports our economy with 2 from human activities around the world crucial jobs, seafood and raw materials. and can effectively be tackled only at The UK has 17,820km of mainland international level. The “Because The coastline and the widest range of marine Ocean” declaration, signed by the UK, habitats of any coastal waters in Europe. highlights the relevance of ocean They are home to a rich diversity of protection in the implementation of the plankton, invertebrates, fish and higher Paris Agreement and calls for all parties predators, with around 8,500 species of to include ocean protection in their 36 animal and plants35. Left alone by people, Nationally Determined Contributions , many aspects of marine ecosystems both in mitigation and adaptation action, continually renew themselves. including the conservation or creation of marine habitats important for carbon
actions, known as their Nationally Determined 35 State of Nature, RSPB, 2016 Contributions (NDCs). 36 The Paris Agreement requests each country to outline and communicate their post-2020 climate Page 214 104 25 Year Environment Plan sequestration. As a consequence, We have invested £10.1m to work with consistent and widespread monitoring to coastal communities to protect support identification of OA trends at a mangroves in Madagascar, Indonesia global level is required. The UK will and wider South East Asia. continue to support this, and work with others to drive innovation in monitoring Seas and oceans do not respect regional and collecting data to support policy and or international boundaries. Given the the activities of vulnerable ocean states. transboundary nature of the marine This will help us to improve our environment it makes sense to work with understanding of OA conditions and the others to achieve our objectives ecosystem response to them, optimising effectively and efficiently. We will look to forecasts for OA and its impacts. work with all UK administrations and other countries that are neighbours of our Coral reefs are under direct and seas through OSPAR37 in delivering our sustained pressure. The UK’s ambition is ambitions for the marine environment. to champion and support their Using and managing our seas sustainably conservation and biodiversity in UK and will require multilateral collaboration: this Overseas Territories’ (OTs’) waters and provides an opening to influence around the world. We welcome the fact that 2018 has been made the international diplomacy as we have done International Year of the Reef by the for many decades. Our commitments to International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), deliver the Sustainable Development recognised by the UK as the key Goals (SDG) including the 14th:“Conserve international body for the conservation of and sustainably use the oceans, seas coral and related habitats. We will and marine resources for sustainable increase engagement with ICRI and work development”, will guide many of our with OTs to encourage the adoption of priority work areas. We will work best sustainable management practice of domestically and internationally to deliver coral reefs, as well as their associated our commitments under SDG14. ecosystems. We want to provide sustainability for fisheries and ensure As part of our commitment to the oceans, food security while upholding social and the UK will continue to work with the cultural wellbeing. Commonwealth Secretariat and our Commonwealth partners to draw up We are taking steps to secure an ambitious plan for a international natural capital to deliver Commonwealth Blue Charter. It will look multiple benefits. Mangroves, for to apply the principles and values of the example, play an important role in healthy Commonwealth Charter to oceans, to coastal ecosystems, sequestering carbon include maintaining sustainable marine and supporting aquaculture as well as environments, developing prosperous contributing to the wellbeing and blue economies, delivering fair ocean prosperity of coastal communities. governance and ensuring a safe and secure maritime environment.
cooperate to protect the marine environment in 37 The OSPAR Convention (1992) is the the North East Atlantic. mechanism by which 15 countries and the EU Page 215 105 25 Year Environment Plan
We will build on the success of the In turn, by fishing at sustainable levels we Commonwealth Marine Economies will help to protect the wider marine programme where the UK is working with ecosystems that underpin the fish species Small Island Commonwealth States to we rely on. enable them to use their marine space To do this, we cannot look at fish stocks sustainably. in isolation. We must also protect the marine environment that is their vital Overall, some aspects of the UK marine environment are improving. About 30% of habitat, protecting and improving it by joining forces with local stakeholders to fish stocks are now at sustainable levels, for example, and since 2010 the find the most appropriate ways of drawing down the riches of the sea in a proportion of large fish in the North Sea has climbed sharply to levels not seen sustainable way. since the 1980s. We must still seek to ease the impact of human activity, 1. Introducing a sustainable however, particularly on seabed habitats and fish populations. fisheries policy as we leave the Common Fisheries We need to understand the full value of the marine environment and incorporate Policy that into the decisions we take: this is key The Government will take advantage of to the ‘natural capital’ approach that has the opportunities offered by leaving the informed this 25 Year Environment Plan. EU to bring in a world-class fisheries An understanding of marine economic, management system that is based on the social, historical and environmental principle of maximum sustainable yield values can help incentivise behaviours and helps to restore and protect the and practices that support stewardship marine ecosystem. We will work with the and sustainability. Using this approach devolved administrations as well as the will allow us to be explicit about the UK fishing industry and other choices we make about how best to stakeholders to end wasteful discarding, protect and manage the marine put in place the right incentives to ensure environment, looking at them in the compliance, and collect data and use context of the values associated with our science in the policy decisions we make. seas and oceans. We will implement science-based plans The fishing industry is a good example of as part of our approach to managing natural capital in action. This vital industry fisheries sustainably and to recovering is dependent on a healthy marine fish stocks to sustainable levels in the environment. We need to make sure that shortest time feasible. Once we have left we have healthy fish stocks free of the EU, the Government will publish an persistent pollutants and heavy metals, annual statement on the state of fish and that fish stocks are exploited stocks of interest to the UK. sustainably, in order to ensure the long- term viability of the fishing sector.
Page 216 106 25 Year Environment Plan
An ecosystem approach to fisheries manage a range of pressures, from management will account for, and seek to marine pollution and eutrophication minimise, impacts on non-commercial (adversely enriching a water body with species and the marine environment nutrients) to fishing and other maritime generally, including through technical development. conservation measures. Recognising that species are mobile and marine environments are inter-connected, it will require us to work closely with other Actions we will take include: government departments and countries.
Publishing a Fisheries White To help achieve this we will: Paper ahead of the new Fisheries Bill, setting out our Review all our marine targets and future approach to sustainable indicators to align them with the management as we leave the objectives set out in this Plan and EU. develop a marine online assessment tool (MOAT) to look at Pursuing this approach with the marine environment and the action at all levels, including in pressures affecting it. fisheries negotiations with the EU and other countries. Deliver the marine spatial planning and licensing systems needed to support proportionate management of the marine 2. Achieving good environment whilst enabling growth and providing greater environmental status in our certainty for industry and investors. seas while allowing marine We will complete the full series of industries to thrive England Marine Plans by 2021 and ensure they work cohesively with Leaving the EU also gives us the adjacent marine plans, whether they are opportunity to review how best to manage developed within the UK or by our seas. The UK Marine Strategy sets neighbouring countries. We will continue out our overall ambitions for the marine to implement a marine licensing environment, the targets we want to regulatory regime that supports achieve and how we achieve those sustainable development while protecting targets. the natural capital and wellbeing of the Based on an improved understanding of marine environment and all local the value of the marine environment, we authorities with a coastal interest will be will deliver effective management of our signed up to the Coastal Concordat by seas to make sure they are resilient to 2021 climate change while delivering the full range of goods and services. Realising the vision of the Plan will require us to Page 217 107 25 Year Environment Plan
Building on current plans to complete our the objectives in this Plan and ecologically coherent network of well- associated international managed MPAs, we will move to a whole- obligations for our seas. Regular site approach to protect sites of greatest review dates will ensure that we biodiversity interest. We will adapt our remain on track. approach to respond to changing pressures on the marine environment, Putting in place the remaining including climate change, and develop marine plans for England, and new and innovative techniques to help working with partners in the with their management. These might devolved administrations to include remote sensing, earth observation support those for Northern satellites and the use of autonomous Ireland, Scotland and Wales. vehicles. The aim is to complete the series of UK marine plans by This will protect marine habitats and the 2021. species they support. It will increase their resilience so these marine assets are Consulting on the third tranche better able to respond to long-term of Marine Conservation Zones in pressures and damaging human the first half of 2018, with activities, and recover more swiftly from designations within 12 months individual events such as storms and of that date. This will complete pollution incidents. our contribution to the
international ecologically- coherent network of MPAs in the Actions we will take include: North East Atlantic by including a representative range of the Completing in 2018 a major species and habitats found in assessment of how far our seas our seas. have moved towards good
environmental status since Extending work to protect 2012. mangroves for local
communities to Indonesia in Using that assessment to review 2019 and to more communities our targets and put in place an in South East Asia. updated strategy that will deliver
Page 218 108 25 Year Environment Plan
Sustainable fishing
Historically, we have fished unsustainably and this has vastly depleted fish stocks. Without effective regulation and management, fisheries can suffer from what is called the ‘tragedy of the commons’ where open access to a common valuable resource results in a tendency to over-exploit. Unsustainable fishing practices do not just deplete fish stocks; they threaten the environment and marine ecology and can also have an impact on coastal communities. While overfishing may provide immediate benefits in the form of increased income, it limits the availability of resources in the longer term and thereby jeopardises the livelihood of fishers. It also undermines the resilience of our marine ecosystem and its ability to support sustainable fisheries in the future. An ecosystem approach to fisheries management aims for more sustainable management and accounts for, and seeks to minimise, impacts on non-commercial species and the marine environment generally. One such intervention is ‘achieving Maximum Sustainable Yield’ (MSY). To bring overfishing under control, from 2006 EU fisheries management began to adopt the concept of setting quotas to prevent further depletion of fish stocks. This was further strengthened in 2011, and MSY, with its aim of restoring stock populations and maintaining them at sustainable levels, was adopted as a central objective in 2013. MSY represents a reference point or range based on scientific advice that indicates the level at which a species can be fished without harming the stock in the long term. While this might mean in practice that fishermen cannot fish as much in the short-term, it allows fish stocks to rebuild over time and ensures that the resource is available to us for much longer. Hake stocks in the North-East Atlantic are an example of how stocks can be rebuilt, and illustrate the potential effect of MSY on stock sizes. Between 1985 and 2004, these stocks were in continual decline owing to overfishing. At the lowest point in 2003, 2,500 tonnes were landed in the UK, at a value of £6m at current prices. From 2006, the EU moved towards setting Total Allowable Catches (the amounts fishermen are allowed to catch) in line with MSY. As a result, stocks are now around five times larger, allowing the UK to land 14,000 tonnes of Hake valued at £35m.
Page 219 109 25 Year Environment Plan
Chapter 6: Protecting and improving our global environment
At a glance
We will: Provide international leadership and lead by example in tackling climate change and protecting and improving international biodiversity.
Help developing nations protect and improve the environment by providing assistance and supporting disaster planning.
Support and protect international forests and sustainable agriculture.
Leave a lighter footprint on the global environment by enhancing sustainability and supporting zero deforestation supply chains.
We all live on one planet. We cannot Our Clean Growth Grand Challenge, improve the UK’s environment in isolation announced in the Industrial Strategy, will from the wider global environment – we ensure that we approach these must protect and enhance both. Systems challenges with economic opportunities that regulate life on earth – terrestrial and productivity enhancement in mind. ecosystems, the world’s oceans, freshwater and the climate exist in Environmental pressures are increasing feedback loops. everywhere. Major ecosystems (such as seas and oceans) that support billions of Damage we cause can be multiplied, people are under threat. Natural creating conditions hostile to our disasters, climate change and existence. An effective response requires catastrophic environmental degradation joint action on a global scale. We want to cause economic problems worldwide. be sure that tropical rainforests, coral Pollution observes no national borders. reefs, abundant wildlife and the Emissions that affect land, air and water astonishing beauty of the natural world in one country can have a harmful impact survive to thrill and support the livelihoods on ecosystems and human health in of future generations. others.
