In the first major review of the Environment Improvement Plan, advisors warn that the UK Government is off-track, and risks missing the legally-binding target to halt nature decline by 2030.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has concluded that Government needs to speed up and scale up delivery. It also warns that the plan lacks transparency and accountability, Wildlife and Countryside Link reported.

Environment Act targets, binding in law, include 70% of the designated features in Marine Protected Areas to be in favourable condition by 2042, with the remainder in recovering condition.

Photo: Jonny Gios

Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said:  “Government must double down on delivery of its nature promises or hopes of meeting the positive promises in the Environment Act will remain daydreams.

“A rapid delivery plan of action and investment is needed to create an economy that can thrive with nature, instead of at nature’s expense. This plan is supposed to be the flagship of reforms to leave the environment in a better state for future generations. But instead, Government is bobbing along with business as usual.” 

In seven goal areas the ‘government is largely off track’

The OEP said that in terms of the overall prospects of government meeting its ambitions for significantly improving the natural environment, the OEP concludes that in seven goal areas, including the apex goal of achieving ‘thriving plants and wildlife’, government is largely off track. In two goal areas, government is partially on track (‘clean air’ and ‘reducing the risk of harm from environmental hazards’), and in one area, ‘enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environment’, progress could not be assessed due to a lack of evidence.

The report identifies factors impeding progress:

• Key policies, strategies and regulatory frameworks are announced and anticipated, but not then developed or delivered. For example, major initiatives, such as a Chemicals Strategy and a Land Use Framework, are long awaited. This creates uncertainty, presents barriers to progress, and results in missed opportunities.
• Actions are not addressing all major pressures. For example, for water quality, commitments to investment have increased substantially in some but not all areas of need.
• Resources are not always allocated as needed, even when tools and actions are well understood. For example, there is an approach in place for tackling invasive non-native species, but resources are inadequate to implement actions at the scale required to achieve desired outcomes.
• The urgency with which positive actions are being implemented is frequently lacking. For example, the current rate of tree planting needs to substantially increase to achieve woodland creation goals.