ENVIRONMENT BANK – A NEW LOOK AT MITIGATION

1. ENVIRONMENT BANK – A NEW LOOK AT MITIGATION David Hill & Robert Gillespie

2. Key issues Development Pressure and the step change in housing delivery Applications and allocations Protracted negotiations and delays / uncertainties Environmentalists v Developers Political response Development industry initiatives Reduction in delays and costs

3. Key issues Our landscapes have changed dramatically in 50 years – macro-environmental changes as well as development Planning has become more complex with limited outcomes Legal and social requirements for mitigating impacts are failing to deliver

4. What have we lost?

6. Our landscapes and biodiversity are more impoverished now than at any time in recorded history Our population is at its highest and continually growing By 2010 65% of our population will live and function only in urban environments Yet access to wildscapes and the countryside substantially improves physical health and well-being

7. UK habitat status - losses 50% ancient lowland woodland 150,000 miles hedgerows 95% traditional hay meadows 80% chalk downland 80% wetland fens & mires

8. Farmland Indicators

9. Unfavourable Condition 42% of the 1 million ha of SSSI’s 69% of rivers and streams 65% of upland grassland & heaths 35% of fen, marsh & swamp 33% of lowland broadleaved woodland Everett (2004)

10. ‘Even if climate change hadn’t landed in our midst as a massively ‘inconvenient truth’ the planet would still be falling to pieces in front of our eyes in terms of resource exploitation, pollution, loss of topsoil, water, forests…..’ ‘How we use land affects every single aspect of our lives today’ The balance sheet is very scary !! Jonathon Porritt, Insight 2007

11. Massive scope for mitigation Ecosystem services New habitat creation Restoration Reversing unfavourable condition Landscape scale

12. Upland catchments

13. Planning is failing to deliver Failure to : - analyse impacts beyond site boundary - quantify ecological impacts - identify/measure cumulative effects - mitigate important impacts Lack of monitoring or follow up Lack of enforcement Responsibilities / maintenance / costs Treweek (2000)

15. COUNTRYSIDE QUALITY COUNTS

16. Supporting Policy • Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (1995); • World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg,2002); • 5th EU Ministerial Conference (Kyiv, 2003); • Objective 4, EU Biodiversity Stakeholders Conference (Malahide, 2004); • Article 10, Habitats Directive (1992). • Regulation 37, Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations (1994) • Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (ODPM 2005).

17. IS THERE A DIFFERENT APPROACH ?

18. MITIGATION BANKING Not really a bank An entity that restores, creates, enhances or preserves a species or habitat The entity sells tangible units of habitat, termed credits, to a developer for compensation for equivalent units that the developer has destroyed, termed debits Title never passes to the developer

19. ADVANTAGES Matches ecosystem services with development needs Economies of scale - structured and efficient habitat regulation; encourages watershed-based planning Range of habitats – woodlands, forests, created/restored heaths, restored moorland, grasslands Deliver large scale habitats – ecological networks Species networks – newts and reptiles Provides confidence to the developer

20. A new facility? Operates as a business in US for 15 years – environmental off-setting Offers long-term solution to developer and independent from developer Not yet a business in the UK – too focussed on small-scale, political boundaries The time is right to establish a facility to help the development industry whilst providing biodiversity gains and access opportunities for people

21. THE ENVIRONMENT BANK LTD 1st company of its kind Facilitates the delivery of mitigation and compensation schemes associated with planned development

22. The Environment Bank provides the mechanism by which effective biodiversity conservation can be delivered by taking a strategic approach, at various spatial scales, enabling landscapes of substantial worth to be created, managed and maintained within a long-term framework

23. Win-win Use of PGS type approach – Barker Review recommendations Delivery mechanism for ecosystem services and nature conservation enhancements Pooled contributions from developments used to provide landscape-scale, large cross-boundary initiatives

24. Specific objectives Site purchase, habitat creation, restoration, enhancement and management Identify suitable places and managers An improved approach to land-use planning, reconciling conflicts between development and nature conservation Areas for peaceful recreation, consistent with the Government’s initiatives for healthy living Management planning and monitoring

25. Sectors Housing Infrastructure Port developments Retail Distribution centres Water resources and reservoirs Waste management Power Climate proofing Sport and leisure Oil and gas Minerals

26. Process Consultation – conservation advisers, planning authorities Links to strategic developments, RSS’s, LDF’s Developer purchases credits Sites sought for purchase, land management agreements, restoration, enhancement Large schemes can create their own income stream

27. Benefits Substantial gains through scale More predictable and workable outcomes Landscapes for people and wildlife Policy compliant – PPS9, LDF’s, RSS’s People engaging with their environment Health and well-being Easier to manage

30. Talk to us…

31. www.environmentbank.com