Page 220 110 25 Year Environment Plan
The poorest people and countries in the around the world. The despoliation of world are often the most vulnerable and forests destroys traditional sources of likely to be hardest hit by the degradation food for forest animals, clean water, of natural environments – the soil, water, medicines for indigenous people and seas, forests and wildlife. Climate change building materials. and the deterioration of natural environments are prime drivers of Achieving global change is not easy. But poverty, food insecurity and instability, by showing international leadership, and can trigger conflict and migration. supporting developing countries and reducing our own environmental footprint, The illegal wildlife trade is the fourth most we can make a real difference. With lucrative transboundary crime, with an much at stake, we need to work together estimated value of up to £17bn per year. to confront pressing challenges. The It is not only animals that are poached whole of the UK is fully committed to this and killed, but prized tropical hardwoods most vital cause. that are illegally felled and shipped
The illegal wildlife trade is worth an estimated £17bn per year. Page 221 an important plant of peat bogs seen here on the Humberhead Peatlands NNR 111 25 Year Environment Plan
From our proposals for some of the The Clean Growth Strategy, published in world’s strictest measures on ivory sales October 2017, set out our plans to build to combating deforestation, cutting on the successful decarbonisation of the greenhouse gases while promoting clean power sector while looking further across economic growth, the UK has the whole of the economy and natural championed environmental protection. environment. It includes ambitious Among the most difficult challenges is proposals surrounding housing, business, securing binding pledges from multiple transport, the natural environment and nations. In 2015, the UK helped to secure green finance. The Clean Growth Grand the Paris Agreement, the first truly global, Challenge, announced in the Industrial comprehensive climate change Strategy, will ensure the UK reaps the agreement. And we continue to lead by economic rewards that this global taking action at a domestic level - since transformation will create for those that 1990 we have cut UK emissions by 42%38 lead the way. while our economy has grown by two- thirds.39 The UK’s Climate Change Act The Government’s most recent UK 2008 was the first in the world to climate change risk assessment (CCRA), introduce legally-binding emissions based on the independent evidence targets: it is hailed as having led the world report of the Committee on Climate in driving domestic action, both to reduce Change, highlights risks to a number of emissions and to identify and adapt to the our natural assets – including soils, pressures we face as our climate freshwater resources, natural carbon changes. It is an example of UK stores, marine ecosystems, farming, leadership above and beyond the forestry, wildlife and habitats. requirements of EU membership. We will address these risks through the second National Adaptation Programme, to be published later in 2018. This will set out how we will adapt to a range of projected climate impacts.
Emissions from the natural resources sectors have halved since 1990 and further action to reduce them are set out in the Clean Growth Strategy.
39 38 Provisional UK emissions statistics, BEIS, 2017 Quarterly National Accounts Statistical bulletins, ONS, 2016
Page 222 112 25 Year Environment Plan
Climate change is far from the only global have helped protect the snow leopard, threat. Across the world, biodiversity and protected and restored mangroves in the the habitats that support it are coming Philippines in the wake of Typhoon under unprecedented pressure. The UK Haiyan in 2013, and supported as a party to the CBD and to numerous commercially successful and sustainable conventions that protect marine, coffee co-operatives in Ethiopia. migratory and endangered species will work to improve the global environment: We are also committed to protected indeed, we ourselves are custodians of cultural and natural heritage around the globally significant biodiversity in the UK’s world. The UK’s heritage organisations OTs, which support unique ecosystems. deliver education, training, consultancy, conservation and renovation programmes As such, we are committed to to many parts of the globe. Many heritage implementing these conventions professionals and practitioners from other domestically, and to supporting countries come to the UK each year to developing countries to meet their develop their skills, learn about heritage obligations. Our long-standing Darwin protection and management in the UK, Initiative, established 25 years ago at the and benefit from the knowledge of our Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, has so heritage sector. far supported over a thousand projects in 159 countries. It helps nations rich in Our OTs boast some of the world’s most biodiversity but poor in financial delicate and complex ecosystems and resources to conserve, and sustainably habitats. Working in partnership with the use, their natural resources. So far, the OTs, natural capital assessments are Darwin Initiative has established 20,315 being undertaken to improve permanent field plots around the globe, understanding of the full value of these provided 32,957 training weeks and unique environments, and through the 2 produced 2,660 species or habitat Blue Belt programme 4 million km of management plans for overseas ocean around the OTs will be protected governments or agencies. Recent by 2020, further conserving vital habitats projects funded through this initiative and species.
Page 223 113 25 Year Environment Plan
The timeline below illustrates some of our most important commitments.
Page 224 114 25 Year Environment Plan
In 2016, we also played a key part in The UK has consistently supported securing a global deal to reduce the use increased protection for vulnerable of hydrofluorocarbon greenhouse gases marine species across different under the Montreal Protocol, helping to environmental agreements. We continue avoid close to 0.5oC of global warming by to play a leading role championing the the end of this century. conservation and welfare of all whales, dolphins and porpoises both in the UK In line with our commitments under the and internationally. We play an active role Paris Agreement, the UK has committed in the International Whaling Commission at least £5.8bn through its International (IWC) where we strongly support the Climate Finance between 2016 and 2020 global moratorium on commercial whaling to help developing countries mitigate and and will continue to lead calls for those adapt to the impacts of climate change, countries that still engage in commercial reduce deforestation and support cleaner whaling practices to stop. economic growth. Our portfolio of projects has so far supported 34 million people in We have announced measures to clamp coping with the effects of climate change down on the trade in ivory, which and avoided 9.2 million tonnes of CO2 contributes to the slaughter of almost equivalent emissions40. We also work 20,000 elephants every year. We intend closely with Multilateral Development to introduce a total ban on UK sales, and Banks to help direct their finance to the import and export of ivory for sale to support low carbon transition and and from the UK, that could contribute encourage them to be innovative and either directly or indirectly to the ambitious. continued poaching of elephants, with only a limited number of narrowly-defined The UK has also shown global leadership exemptions. These proposals will put the in tackling the illegal wildlife trade (IWT). UK front and centre of global efforts to In 2014, Defra, DFID, the Home Office end this trade. and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office worked closely together to make We have also been at the forefront of the first international IWT conference – global action to halt deforestation, hosted in the UK – a success. The supporting ambitious action. This includes conference secured ambitious the REDD+ Framework under the UN agreements from more than 40 Framework Convention on Climate governments to take urgent, coordinated Change (UNFCCC), covering countries’ action to combat IWT and was hailed as a efforts to reduce emissions from turning point in global efforts to tackle deforestation and forest degradation, and these damaging activities. the New York Declaration of Forests – a far-reaching set of commitments to halve (in 2020) and then halt (by 2030) the loss of natural forests, recover forests and croplands, and support private sector-led
40 UK Climate Finance Results, Department for International Development, 2017
Page 225 115 25 Year Environment Plan commitments to eliminate deforestation 1.5°C. We want to reduce our carbon from the supply chains of key agricultural emissions by at least 80% from 1990 commodities. levels, and achieve this by 2050. We want to halt and then reverse the decline So that we can keep this momentum in global biodiversity, and increase the going, we must intensify our efforts to adoption of sustainable agriculture and protect and improve the global fishing. Our goal is to help prevent the environment, with all relevant government extinction of known threatened species, departments and stakeholder groups and improve and sustain their working together to ramp up global conservation status. As we move to environmental action. tackle poaching and the illegal import/export of threatened goods, we will We want to keep the average global not overlook the illegal felling of rare temperature rise below 2°C above pre- tropical hardwoods. industrial levels, and aim for a rise below
Delivering the UN Sustainable Development Goals
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and make sure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. Delivering the relevant environmental aspects of UN Sustainable Development Goals (Agenda 2030) for the UK requires cross-government, cross-industry and individual participation. There is a huge socio-economic and environmental dividend to be gained through SDG implementation. The Business & Sustainable Development Commission has estimated that the economic prize to business of implementing the SDGs could be up to US$12 trillion (£9 trillion) globally by 2030. The government now has the opportunity to create the right market conditions to harness the socio-economic and environmental opportunities presented by the relevant SDGs. We are committed to delivering the SDGs across government and have set up a cross-Whitehall Sustainable Development Forum to co-ordinate and facilitate implementation of SDGs in the UK, with ongoing scrutiny from the Environmental Audit Committee who will hold us to account on SDG reporting and delivery. In addition, we aim to present our Voluntary National Review to the United Nations in 2019. A report published in March 2017 set out examples of the UK’s work towards achieving these goals, both domestically and internationally.41 On Sustainable Cities and Communities: Air Quality, for example, we have agreed legally-binding UK targets to reduce emissions of key air pollutants by 2020 and 2030. We are engaging at local, national, and international level and working closely across the UK
Development - at home and around the world, 41 Agenda 2030: The UK Government’s approach Department for International Development, 2017 to delivering the Global Goals for Sustainable Page 226 116 25 Year Environment Plan
Government to create a healthier environment through a new programme of Clean Air Zones that will benefit people and the economy.
As a developed country, the UK should drive progress on certain SDGs where domestic consumption has an impact on other countries. These include SDGs 13 (climate change), 7 (energy), 14 (life below water), 15 (life on land) and 12 (sustainable consumption and production). We are already investing in projects that build the capability of developing countries to meet the SDG targets. We are using finance mechanisms that will attract more private finance into environmental projects and focus investment where it can provide the greatest benefit and bring real, meaningful results. We will continue to take coordinated and ambitious action, building on our existing achievements, to reduce the UK’s impact on the environment at home and abroad, and help developing countries to meet their targets.
We cannot do any of this in isolation. From working with developing nations, to Action will only succeed when we agree chairing a working group protecting international standards that protect the rhinos, and continuing to strongly support environment while also facilitating fair the prohibition of commercial mining in practice in international trade which Antarctica, the UK remains an energetic avoids improving our domestic and committed flag-bearer for environment at the expense of the environmental reform. environment globally. We have consistently used our The policies we will implement to protect membership of international fora to and improve our global environment are deliver high-level agreements on key set out below. environmental issues. The UK is party to more than 300 treaties and agreements related to marine and terrestrial 1. Providing international environments, food and agriculture, leadership and leading by chemicals and waste, genetic resources, example and plant and animal health – each with an important role in protecting and The UK will be at the forefront of global improving the natural world. efforts to protect and improve the natural We will continue to lead by example on world, driving the international community the crucial environmental challenges, to adopt higher standards. Our leadership meeting the ambitious goals to which we is respected in part because of our are committed under these agreements. enduring commitment to high standards, domestically and internationally, and the depth and quality of our scientific expertise.
Page 227 117 25 Year Environment Plan
As existing agreements progress, or The move away from coal towards become open for renewal, or new cleaner sources of power is one of the instruments are proposed, we will most effective decisions governments can leverage all our influence to secure make to comply with the Paris international commitment to global targets Agreement. To this end, the UK, that are even more ambitious and alongside Canada, forged the Powering stretching. Past Coal Alliance. Launched in November 2017 at COP23, the UN climate change talks in Bonn, the global i. Tackling Climate Change group already includes more than thirty government and twenty businesses and As set out above, the Climate Change Act aims to grow further and continue to we adopted in 2008 was a prime example engage the private sector, ahead of of early leadership: it introduced five-year December 2018, building a groundswell caps on greenhouse gases, known as ‘carbon budgets’, which have been used for this vital transition. as a model for action across the world Using our leading role in the UNFCCC, and are reflected in the Paris Agreement. through which the Paris Agreement was We will continue to set an example, established, we will urge the international reducing our emissions from 1990 levels community to meet the goals enshrined in by at least 80% by 2050 and publishing the text – in particular, as a first step, our second sustainable and effective through securing robust and integral rules National Adaptation Programme in 2018. and standards. This is vital for future We will use our diplomacy on the environmental security: current global international stage to encourage more commitments under the Agreement are ambitious global action. insufficient to limit average temperature o The UK’s recent Clean Growth Strategy is rise to well below 2 C. another example of domestic commitment to environmentally sustainable growth, a model to others as they develop their Actions we will take include: long-term emission reduction plans ahead of 2020. Again, we will also reflect this Working to secure robust and commitment in our international work. integral rules and standards that The Clean Growth Grand Challenge underpin the goals of the Paris within our Industrial Strategy will seek to Agreement. maximise the advantages for UK industry Show global leadership by from the global shift to clean growth – phasing out unabated coal-fired through leading the world in the electricity by 2025. development, manufacture and use of low carbon technologies, systems and services that cost less than high carbon alternatives.
A core part of the Clean Growth Strategy is our commitment to phase out unabated coal fired electricity by 2025. Page 228 118 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Protecting and improving IWT products, ensuring effective legal frameworks, strengthening law international biodiversity enforcement and providing sustainable alternative livelihoods. To help secure this We will use the UK’s influence to build ambition we will bring global leaders back support for an ambitious post-2020 to London in 2018 for the international international biodiversity strategy, rooted IWT conference – convening a global in a natural capital approach that coalition against IWT and reaffirming emphasises the importance of nature’s political commitment at the highest level. contribution to people, their health and We will tackle IWT as a serious organised prosperity, and the links with the SDGs crime that affects people as well as and the Paris Agreement. We will work animals. with partners internationally to make sure that a robust evidence base informs the The UK’s OTs are home to rich, globally adoption of ambitious, realistic and important biodiversity, with many species measurable post-2020 targets at the 15th found nowhere else in the world and a Conference of the Parties of the CBD in variety of spectacular marine and 2020. These targets should help to terrestrial ecosystems. Local people rely strengthen a natural capital approach and heavily on societal benefits from the transform the way in which decisions are environment in the form of tourism, made at all levels, to value, conserve and disaster mitigation and the provision of recover global biodiversity, thereby food and clean water. sustaining a healthy planet and delivering With their vast marine areas, the OTs benefits essential for all people. offer an opportunity to lead the world in We will press ahead with activities marine protection. The Blue Belt of inspired by the aims of the Convention on marine protection around our OTs, International Trade in Endangered conserves habitats and the species they Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) support, increases resilience to long-term to ensure the sustainability of legal trade pressures such as climate change and in wild flora and fauna, and to protect damaging human activities in surrounding species such as lion, elephant and areas, and supports sustainable dugong, a marine mammal related to economic development for the long term. manatees. The UK chairs the CITES Climatic changes in the Polar Regions working group on proposals to combat are having dramatic consequences, and illegal killing and trafficking of rhinos. Our these consequences have global impacts. aim overall is to make sure that The UK has consistently been at the international trade in specimens of wild forefront of protecting the environment of animals and plants does not threaten the Arctic and the Antarctic and will their survival. continue to use its leading role in the Antarctic Treaty System and our An important part of our commitment to sovereign interests in the South Atlantic protect wild animal and plant populations to protect Antarctica and the Southern is our work on combatting illegal trade. Ocean. We led the work to create the first We aim to reduce illegal trade in wildlife ever Marine Protected Area in Antarctic by working to eradicate the market for waters in 2009, strongly supported the
Page 229 119 25 Year Environment Plan designation of the world’s largest Marine Protected Area in the Ross Sea region, feasibility of an anti-poaching and continue to work towards the taskforce. development of a network of protected areas around the Southern Ocean. A UK- Continuing to provide targeted led initiative ensures that marine areas financial help to developing newly exposed from ice shelf collapse or nations in order to manage retreat, such as occurred at the Larsen C biodiversity and tackle the illegal ice shelf in 2017, are protected from wildlife trade. commercial fishing activities for scientific study. The UK remains fully committed to Developing new techniques to the Protocol on Environmental Protection manage protected areas in the and its ban on commercial mining in OTs, for example by introducing Antarctica. We will continue to work with the use of remote sensing, earth the Arctic States to further our observation satellites and use of understanding, and enhance the autonomous vehicles. protection of the fragile environment, and to advocate that only sustainable and Working with our OTs we will responsible development takes place in continue the implementation of the high North. the Blue Belt programme,
including supporting efficient monitoring and enforcement of Actions we will take include: large scale protected areas.
Taking a leading role in We will continue to support the developing an ambitious post- global moratorium on 2020 international biodiversity commercial whaling and lead strategy. calls for those countries that still engage in commercial whaling Hosting the IWT conference in practices to stop. 2018, we will work with other nations to drive coordinated Playing an active role in securing global action in the fight against a new international agreement IWT. for the conservation and sustainable use of marine areas We will strengthen partnerships beyond national jurisdiction. to tackle IWT beyond borders, including investigating the
Page 230 120 25 Year Environment Plan
2. Helping developing nations The next rounds of the Darwin Initiative, Darwin Plus and the Illegal Wildlife Trade to protect and improve Challenge Fund are expected to open for the environment applications in spring 2018.
The actions taken by developing The UK will continue to support countries countries, which often suffer the worst with National Adaptation Programmes of effects of climate change, are key to Action and disaster risk plans. Through improving the global environment, UK-funded programmes such as Building particularly as their economies grow over Resilience and Adaptation to Climate coming decades. If we are to protect and Extremes and Disasters (BRACED), the improve the global environment, we must UK can demonstrate global leadership work with developing countries to support and reduce the impact of humanitarian them in strengthening their resilience to disasters. We will support further climate change, support sustainable engagement with climate-related policies development and conserve biodiversity. on a national, regional and international scale, in particular in drawing up processes for Adaptation Plans. i. Providing assistance and supporting disaster planning The UK has built up a wealth of expertise while improving the performance of its own economy and energy systems over The UK will use Official Development the past quarter of a century. We are Assistance and our scientific and sharing the lessons learned with partner technical expertise to help developing countries, supported by the £1.2bn cross countries understand and manage their government Prosperity Fund that has environments sustainably. been set up to tackle barriers to We have already pledged at least £5.8bn sustainable and inclusive growth between of International Climate Finance from 2018 and 2021. Prosperity Fund 2016-20, playing our part in the collective programmes in China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South East Asia will provide effort by all developed countries to expertise about regulating clean energy mobilise at least $100bn of climate markets, improving the flow of finance to finance a year by 2020 from public and low carbon projects, and building up private sources. We are one of the largest capacity to improve regulation. We will providers of this kind of finance. Our aim build on the experiences of the is to target funds in areas where the Commonwealth Marine Economies money will have a transformative effect, programme which is working with 17 to leverage in further finance, and to build Commonwealth small island developing on UK strengths and experience. states to combat the effects of climate change, ocean acidification, extreme To help achieve our environmental weather events, pollution, over fishing, ambitions we will continue our work on loss of habitat and to enable conservation the UK’s Darwin Initiative and Darwin and sustainable use of their marine Plus funds, which aim to help deliver space. long-term strategic outcomes for the natural environment in the UK’s Overseas Territories and developing countries.
Page 231 121 25 Year Environment Plan
ii. Supporting and protecting Actions we will take include: international forests and Continuing to help support sustainable global agriculture developing countries on high priority environmental projects. Forests support 90% of the world’s biodiversity, regulate water quality, and Doing more to help developing mitigate climate change by absorbing and nations tackle pollution and storing huge quantities of carbon from the reduce plastic waste, including atmosphere. More than 1.6 billion people through UK aid. depend on forests for food, medicine and livelihoods. Illegal logging increases Continuing to deliver the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions and results in Darwin Initiative and Darwin Plus the loss of biodiversity. It can also have a programmes. devastating impact on the people who live in forests or rely on them for their Assisting countries in preparing, livelihoods. producing and implementing National Adaptation Programmes But there is a balancing act to perform of Action. with the ever increasing need for productive agriculture. Sustainability is Sharing UK expertise with particularly important in agriculture. Two emerging economy partners billion people are supported through through Prosperity Fund smallholder farming in developing programmes. countries: these enterprises produce over 70% of the world’s food. With the global Helping to produce national population expected to reach nearly 10 capacity building plans billion by 2050, these farmers must (complementing existing national become even more productive if we are and regional plans) for to be sure of having enough food for all. developing Blue Economies of small island developing states by We cannot continue with the current 2025. massive conversion of forests and other natural habitats into farmland. Already, Continuing to improve the flow of high levels of food insecurity and finance to low carbon projects malnutrition persist despite an increase in and ensure proper regulation of global supply, and climate change clean energy markets. This will ratchets up the pressure to produce food help emerging markets to and other crops sustainably. improve medium-term regulation. To tackle these challenges, we are working to make agricultural systems more productive, sustainable and resilient to climate change through strategic investments. As part of the Clean Growth Grand Challenge, the Industrial Strategy
Page 232 122 25 Year Environment Plan
White Paper set out our ambition to put the Amazon, Atlantic Forests and the UK at the forefront of the global move Cerrado by helping them access private to high-efficiency agriculture through the sector loans to fund the transition into low new Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund carbon sustainable agriculture. 'Transforming food production: from farm to fork'. The Department for International Development (DFID) has also significantly increased the money it puts Actions we will take include: into agriculture, raising it from £243m in 2011/12 to £484m in 2014/15. This Ensuring deforestation remains a covers the world’s largest climate change priority when targeting future adaptation programme focused on Official Development Assistance smallholder farmers - the International spend. Fund for Agriculture Development’s (IFAD) multi-donor Adaptation for Continuing to work with Smallholder Agriculture Programme multilateral development (ASAP). organisations so that momentum is maintained on key Through the support of UK International environmental issues. Climate Finance, we are helping to make sure that this agricultural development Remaining firmly committed to happens in the right way, supporting halting illegal logging and developing countries to halt deforestation, combating deforestation, and protecting the world’s most biodiverse devising new solutions to support forests and establish sustainable and recognise improvements in livelihoods to eradicate poverty. In Brazil, forest governance. for example, we are supporting farmers to protect and restore forest landscapes in
Page 233 123 25 Year Environment Plan
Adapting the Ethiopian Coffee Economy to Climate Change Scientists from Royal Botanical Gardens Kew worked with cooperatives in Ethiopia to produce a higher value export coffee sold through Waitrose and other retailers, showing what successes can be achieved. Yayu Forest Coffee is the upshot of a three-year, £315,790 project funded by the Darwin Initiative, aimed at securing both local livelihoods and the local environment.
Ethiopia is the world’s fifth largest coffee producer. Its exports of Arabica coffee beans generate a quarter of the country’s export earnings and provide livelihoods for around 15 million people. Arabica has a very narrow tolerance of environmental fluctuations – particularly temperature and rainfall. The fear was that the traditional ‘forest-friendly’ method of coffee production in Ethiopia could be jeopardised due to the effects of climate change.
Four fifths of coffee in Ethiopia is grown under forest canopy – a production method that is good not only for the growers but also the natural environment and local people. Forests that are seen to ‘pay their way’ are conserved rather than converted to other uses, which could then run the risk of threatening the stock of natural capital and damaging ecosystem services such as water cycling and soil protection.
Scientists from RGB Kew, in collaboration with Ethiopian researchers, began to study the impact of climate changes on coffee production and come up with options for the future. They identified that climate change could reduce viable coffee producing areas by up to 60% in the absence of adaptation strategies. Conversely, the research also showed that a positive adaptation approach could actually lead to increased production.
As a result, one of the forest coffee cooperatives, along with Union Coffee is now producing a higher value export product – achieving better margins at no extra cost to the natural world. The UK‘s involvement helped to produce sustainable and resilient local livelihoods while conserving valuable local biodiversity.
Page 234 124 25 Year Environment Plan
3. Leaving a lighter footprint on We will use natural capital approaches to help guide us and as part of this the global environment encourage better uptake of natural capital reporting, standards and accounting Our vision for the natural world of the across government and businesses, in future is one in which economic growth, conjunction with key initiatives such as development and environmental the Taskforce on Climate-related protection go hand in hand wherever you Financial Disclosures and the Natural are in the globe and this approach was at Capital Coalition Protocol. the heart of our Industrial Strategy. It is in everyone’s best interests to avoid any ‘race to the bottom’. For centuries the UK has been a great trading nation and the Actions we will take include: legacy of this is that we remain a leader in understanding and promoting the Working in partnership with importance of the environment. industry to explore the possibility of developing additional tools that support businesses to identify i. Enhancing sustainability sustainable supply chains.
As is the case with all our environmental Establishing appropriate work we set out to be an example for mechanisms to screen policies others, focusing attention on how to and strategies for potential create and drive up standards negative environmental effects everywhere. We will do this by making overseas. sure that our consumption and impact on natural capital are sustainable, at home Using our prominence as and overseas. innovators to develop new approaches and techniques that We believe that environmental help take account of natural sustainability should be at the very heart capital. of global production and trade, and we will be a passionate advocate for it. We Hosting an international will develop a trading framework that conference to discuss new ways supports foreign and domestic policy, of incorporating natural capital sustainability, environmental and approaches to long-term policy development goals. In this way we will making. help make sure that the global environment is properly protected, and that threats of extinction are greatly reduced.
Page 235 125 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Protecting and managing We will develop methods to identify substances of concern: our aim is to risks from hazards substantially reduce deaths and ill-health arising from hazardous chemicals and We are committed to maintaining high wastes. We will use existing multilateral standard of protections for consumers, environment agreements, such as the workers, and the environment in our trade Stockholm and Basel Conventions to ban agreements. and restrict chemicals of global adverse As part of this we will work on the impact and develop guidelines to support international stage under frameworks safe movement of hazardous waste such as the Strategic Approach to internationally. International Chemical Management to set long-term aspirational goals after 2020. Actions we will take include:
We will support countries to develop Maintaining high standard of effective chemical and waste protections for consumers, management regimes, and thus facilitate workers, and the environment in existing and future trade whilst minimising our trade agreements. the risk of adverse effects from harmful Playing a leading role in chemicals and wastes. developing goals for international chemical management beyond 2020.
Supporting countries to develop effective chemical and waste management regimes.
Understanding if further R&D is needed into methods to identify substances of concern and supporting other countries to do the same.
Setting up international partnerships over the sustainable use and production of chemicals. These will make it easier to share data, skills and fresh approaches to risk assessment and management.
Page 236 126 25 Year Environment Plan iii. Supporting zero- Palm oil and cocoa are key commodities linked to deforestation for which viable deforestation supply chains measures of sustainability already exist and on which we are working in The UK is determined to make good on partnership with industry. We intend to its clear commitments to support expand this approach to look at other companies to implement zero- internationally traded commodities linked deforestation supply chains. This stems to deforestation. Our goal is to create from our endorsement of the Amsterdam demand-side incentives for sustainable Declarations and the New York international sourcing at home, while Declaration on Forests. supporting supply-side improvements by We will continue to invest in reducing influencing, and investing in better environmental risk in key sourcing resource governance in trading partner countries. In one example of this we will countries. This initiative would build on work directly with local producers under the range of existing partnerships aimed the Partnerships for Forests programme: at making specific commodities more this supports zero-deforestation sustainable. commitments led by the private sector, and deepens demand for sustainably produced commodities in our own Actions we will take include: markets while helping the transition to sustainable farming practices. This shows Establishing a cross-government how the sustainable trade model can help global resource initiative in 2018 drive economic growth in developing to work with businesses, NGOs, countries. producer countries and intermediary countries. This will bring together key actors to identify actions across supply chains that will improve the sustainability of products and reduce deforestation.
Convening a roundtable discussion over one chosen commodity as a scoping exercise to explore the sustainability of key supply chains.
Page 237 127 25 Year Environment Plan
Section 2 - Putting the Plan into practice
At a glance
We will: Consult on setting up a new independent body to hold government to account and a new set of environmental principles to underpin policy-making.
Develop a set of metrics to assess progress towards our 25 year goals and undertake a second ‘National Ecosystem Assessment’ type initiative beginning in 2022.
Refresh the 25 Year Environment Plan regularly to ensure that collectively we are focusing on the right priorities, using the latest evidence, and delivering better value for money.
Strengthen leadership and delivery through better local planning, more effective partnerships and learning from our four pioneer projects.
Establish a green business council and explore the potential for a natural environment impact fund.
Work closely with a large range of stakeholders over the coming year to identify their contribution to the goals set out in this Plan.
This Plan is a living blueprint for the 1 Set a clear, long-term direction environment covering the next quarter of with flexibility to adapt to new a century. It is an ambitious project, made evidence and circumstances. even more so by our use of a natural capital approach, a world first. 2 Provide robust and credible reporting, governance and Turning the vision into reality requires accountability. solid foundations: comprehensive, reliable data, strong governance, a robust 3 Put in place strong local leadership delivery framework, and everyone to play and a more integrated delivery their part. framework.
This Plan will be revised and refreshed 4 Resource, set incentives and over the next 25 years to take account of support innovative finance, fast-moving changes in technology, including from the private sector. science, data and society. Our starting point however, is that we will: 5 Make sure everyone plays their part in delivering the improved environment we all want.
Page 238 128 25 Year Environment Plan
1. Setting long-term direction Currently, EU rules create a consistent approach across the UK in a range of with flexibility to adapt to new policy areas. While the UK Government evidence and circumstances and devolved administrations make different choices on implementation in The goals for the next quarter of a some policies, these common rules century are set out earlier in the provide a number of benefits, including document. They provide a long-term making it simple for businesses from agenda that everyone can work towards. different parts of the UK to trade with each other, helping the UK to fulfil its We have also outlined the next policy international obligations and protecting steps Government will take, working with our common resources. stakeholders. This and future governments will need to build on and Outside of the EU, we will need to ensure refine these policies in the light of that we do not create any new barriers to developing scientific and economic living and doing business within our own understanding, and changes in society union. For these reasons, there will be and the natural world. some areas where we will continue to need common frameworks. We have The Plan coincides with the once-in-a- already started discussions with the generation opportunity presented by our devolved administrations on where leaving the EU. We will make the most of common frameworks may be required. the chance to improve our environmental policy framework, align it with the After leaving the EU, we will build on the ambitious goals we have set, and lead many benefits provided by EU from the front in pursuit of higher environmental regulation, and make sure standards across the world. that our policy framework delivers an environment of which we can feel even The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill will more proud, in a cost-effective way to tax- ensure that the body of existing EU law, payers. Our work will build on the including environmental law, continues to immense progress achieved in recent hold sway in the UK. Key underlying years, both locally and nationally. principles of existing policy, such as the ‘polluter pays’ principle and the Should we identify opportunities for precautionary principle, are reflected in improving environmental regulation, we this legislation and in the historic will consult upon them before making judgements of the European Court, also changes. We remain fully committed to covered by the Bill. implementing within the UK those international agreements to which this We will be consulting on the development country is a party and will continue to lead of a policy statement on environmental their application globally, working in principles to underpin policy-making post- partnership across the UK and EU Exit. This will provide maximum internationally. certainty about environmental regulations as we leave the EU.
Page 239 129 25 Year Environment Plan i. Measuring progress towards its benefits. We will carry out research to establish which measures give us the our goals best insight into how natural capital changes as time passes – these will We recognise the need for rigorous include the quantity and quality of natural scrutiny and will create a framework capital, and where it is vested. The which will specify how progress is to be national metrics are likely to be measured. supplemented by local metrics, tailored to At present, we have well-developed a narrower set of needs and systems that monitor many aspects of our circumstances. environment but these will need to evolve Both types of metrics will take advantage to accommodate the needs of the Plan of rapidly-advancing new technologies. and a greater emphasis on using a Remote sensing, environmental DNA (i.e. natural capital approach. nuclear or mitochondrial DNA released We will develop better measures in areas from an organism into the environment) such as: and ever-smarter mobile phones have the potential to revolutionise how we monitor soil health; changes in natural capital in ways how ecological systems are currently technically impossible or functioning; prohibitively expensive. Satellite data, for the human health benefits example, can allow improved monitoring associated with a better and enforcement in fisheries, or can environment; and record more accurately and with greater the overseas impact of domestic frequency how land is being used. consumption. Underwater vehicles (marine robots) will help us map and monitor Marine We will also engage widely over the next Conservation Zones. six months as we develop a comprehensive set of metrics that we can Metrics and monitoring will be regularly use to monitor progress. reviewed to check we are measuring the right things at the right time and in the The box below gives more detail on how most cost-effective way. This will ensure these indicators and measures might be that it is not the blind pursuit of targets produced and used. that drives us, but rather the most As a first step we will review which of our appropriate policies and incentives for current indicators and monitoring improving the environment. programmes remain relevant and can be Further details of requirements for a reworked to take account of natural comprehensive monitoring and evaluation capital. framework can be found in Section 5 of Because this is the first time in the world the supporting Evidence Report. that government strategy centres on natural capital considerations, we will need reliable measurements of all the key relationships between natural capital and Page 240 130 25 Year Environment Plan
Measuring the impact of the 25 Year Environment Plan
Metrics are a critical part of the 25 Year Environment Plan. They enable us to comprehend the complexity of the environment and allow us to:
understand how the environment as a whole is changing – the pressures, the state of assets and the flow of benefits;
assess the effectiveness of our policies and show how we are delivering our domestic and international commitments; and,
inform decisions and promote action within and outside government, locally and nationally.
We have a large number of existing indicators and associated statistics, data and monitoring systems. A natural capital approach will require careful selection of these and development of further indicators.
Goals of the 25 YEP. Examples of existing indicators relevant to each goal*
Clean air Emissions of key pollutants; number of high or moderate air pollution days; area of sensitive habitats with excessive levels of air pollution.
Clean and plentiful water Water quality in rivers and lakes, bathing waters, and groundwater; inputs of hazardous substances to the marine environment.
Thriving plants and wildlife Extent and condition of protected sites on land and at sea; status and trends of wild species and habitats.
Reduced risk of harm from Number of households better protected from flooding. environmental hazards
More sustainable and efficient Area of sustainably managed and harvested woodland; fish use of resources stocks harvested within safe limits; amount of raw materials consumed per person and resource productivity.
Enhanced beauty, heritage Area of woodland; people visiting the natural environment and and engagement with the volunteering for conservation activities. natural environment
*We will also need to measure pressures on the environment: e.g. greenhouse gas emissions and removal, waste and resource management, chemical emissions, and pest/non-native species establishment.
Page 241 131 25 Year Environment Plan
We propose that we measure both the actions that we take (‘performance measures’) and long-term progress towards our goals (‘outcome indicators’). This will enable us to check progress annually within a longer-term context, looking across all the goals of the 25 Year Environment Plan.
Understanding how different interventions contribute to a number of outcomes will help us review their effectiveness and strengthen the synergies between them.
Analysing trends and considering groups of indicators together will provide a more robust assessment of environmental change.
Page 242 132 25 Year Environment Plan ii. Using benefits of better In order to improve our understanding of our natural capital we will: evidence for better decision- making Continue to work with the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to Good evidence is the cornerstone of develop a full set of natural capital effective policy making. The natural accounts for the UK that are widely capital approach will help place science understood and shared and economic evidence at the forefront of internationally. Taken with the new decision-making, ensuring that policies outcome indicators, these are aligned with our desired accounts will provide a much richer environmental outcomes and yield the picture of changes to the best return on every pound spent. environment over time.
Improve our understanding and valuation of the benefits of natural capital through our own research and working with the research community, learning from best practice abroad where appropriate.
Better incorporate the full spectrum of natural capital and the value of the benefits it provides into analysis and appraisal across government. We will also develop new digital tools and maps to make the use of robust economic values easier for everyone (see box on recreational values below).
Improve monitoring and evaluation of policies so that both costs and benefits can be more accurately estimated in future analysis.
Page 243 133 25 Year Environment Plan
Valuing outdoor recreation using a new online tool
The University of Exeter, funded by Defra, developed the Outdoor Recreation Valuation (ORVal) tool in order to quantify recreational values provided by accessible greenspace in England. ORVal is an online map-based application that allows users to explore accessible greenspace across England in a user-friendly, intuitive way. Based on a cutting-edge, world-leading statistical model of recreational demand, ORVal brings data together and provides information that can now be included in the decisions made by communities, government and businesses. The online tool is in map form, giving people the opportunity to explore recreational opportunities close to them. It also helps connect them with their local environment, both in urban as well as in rural areas as the map below shows.
Page 244 134 25 Year Environment Plan
At present we cannot robustly value transferable knowledge base and the everything we wish to in economic terms; skills to support better decisions – all wildlife being a particular challenge. On based on a sound understanding of the NCC’s advice, we propose to natural capital and the effectiveness of undertake risk assessments of the threats interventions to improve it. facing our natural assets, and use the findings in strategic decision-making and We will seek out innovative ways to prioritisation exercises for future iterations collect and analyse data about our natural of this Plan. environment and how people engage with it, building on the digital revolution. We Over the long term, we will work with will promote research that sets the UK’s research councils, academic, professional action in a global context, taking account and voluntary bodies to help to develop a of what happens in our dependencies and more relevant, accessible and the impact we have on the world.
At present we cannot robustly value everything in economic terms; wildlife being a particular challenge (Photo: James LePage). Page 245 135
25 Year Environment Plan iii. Refreshing the 25 Year Environment Plan
We propose to update the Plan at least every five years, following progress reviews (see section below on reporting). During the first five year period we may update the Plan more frequently to capitalise on the opportunities of leaving the EU.
Learning lessons – innovating through pioneer projects
Defra has created four pioneer projects to inform the development and implementation of the 25 Year Environment Plan. Each pioneer is located in a different area of England and is led by part of the Defra group, working closely with local partner organisations. Defra asked the pioneers to explore four broad objectives: Applying a natural capital approach to decision making; Developing innovative funding opportunities; Demonstrate integrated approaches to planning and delivery; and Building our understanding of ‘what works’ in practice.
The pioneers started in 2016 and have since been exploring policies that feature prominently in this Plan. The locations offer a range of environmental challenges and circumstances against which to test ourselves, and also reflect pre-existing strong partnerships and relevant initiatives in each area. The pioneers are working with partners on what they learn to adapt or propose future projects to meet the four objectives. Defra has asked the pioneers to be ambitious and to take managed risks; to learn from what does not work as well as what does. As a result, and as intended, each pioneer has approached their objectives in a different way according to their local circumstances and the priorities of their respective partners.
The four pioneers
Cumbria Catchment Pioneer The Catchment Pioneer is led by the Environment Agency (EA). The devastation caused by the floods of 2009 and 2015 and the subsequent response provides the starting point and has shaped the way affected communities engage with their environment. The pioneer is encouraging communities to take a broader interest in how the management of land and water affects them, using a natural capital approach. Priorities for this pioneer include: testing new governance models for the environmental management of river catchments as a whole; looking at how the different agencies can work better together to improve the process of securing
Page 246 136 25 Year Environment Plan
environmental permits needed for development schemes; and testing the application of innovative finance mechanisms, for example a ‘visitor giving’ scheme. These objectives are closely linked with many policies in this Plan, supporting for example increased tree planting, restored peatlands, the delivery of a new environmental land management system and work with the Lake District National Park Authority to conserve and enhance natural beauty and cultural heritage. North Devon Landscape Pioneer The Landscape Pioneer is led by Natural England (NE) and is based in the North Devon UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. This pioneer is testing the use of natural capital in determining environmental priorities and agreeing actions to target them. At its heart is an innovative process for creating a shared plan that identifies where investment in natural capital is most needed and securing new investment for those projects in the pioneer area. The pioneer has already mapped how existing funding for natural capital is distributed across the Biosphere Reserve. The pioneer then identified the ecosystem services that are provided by the different land uses and worked with stakeholders to value them and assess how they change over time. Investment priorities – such as saltmarsh restoration or natural flood management – will be established jointly with partners, based on this assessment. The pioneer will trial a new local governance model, design and trial a payment-by- results environmental land management scheme for farming, and test natural capital as a tool for engaging communities with the benefits provided by their environment. The pioneer will also promote net environmental gain through strategic planning to expand North Devon’s most valued natural capital. It will look to support more tree planting and greater enjoyment of our coastal areas. Greater Manchester Urban Pioneer The Urban Pioneer is led by the EA and covers the whole of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). This pioneer is focused on how environmental enhancements can improve people’s lives. It is built on a strong partnership with the GMCA – an enthusiastic supporter of a natural capital approach with extensive devolved responsibilities including health, skills, planning, and economic development. The pioneer is supporting GMCA in understanding how natural capital helps deliver these objectives and the benefits of investing in it, including through the development of a natural capital account for the GMCA area. The pioneer has supported the GMCA in committing to achieving a biodiversity net gain through planning and development across the city region. The pioneer is also working with the GM Mayor to increase public engagement with the environment through its 2018 Green Summit.
Page 247 137 25 Year Environment Plan
Other Plan policies that the pioneer will look to support include urban tree planting, natural flood management, sustainable drainage and creating green infrastructure. Marine Pioneer The Marine Pioneer is led by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO). It operates in two separate locations, covering areas of coast and sea based on the North Devon Biosphere and the Suffolk Coasts and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Applying a natural capital approach to the marine environment has not been attempted before on this scale: this is a great opportunity to develop our understanding. The pioneer is working with partners to produce practical tools for capturing natural capital in decision making, and using natural capital to identify environmental priorities and investment opportunities. The pioneer is undertaking a natural capital assessment of saltmarsh restoration and is developing a fisheries partnership with the industry and others to test regional management opportunities and create a market for sustainably-caught local fish. Other Plan policies that the pioneer will look to support include sustainable fisheries, better managed MPAs and development of the planning and licensing system. The pioneers’ continuing role Defra expects the pioneers to make an important contribution to the future iterations of the 25 Year Environment Plan. Updates following the UK’s exit from the EU will be a key opportunity to share good practice from the pioneers across the country. With foundations now in place, the pioneers can make quick progress on their existing objectives, and on testing and supporting the policies in this Plan.
2. Reporting on progress, authorities, businesses, the public and governance and accountability other stakeholders.
Transparency and accountability are key i. Reporting on progress features of successful reform programmes and will be built into our We will put in place regular and environmental reforms. transparent reporting of progress against our new metrics, including to Parliament. Defra will act as ‘owner’ of the Plan on We propose to report annually on the behalf of government. The department plan itself. Reports will cover the progress will lead on developing future iterations against performance measures and an and overseeing delivery at a strategic analysis of recent outcome indicator level, working closely with other monitoring. As the monitoring cycles for government departments, local different outcome indicators will vary in frequency and timing, each annual report Page 248 138 25 Year Environment Plan will place greater emphasis on a slightly The assessment will be repeated towards different set of metrics, and in so doing the end of the 25-year period to assess build up over a time a more complete outcomes and inform future planning. picture of overall progress towards the 25 year goals. ii. Ensuring independent Alongside partners within government, oversight and accountability such as the Office for National Statistics, and interested parties outside, including We intend that there should be robust environmental organisations, we will and thorough oversight of progress continue to publish regular official and against the Plan. Government will launch national statistics, giving everyone a consultation in early 2018 on information on how the environment is establishing a new, world-leading, changing. We will adhere to the UK’s independent, statutory body to give the Code of Practice for Statistics and ensure environment a voice, championing and that all the statistics we produce are upholding environmental standards as we trusted and high quality, and meet user leave the European Union. We will needs. We will continue to invest in the consult widely on the precise functions, systems that we use to collect data on the remit and powers of this new body, environment and people’s engagement including any significant role in with it. As far as we can, we will make the scrutinising and advising on the 25 Year data collected available externally for Environment Plan, subject to others to use. consultation.
In addition, government will arrange for comprehensive assessments of natural 3. Supporting strong local capital to take place on a roughly 10 year leadership and delivery cycle. The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA), completed in 2011, At present many organisations and was the first comprehensive assessment partnerships pursue their own plans, of the state of ecosystem services in the across different areas and boundaries. In UK. It has been hugely influential in the places there is good coordination development of natural environment between them, but in other places policy in England, the devolved opportunities for joining up and administrations, and internationally. integrating environmental work are missed. A second assessment to be started in 2022 will provide an updated picture of At a local level we want environmental the state of the environment at Brexit. effort to be guided by the goals we have Building on annual progress reports, this outlined but also to reflect local needs will involve a more detailed evaluation of and priorities as well as being more the effectiveness of policies and integrated and efficient. measures. In it, we will take account of new scientific knowledge and explore future scenarios and policy options.
Page 249 139 25 Year Environment Plan
Work has already started. The larger The organisations involved may vary by environmental delivery bodies in the area according to need, but should Defra Group, have aligned around a include Local Enterprise Partnerships, common geography of 14 areas. Each leading businesses and utility companies, now has its own Area Integrated Plan Local Nature Partnerships, Catchment (effectively, a joint statement of intent Partnerships, local authorities, National between the Environment Agency, Park Authorities and water companies. Natural England and the Forestry The level of involvement of external Commission) that we propose to develop parties will vary between areas but it is into natural capital plans. These will be key that the plans for each are co- aligned with the 25 Year Environment designed and delivered. Plan (ensuring a clear line of sight to national government) but be particularly Ultimately, we want to move towards an relevant to the local area or geographies approach in which the 14 local areas are within them. mapped and managed more as a system, with a ‘system operator’ responsible for The aim is for the 14 areas to work the strategic management of the natural together, using a natural capital capital in accordance with respective approach, bringing in other partners to local plans. We recognise that this is a maximise the environmental benefits that long way from where we are now and that can be achieved from better coordination considerable work is required to map out across individual remits. Lessons from how this might operate in practice. We the pioneer projects will provide vital will continue to explore innovative ideas, information as they develop and such as the natural capital trust idea implement natural capital plans in their which seeks to channel funding to agreed respective areas. They also provide a priorities (See box below), to make valuable opportunity to test approaches. progress.
Innovation in governance – a natural capital trust
The West of England Nature Partnership (WENP) is working closely with local authorities and the West of England Combined Authority to explore how the establishment of a Natural Capital Trust for the West of England could both enable development and investment in natural capital, improving the quality of life for people across the region. Defra has provided support for this project as the model has the potential to be replicated across the country. Such a model could improve the strategic allocation of funding generated from developer contributions and payment for ecosystem services schemes to have maximum benefit to the protection and enhancement of a region’s natural capital.
Page 250 140 25 Year Environment Plan
4. Funding, financing and The right mix of public and private funding and financing for projects that protect and incentivising improvement in enhance natural assets will be crucial to natural capital the successful delivery of this ambitious plan. To date, such projects have typically We now have strong evidence on how been resourced through subsidies and natural capital underpins the economy, grants from government and the EU, the supports long-term growth and benefits Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and human health and wellbeing. We know philanthropic foundations as well as local carefully-planned investments in natural authorities, environmental organisations capital assets can deliver significant value and private sector investment, notably by for money and generate economic returns water companies. that rank favourably with those generated by more traditional infrastructure While data for direct spending on investments. When the NCC examined a improving natural capital is not range of natural capital investment types consistently gathered across all sectors, in their third report to government, it HM Treasury and Defra estimate that found that the benefit:cost ratios ranged central government funding for this in from 3:1 to 9:142. In other words, for every England amounted to approximately pound spent, the nation received £3 to £9 £805m in 2015-16. Spending at UK level back in economic value. by environmental organisations with a biodiversity or nature focus was £236m in 2014-1543 and the HLF awards around £100m per year to UK natural heritage project.
42 The State of Natural Capital: Protecting and 43 This value is likely to be an underestimate as Improving Natural Capital for Prosperity and the indicator does not include all NGOs with an Wellbeing, NCC, 2015 environment or customer focus. Biodiversity 2020: a strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem service: Indicators, Defra, 2017
Page 251 141 25 Year Environment Plan
Philanthropic and Lottery funding for the environment
The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation (EFF) is one of the largest independent grant- makers to the natural environment sector in the UK. Innovative funding models used by EFF include a £10m fund which is used to purchase pieces of land with a high conservation value that come on to the market in the UK. The land is purchased directly by EFF and simultaneously leased to a pre-approved conservation organisation with the option for them to buy it in two years’ time at the price EFF paid for it, plus a small interest charge. This provides the conservation organisation with a window to fundraise. EFF has also committed a social investment of £400,000 to the South Midlands Newt Conservation Partnership to support its role in a pilot scheme testing an innovative approach to the protection of great crested newts through the planning system. The EFF investment will help kick start a longer-term programme supporting over 100 habitats, leading to the creation of up to 1,000 ponds, 500 hectares of grassland and 100km of hedgerows over 10 years, with the investment being repaid over time through compensation payments from developers. The HLF uses money raised by National Lottery players to help people across the UK explore, enjoy and protect the heritage they care about. This includes natural heritage and HLF provides around £100m of grant funding to UK landscape and nature projects each year, with a particular focus on connecting people with nature. Defra will work with HLF, as recommended in the recent DCMS-led tailored review,44 to consider how HLF can engage with the 25 Year Environment Plan and to explore whether alternative options to pure grant-giving would support the sustainability of the natural heritage sector.
44 Tailored review of Heritage Lottery Fund/National Heritage Memorial Fund, Department for Digital, Culture, Media & sport, 2017
Page 252 142 25 Year Environment Plan
Case study: Water companies innovating in natural capital investment solutions
South West Water’s (SWW) Upstream Thinking scheme, a partnership with the Wildlife Trust and the Rivers Trust involves joint investments between farmers and the water company aimed at making sure that land is managed in such a way that potential pollutants do not run off into surrounding water courses. It is much cheaper for SWW to tackle pollution up front than pay to remove it once it has affected the water: as such, it is part of a long-term sustainable approach to managing costs by reducing ongoing maintenance and/or deferring large capital investments; it also helps keep down customers’ bills.
Wessex Water’s EnTrade scheme uses an innovative reverse auction online platform to determine the optimal mix of payments to encourage farmers to grow cover crops to reduce nitrogen run-off in Poole Harbour. As with the SWW scheme, it is a more efficient way of tackling pollution.
United Utilities’ (UU) Sustainable Catchment Management Programme (SCaMP) works with farm tenants and in conjunction with partners such as the RSPB, Natural England and the Forestry Commission. Between 2005 and 2015, UU invested over £22m in moorland restoration, woodland management, farm infrastructure improvements and watercourses to protect and improve water quality and the surrounding natural environment, while delaying or reducing the need for future capital investment in additional water treatment.
For the current price review (PR19 – the process through which Ofwat regulates to set the price, investment and service package for customers), Ofwat is proposing higher rewards for water companies that deliver innovative and stretching outcomes, including for environmental performance. Ofwat also expects water companies’ business plans to embed natural capital approaches at catchment scales. These incentives could spur a shift towards significant innovation in delivering more environmental benefits, supported by private capital. 2017 saw the first UK public utilities green bonds issued. Anglian Water issued a green bond that raised £250m to fund projects which contribute to their sustainability strategy. Tideway, the company responsible for delivering the Thames Tideway Tunnel supported by contingent government financing, issued a £250m green bond which was three times oversubscribed, demonstrating the strength of demand in the market for sustainable investment opportunities. A second green bond issue means that Tideway is now the largest issuer of corporate green bonds in Sterling with a total amount of £450m.
Page 253 143 25 Year Environment Plan i. Continuing public investment Everyone should bear the full cost of practices that negatively impact on it and face a suite of incentives that make This initial iteration of the 25 Year positive practices in their economic Environment Plan contains a mix of interests. The 5p plastic bag charge and confirmed policies and longer-term aims, consequent reduction in plastic bag use is with further announcements over the a powerful example. coming years. Public funding sources will continue to play an important role in protecting and enhancing the natural ii. Catalysing private environment. A significant proportion of UK taxpayer’s money is currently investment channelled via the European Increased private sector investment in Commission. Brexit brings with it a unique natural capital will equally be crucial. The opportunity to make sure public funding is development of natural capital thinking, targeted at our most pressing priorities as data and tools will usher in more enshrined in this Plan, achieving opportunities to generate revenue from maximum impact including by stimulating projects that improve the natural private investment. For example, environment. By measuring the benefits Government’s near £6m investment in the of natural capital improvements we will Northern Forest will help unlock further sharpen the business case for private investment from a range of sources which sector investment and help to unlock new could generate more than £2bn for the markets, funding streams and private country’s economy. finance for natural environment projects.
A new environmental land management The Government will take steps to system will use public money to deliver encourage private sector investment public goods through simple and effective wherever possible, targeting public funds administration. The Government has also at projects that provide purely public committed to underwrite the funding goods. awarded to UK projects on a competitive basis by the EU, for example through the Such private sector opportunities were LIFE Programme, even where projects previously identified and explored by the continue beyond the UK’s departure from industry-led Ecosystems Markets Task the EU. We will work with partners to Force. Between 2012 and 2015, Defra develop post-EU exit arrangements and funded three rounds of pilot projects to scope the potential for novel funding both improve the environment and streams and incentives, including levies generate revenue. The pilots offered and charges. Ultimately we need to valuable evidence of the opportunities ensure that we all face the right and challenges associated with incentives to take action on the innovative funding approaches. We have environment. since seen pioneering schemes from water companies, and environmental NGOs working with businesses and other organisations willing to fund environmental improvements because Page 254 144 25 Year Environment Plan benefits accrue to them. The RSPB and More recently, a report for Defra identified Oliver Wyman will shortly publish a projects and initiatives involving private discussion paper on large-scale domestic sector expenditure that protect or conservation finance. enhance natural capital; The Aldersgate Group also published a paper exploring the current state of play in the natural capital finance market and ways to increase investment.
Clean Growth Strategy and Green Finance Taskforce
HMG’s Clean Growth Strategy sets out a series of policies and proposals to develop new green finance solutions to mobilise more private capital into sustainable technology and infrastructure projects in sectors such as energy, water, waste and air quality. This includes setting up a Green Finance Taskforce, comprising senior representatives from the finance industry and government, to develop ambitious policy proposals which could further accelerate private sector investments to help deliver the Clean Growth Strategy and 25 Year Environment Plan. Shortly, the Green Finance Taskforce will make recommendations to government on how to accelerate private sector investment in sustainable projects and infrastructure by building on the UK’s strength in green finance.
Page 255 145 25 Year Environment Plan
In the following examples we set out a such schemes could help improve number of innovative market mechanisms consumer awareness and drive that can capture and monetise more of higher environmental standards. the benefits from the natural environment in order to generate revenue streams or Business in the Community (BITC) cost savings. has been working with businesses that are already investing in natural Listed companies can invest in tree capital to ensure resilience of planting and peatland restoration supply, provide a healthy attractive projects to offset their residual environment for their employees and carbon emissions – for example by to meet environmental using the Woodland Carbon Code or standards. There is an opportunity Peatland Code. to align this investment to make sure that it is used to the best effect in Housing and infrastructure communities. For example, the developers can invest in habitat Landscape Enterprise Network creation projects as a cost-effective approach developed by BITC, way of fulfilling their obligations to Nestle and 3Keel identifies the compensate for habitat loss under businesses working within a the National Policy Planning landscape and maps the natural Framework. Natural England’s capital that they are reliant on, metric does this by converting enabling more effective investment damage to biodiversity into a and a greater understanding of comparable unit. shared needs.
Providers of infrastructure can invest Matched crowd-funding schemes in natural flood management combine crowdfunding and projects to increase their resilience. institutional funding to get great The Green Alliance and National ideas off the ground. A recent report Trust's work on natural infrastructure from Nesta looked at the impact of schemes explores how an area- such schemes by analysing a based market in avoided costs could £251,500 matched crowdfunding deliver environmental improvements pilot involving the HLF. by bringing together groups of land managers to sell natural services Visitor giving schemes are a simple such as flood protection to groups of way to invite voluntary donations beneficiaries. from tourists, inspiring them to help look after the places they love. Product and supply chain Nurture Lakeland’s visitor giving certification schemes allow goods scheme enables tourism businesses produced to certain environmental to collect contributions from their standards to be sold at a price customers: the money supports a premium, enhancing brand value, host of projects across Cumbria to helping ensure resilience of supply protect the beautiful landscape, and securing access to markets. support communities and promote The practice of benchmarking of the region’s heritage. Page 256 146 25 Year Environment Plan
Case study: Kingsbrook, Aylesbury Vale – putting nature at the heart of development
The RSPB joined forces with Barratt Developments to set a new benchmark for nature friendly housing developments – the first national agreement of its kind in the UK. At Kingsbrook, some 2,450 new homes, new schools and community facilities have been designed in a way that puts nature at the heart of proposals. Around 60% of Kingsbrook will be green infrastructure, including 250 acres of accessible, wildlife- rich open space, orchards, hedgehog highways, newt ponds, tree-lined avenues, fruit trees in gardens, bat, owl and swift nesting boxes and nectar-rich planting for bees.
Aylesbury Vale District Council has been instrumental in promoting this approach from the start and are now looking to adopt these principles in planning their garden town. This is good for people and business as well as wildlife. Barratt expects the value and saleability of its homes to be improved by the quality of greenspace and there is evidence that local businesses can also be boosted by a green setting. For the community, greenspace can improve children’s educational prospects and their connection to nature, and contribute to improved mental and physical health and wellbeing. The Kingsbrook project will be carried out over about a decade with a comprehensive monitoring programme, developed and overseen by RSPB scientists. Barratt have a unique national partnership with the RSPB helping to translate the lessons learnt at Kingsbrook across their development portfolio, having rolled out a ‘Growing with Nature Guide’, embedding a biodiverse approach to all developments, and planting high value plant species that support more wildlife.
Page 257 147 25 Year Environment Plan
We want the Plan to help organisations Embed an ‘environmental net gain’ make more of these innovative ideas. To principle for development, including that end, the Government will: housing and infrastructure and explore options to introduce a system of Set up a stronger domestic carbon conservation covenants in English offset mechanism and carbon law. This will provide long-term guarantee scheme. These will assurance that compensatory habitats encourage private sector investment will be maintained to the standard and develop markets for domestic required. carbon sequestration. Businesses will be encouraged to plant trees as a Test, encourage and embed natural cost-effective way to counterbalance flood management solutions in the their residual carbon emissions; we appropriate places, and alongside will also explore how we could extend more traditional defences where this approach to include other land needed, including new ways of activities. First, we will introduce a financing schemes (see chapter 3). reporting framework for businesses that drives demand for Domestic Work with partners to consider Offset Units or Credits. Government whether benchmarking of will also explore whether a Forest environmental products and supply Carbon Guarantee scheme is viable, chain certification schemes could using the existing Woodland Carbon make consumers more aware of them, Code as a way of sharing the risk to and drive higher standards. attract investors and increase demand for domestically grown timber. Consider the results of Natural
England’s pilot of the BITC Landscape Enterprise Network approach in the Hampshire Avon catchment and assess how to encourage better uptake.
Page 258 148 25 Year Environment Plan
Working with businesses on natural capital investment
Business in the Community works to create healthy communities with successful business at their heart. As well as their Landscape Enterprise Network initiative referenced above, BITC’s Water Resilient Cities programme has been working with schools and NHS sites in Manchester to explore an innovative way of financing the retrofitting of sustainable drainage features (SuDS – e.g. green roofs and rain gardens). A scoping study has identified benefits from a strategic roll out of SuDS in public estates across Greater Manchester, having investigated the time taken to pay back the upfront capital costs through savings made from reduced surface water charges in the schools’ water bills. The SuDS measures would bring benefits to the schools and wider communities in the form of air and water quality, flood risk reduction, education, health, carbon sequestration, urban cooling and biodiversity. More information is available on the BITC website.
Work with partners to determine Government will establish a green the potential for a domestic natural business council to advise environment impact fund. Such a government on setting the right facility could provide technical conditions to stimulate assistance and financing for environmental entrepreneurism. projects that use the kind of market We will work with partners to mechanisms listed above (see box determine its exact focus (see box below). below).
A Natural Environment Impact Fund
The government wants to build on the momentum for more private sector financing and drive further progress in the use of market mechanisms that capture the value of natural capital. Defra will work with a range of partners on stimulating innovation in designing and implementing projects that can improve the natural environment and generate revenue to pay for project costs. We will convene interested parties to explore the potential for a facility to blend capital from a range of sources (e.g. public, private philanthropic) to provide technical assistance funding and repayable finance to projects with the potential to improve the natural environment and generate revenue.
Page 259 149 25 Year Environment Plan
Such a blended facility could issue a mix of grants and loans on a long-term repayment basis at below-market rates to help address some of the market failures that have to date limited the take up of return-generating natural environment projects. This would encourage innovation, help to develop the evidence base and develop a track record that could lead to such projects attracting mainstream investment and the creation of new natural capital markets.
A Green Business Council
The government will also work with partners to establish a green business Council for advice on the following:
Actions by government to encourage, incentivise and create the right conditions for private sector innovation in green enterprise and environmental entrepreneurialism.
Developing and articulating the ‘business case’ for companies to assess, address and report on natural capital risks and opportunities in their operations and supply chains.
Positioning the UK as an international leader in providing knowledge-based goods and services, contributing to the protection of natural capital and its sustainable use.
Options on how to develop new natural capital markets – for example, in exploring how more revenue streams could be generated to make natural capital assets investable. Seeking opportunities for new sector-specific environmental initiatives, inspired by the Courtauld Commitment and the plastic bag levy; enabling more water company investment in natural capital solutions.
5. We will work across society It is clear that momentum for positive to secure lasting change change is growing and we must harness this in coming months and years. We want this Plan to speak to everyone – Government will help bring about change citizens, local councils, charities, NGOs, in a variety of ways, using both incentives businesses. It is important that everyone and regulation where necessary, to make who impacts on the environment and sure that responsible attitudes towards derives benefits from it plays their part. the environment become the norm. Many We all need to adopt a long-term and businesses are also playing their part. committed approach of ‘Do more: harm Fast-food outlets are introducing less’. segregated recycling bins with separate Page 260 150 25 Year Environment Plan sections for paper cups, plastics and Conclusion liquids, proclaiming their ‘ambition to send zero waste to landfill’. Other retailers are swapping plastic straws for paper, and We humans and the stunning multitude of replacing plastic coffee stirrers with other living creatures on this earth are wooden ones. Another example is the completely dependent on each other. Our work of water companies, high street beautiful green and blue planet is our retailers, coffee shops and transport hubs shared and only home. We have a who we will support to offer new refill choice. We can destroy and degrade our stations for people to top-up their water natural capital for short term gain, and bottles in every major city and town in leave an impoverished inheritance for England. The water industry will also fund future generations. Or we can preserve the scaling up of an app to enable the and enhance the world - for ourselves, for public find their nearest refill station. future generations and for all the other creatures who share the globe with us. Consumers are beginning to realise that their plastic cotton bud has a lifespan that This Government has chosen the path of far outlasts their fleeting usefulness, but preservation and enhancement. Our Plan there is much further to go. sets out an ambitious agenda for the next 25 years. Delivery of the Plan will require This Plan sets out how government is sustained and committed effort not just leading, and we will now work with all from government but from organisations parts of society and all sectors of the and individuals across our nation. This economy over the coming year to identify needs to be a shared endeavour and the their contribution to improving the Government intends to work environment. collaboratively with partners across the nation and globally to make a reality of its aspirations. We call on all organisations and individuals – in this country and globally - to join us in our commitment to improving the environment.
We can preserve and enhance the world - for ourselves, for future generations and for all the other creatures who share the globe with us (Photo: RichPage Lukey). 261 151
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10
Notes from the Shurnhold Fields Recreation Development working party held on Wed, 17 April 2019 at 2.00 PM at Melksham Town Council
Present:
Cllr Richard Wood Melksham Without Parish Council Cllr Paul Carter Melksham Without Parish Council Cllr David Pafford Melksham Without Parish Council Cllr Adrienne Westbrook Melksham Town Council
One members of the “Friends of Shurnhold Fields” was in attendance as observer: Phil Mason
Officers: Teresa Strange (Clerk) Melksham Without Parish Council Jeff Mills (Assistant to the Clerk) Melksham Town Council
Minutes:
46. Chair of Meeting: RESOLVED: Cllr Richard Wood took the chair of the working party.
47. Apologies: Apologies were received from Linda Roberts (MTC Clerk)
48. Minutes of the previous meeting held on Thursday 21 March 2019: The previous minutes were noted, with TS advising that the date at the top of the circulated document is erroneous
49. Matters Arising (a) Inspection regime – TS explained that MWPC was concerned about the lack of inspection so sent a caretaker to inspect the fields from the date of this meeting. After some discussion it was agreed that the inspection of the fields will be shared by MTC and MWPC in the following way, based on MWPC’s current green space approach, which was agreeable to MTC, who will send invoices to MWPC for these hours, to be paid out of the shared fund as a maintenance expense.
-Weekly inspections done on a visual basis once per week (with MTC/MWPC sharing this responsibility on a month on/month off basis – MTC to start W/C 22 April -Quarterly inspections to be done in writing, with a caretaker from each council pairing up to do this together -Annual inspections to be completed by ROSPA, organised by MWPC and invoiced as upkeep/maintenance (I forget what we’re calling this charge) ACTION: JM to draw up schedule for weekly inspections
(b) Grass cutting regime – First priority is to cut the grass soon so the fields can be accessible. Discussion focussed on the frequency of the cut, choice of contractor (as heavy-duty cutters required) to complete the work, and whether it is necessary to have the cut grass collected or not. Phil, from the Friends of Shurnhold Fields advised that in the short-term, it would be best if the grass could be cut and collected. It was agreed that MWPC would arrange
1 Page 263 this imminently. Group happy with the quote obtained by TS for the work and distributed at the meeting. ACTION: TS to book contract grass-cutter Going forward, the view from the Friends of Shernhold Fields (FOSF) is that while work is being done and the site is being developed, cuts 2 to 3 x annually would be ideal to ease the accessibility of the site, but that this would change (especially in the lower part of the field slated for meadow development) as the project progresses.
(c) Future bins emptying regime and disposal of waste - Agreed to be a bin at both entrances, with a dog poo bag dispenser nearby. The group looked over several different bin designs and agreed that the one with the biggest volume should be chosen. This bin to be emblazoned with FOSF logo and both council phone numbers. ACTION: Officers to order bins Agreed that MTC will take on responsibility for emptying the bins as we are already responsibly for Dunch lane play area. Agreed that MTC will invoice this separately. ACTION: JM to discuss with caretaking team about scheduling a bin emptying schedule There was also a chat about the noticeboards and the group agreed that the MWPC’s style noticeboards would work well at roughly £600 (+ delivery/concreting in). Again with the FOSF logo and both phone numbers.
(d) Insurance cover – Premium is split 50/50. Question from PM as to whether the Motorized Allen Scythe is ‘insurance-safe’. Based on it’s design and mower-like setup, this seems very likely, but worth double-checking insurance policy. ACTION: Officers to refer to the policy Fence – the fence running between the fields is in disrepair and will require repairs. This will be looked into further by caretakers from both councils at the upcoming monthly inspection
(e) Working funds for FOSF - Agreed to transfer £250 to FOSF to help with basic expenses/petrol etc. ACTION: TS to transfer cash electronically
50. Group received latest update on Land Transfer and payment of Open Space Maintenance Contribution
51. Group received update from parish and town council reps on FOSD community group activities -Group discussed the £9K funds in highways budget to improve Dunch lane. After TS discussion with Mark Stansby (Cat G), it was suggested this must fall under highways to be used. Group felt it is still worth looking into whether the entrance to SF could be altered to improve flow/visibility to park from the corner of the road. AW asserted that the 2016 survey showed no hunger for such changes. ACTION: JM/TS to liaise on how to proceed
52. To agree way forward for the following operational and management items as a result of email from FOSF – Group agreed that a bonfire is a sensible way to dispose of hedge cuttings as long as it is done at a sensible time and in the appropriate corner of the fields
2 Page 264 -Quotes for picnic tables and benches were passed around and the group agreed that they are a sturdy long-term option. TS suggested that we could have a chance at gaining some funds by applying through the Tesco Bags for Life scheme. As the benches/tables are manufactured with 100% recycled plastic, this could tie in well ACTION: Officers to proceed – TS/JM to liaise
53. To consider next steps and future plans for project to develop into “mini country park” – Group felt this could be left – as much already covered, but TS did raise the Q of the car park and whether we are able to retain the original planning permission from the Rugby Park lot. ACTION: Officers to research - TS/JM to liaise
54. Date of next meeting – Wed 18 September at Melksham Town Hall, 2 PM
3 Page 265 This page is intentionally left blank DRAFT MINUTES of the Shurnhold Fields Recreation Development working party held on Thursday 27th June 2019 2019 at Melksham Town Hall, Market Place, Melksham at 7.00pm.
Present:
Cllr Richard Wood Melksham Without Parish Council Cllr Adrienne Westbrook Melksham Town Council Cllr Sue Brown Melksham Town Council Cllr Pat Aves from 7.20pm) Melksham Town Council
Two members of the “Friends of Shurnhold Fields” were in attendance as observers: Roy Dobson, Chair Andy Newman
Officers: Teresa Strange (Clerk) Melksham Without Parish Council Lorraine McRandle (Acting Deputy Town Clerk) Melksham Town Council
54. Chair of Meeting: Resolved: Cllr. Richard Wood took the chair of the working party.
55. Apologies: Apologies were received from Cllr. John Glover and Cllr Paul Carter from MWPC. Apologies were received from Cllr Terri Welch from MTC and Cllr Adrienne Westbrook attended the meeting as substitute.
56. Terms of Reference: The Terms of Reference for the Working Group were noted, as there were some new members.
57. Minutes of the last meeting, held Wednesday 17th April, 2019: Resolved: The minutes were approved as an accurate record and signed by the Chairman.
58. Update on Actions from last meeting, 17th April, 2019: 48a) Inspection Regime: TS confirmed that a weekly inspection schedule had been drawn up and that the two caretakers from each council were taking in turns. No invoices had yet been produced by the Town Council to ensure their cost was covered from the maintenance fund held by MWPC.
48b) Grasscutting Regime: TS confirmed that the cut had been carried out by the MWPC contractor at a cost of £395 from the maintenance fund. She had met Roy Dobson, Cllr Paul Carter and the contractor on site 30th April to agree the scope of works and discuss other works such as concreting in the noticeboard, bin etc.
Roy Dobson explained that he has been cutting some wide footpath areas in the grass, and has also mowed some of the blackthorn roots to keep them under control. Some had been left as undergrowth for wildlife habitat, especially as it allowed small animals to shelter/hide from the many dogs exercised on the fields.
48c) Bin emptying: TS explained that the bins were being ordered as part of a wider order by MWPC the following week. It was agreed that one bin was to be installed as you come through the gate, on the left-hand side, alongside the noticeboards and
1 Page 267 doggy bag dispenser to be put in the same place; and the other by the start of the Right of Way.
Cllr Pat Aves joined the meeting at 7.20pm.
48e) Working funds for FOSF: TS confirmed that £250 had been transferred from the maintenance contribution fund to the bank account of FOSF. In addition, petrol expenses incurred by RD for grass cutting were being reimbursed to RD on the production of receipts.
50) Highways funding for Dunch Lane: RD explained that work needed to be done to improve the visibility splay at the entrance as it was impossible to turn left in a vehicle, you need to turn right and then turn around. There would be a requirement to remove the beech hedge due to the concealed entrance. TS explained that there was also an issue raised by a resident from the new development, that a hedge on the other side of Dunch Lane from the entrance blocked visibility of children walking to and from the new play area; and would resend to the Town Council officers.
52) Next steps – ditch clearance: TS confirmed that she had discussed ditch clearance with Danny Everettt, Wiltshire Council’s Principal Drainage Engineer and they did not want ditches to be cleared at this stage, until preventative works had been undertaken upstream. This has been passed on at the time to the FOSF.
59. Update on planning permission for car park and discharge of existing planning condition: The following update from the Planning Officer had been received: “As far as I can tell, a car park was proposed as part of the provision of playing fields in relation to the planning permission for the adjacent housing development. It was not included within the change of use to public open space application. I’m not sure that the car park can now be provided as the playing fields are now not required. However, you would be better off speaking to Kenny Green, Team Leader for the area about this. It could be argued that the provision of a car park could fall within the Parish Council’s permitted development rights as “works, required for the purposes of any function exercised by them”. However, we would need to see full details before coming to a conclusion on that.
In order to lawfully implement the permission to change the use of the land to public open space, the landscaping condition would need to be discharged. The permission expires on 25th August, so you would need to submit an application to discharge the condition along with a Landscape and Ecology Management Plan. This would then need to be approved before 25th August. I’m not sure that this can be done within the tight timescale, so your best option would be to submit a new application for the change of use. The Plan could then be a condition of the new Permission and provided at a later date”
It was agreed that the group were not in a position to submit a planning application yet as the area for the car park, entrance gate etc had not been agreed and noted that Persimmon Homes had not discharged the condition as required.
ACTION: TS to contact the Countryside Officer, Ali Rasey, to seek advice about the Discharge of Condition of 15/11656/FUL Change of use from Playing Fields to Public Open Space: “A Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) shall be prepared and submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing within 12 months of the date
2 Page 268 of consent. This shall include appropriate management to increase species diversity and the eradication of Himalayan balsam. The site shall be managed and maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the measures set out in the approved details”.
ACTION: TS to check if the cost of the planning application was suitable to be funded from the maintenance contribution.
60. Update from FOSF community group: The members noted the Minutes of the last FOSF meeting held on 27th March 2019 and raised concerns that the Minutes did not make reference to the plan and proposal tabled as an agenda item that evening for an entrance gate, bund, allotment area and car park and yet a drawing had been provided by RD and Cllr Paul Carter to officers seek planning permission. The representatives of FOSF confirmed that the proposal had been discussed by the Committee, and was not provided by individuals acting independently, and they would meet or email the other members of the committee to update the draft minutes of their last meeting. The working party members, did not feel that they could discuss these future plans until they had received this confirmation, and would therefore defer until their next meeting in September. This was to ensure that public money was being spent in accordance with good practice; and would need a lot more work to be considered either as a pre-application or full application as a full set of plans would be required including a detailed layout, site layout plan, block plan, and numbers of car parking spaces etc.
It was confirmed that the MTC rep for FOSF was Cllr Pat Aves, and the MWPC rep was Cllr Paul Carter. PA requested that more notice of meetings were given in advance to ensure she would be more likely be able to attend.
61. Operational/Management Issues: a) Grasscutting: RD was happy to continue to cut footpath areas into the field, but had stopped work due to the health and safety and insurance concerns of MWPC. The parish council were happy to cover the work of the volunteers from an insurance point of view, but it was on the agreement that the FOSF only carried out work that had been reviewed from a health and safety perspective to the general public and safe working practices for those underdoing the work; and yet that had not been done for the grasscutting tasks that were being undertaken, initially with the parish council’s knowledge. Rather than making an onerous task for the volunteers undertaking this work, it had been agreed that the volunteers would confirm in writing that they had read, understood and would comply to the existing Risk Assessment produced by the MTC for their own staff undertaking this task; whilst acknowledging any specific circumstances relevant to Shurnhold Fields. With this confirmation the parish council were happy to cover the activities from an insurance perspective. RD was in receipt of this document and happy to confirm in writing in the next day or so.
The cutting of the other areas of the fields were discussed, and it was RESOLVED: that only one cut per year to be undertaken, in October, by the MWPC contractor at £395 excluding VAT.
b) Tree Sapling Watering: This was discussed as a request had gone straight to the MTC staff to undertake this work, without the agreement of the two councils (costs would be incurred); and was contrary to the advice from the Woodland Trust who had
3 Page 269 provided the trees. RD had offered to water the tree saplings on a volunteer basis, but again, as was doing this by vehicle and trailer in public open space the parish council requested a risk assessment process to be undertaken. ACTION: LMcR to provide a copy of the MTC staff’s watering Risk Assessment to pass to RD as an exemplar to confirm to MWPC that they are working safely.
c) New picnic tables/benches from Rotary grant: The FOSF had applied to Melksham Rotary for funding for some outside furniture and they had replied to say that they were not in a position to award a grant at this time but had offered to fund the provision of benches/picnic tables which could be built by the Melksham Shed Club; with a provision sum of £400-£500. Whilst acknowledging the generosity of the Rotary Club, the members noted that these would be made out of wood, and not the recycled materials originally planned for these type of public open space areas for ease of maintenance, longevity and prevention of vandalism. It was agreed that rather than taking delivery of 2 benches and 2 picnic benches, that FOSF would only request 1 of each initially on a trial basis.
d) Wildflower Meadow: The FOSF had applied to MTC for a grant towards a wild flower meadow, with a plan to cut and scrape an area to the right of the field entrance for a wild flower meadow in October when the grass was cut. An indicative cost for this scrape had been obtained from the MWPC contractor, of £1,255 excl VAT, but this included the cost of create soil banks at the entrance of the field with the spoil. The town council were yet to consider the grant, and queries were raised if this could not be funded from the maintenance fund.
ACTION: TS to check if the maintenance fund could be used to buy wildflower seeds and feedback to the town council before they considered their grant applications.
ACTION: TS to check with Danny Everett, Principal Drainage Engineer that proposed wildflower area did not interfere with any future flood prevention measures.
ACTION: MTC Officer Debbie Bentley to provide details of soil testing so that it can take place to ensure the optimum conditions for a wild flower meadow; or to aid species choice.
62. Next meeting: The next meeting will be on Wednesday 18th September at 2.00pm at the Town Hall. The question of how many car park spaces to be allocated at Shurnhold Fields to be on the agenda.
4 Page 270 Agenda Item 11.1
Page 271 Page 272 Agenda Item 11.2
Page 273 Page 274 Page 275 Page 276