BIO0012

Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) Inquiry into Biodiversity and Ecosystems

JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) Response

JNCC is the public body that advises the UK Government and devolved administrations on UK-wide and international nature conservation. This response addresses the following selected questions from the Inquiry that have a UK-wide or international focus:

How effectively is the Government monitoring the impact of UK activities on biodiversity, at home and abroad?
How has the Government performed against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and what further progress is needed?
Where should the four nations prioritise resources to tackle biodiversity loss?
How can policy be better integrated to address biodiversity, climate change and sustainable development?
How well is the UK addressing biodiversity loss in its Overseas Territories and in international development partnerships with other countries?
Which nature-based solutions are most effective in achieving both climate and biodiversity goals?
What would constitute clear indicators of progress and cost-effectiveness of nature-based solutions and how should trade-offs and co-benefits associated with nature-based solutions, biodiversity and socioeconomic outcomes be considered?
How can funding be mobilised to support effective nature-based solutions to climate change? How can the private sector be encouraged to contribute to funding?

How effectively is the Government monitoring the impact of UK activities on biodiversity, at home and abroad?

UK biodiversity

Within the UK, biodiversity monitoring is primarily a devolved responsibility. Overall, reasonably good data are available on the state of biodiversity (although there are some gaps in coverage, particularly for marine biodiversity). Some activities affecting biodiversity are monitored effectively, but direct measurement of the impacts of UK activities is more limited. The State of Nature Report provides an overview of the state of biodiversity in the UK and the main pressures causing biodiversity loss (e.g. climate change, land use change and management, fisheries and pollution). The UK biodiversity indicators (updated annually) provide trends for 24 indicators and 49 measures.

Global biodiversity

Consumption (of food, timber, etc) is one of the biggest drivers of land conversion and biodiversity and carbon impacts at a global scale. Fifty percent of food consumed within the UK comes from overseas. The 25 Year Environment Plan identifies sustainable consumption as a goal.

The UK is a key global consumer of wildlife controlled by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). During 2012-2016 the UK was the 11th highest global importer (2% of global transactions of CITES-listed taxa).

With development assistance, the main challenge is to understand and manage the impacts of measures taken through programmes, such as International Climate Finance, on biodiversity, climate change mitigation and adaptation and poverty alleviation, given the often data-poor environments in which projects operate. JNCC is engaged in a review of ways this situation can be improved.

JNCC engagement

JNCC plays a key role in assisting country-level monitoring of biodiversity in the UK through:

establishing a UK terrestrial monitoring framework for protected sites and a set of species surveillance schemes in partnership with other organisations, largely undertaken by volunteers;
supporting seabird and marine mammal surveys;
coordinating monitoring of Marine Protected Areas in England and Wales;
undertaking offshore surveys; and
developing guidelines and standards for marine monitoring.

In the Overseas Territories JNCC assists with monitoring of biodiversity, and any impacting activities or pressures, through specific collaborative projects (e.g. impacts of hurricanes and climate change in the Caribbean, sustainable land and sea management, natural capital assessments). This includes through developing monitoring programmes to help the Territories implement relevant 25 Year Environment Plan indicators in both the terrestrial and marine environment.

As the UK’s CITES Scientific Authority (fauna), JNCC is responsible for ensuring that CITES-listed imports do not have a harmful effect on the conservation status of species or the extent of the territory occupied by the relevant population.

JNCC is working on development of an indicator to estimate the extent of the biodiversity impact overseas caused by UK economic activity.

Recommendations for improvement

There is a key need in the UK and globally to improve understanding of the impact of activities and management on biodiversity and ecosystem function through improved detection of change. Specifically:

Measuring the effects of activities, such as pollution, on habitats, species and ecosystem function, rather than the level of the activity, such as exposure to pollution, which is what is monitored currently.

Assessing the impact of activities at a range of scales, including improved monitoring of local change. For example, some air pollution impacts can be assessed at a national scale, but the effectiveness of a management intervention will often be determined at a local level (Carnell et al., 2017).

Using Earth Observation data to pick out management activities and assess how they are affecting habitat condition, and therefore biodiversity (Medcalf et al., 2014; Natural England, 2016).

Improved monitoring of status and trends for some components of biodiversity. For example, the updated UK Marine Strategy (2019) demonstrated that for several marine habitats and species, the current level of monitoring is insufficient to provide confident assessments of change.

Understanding the social science context and coproduction of evidence, to bring about more effective interventions and change (particularly in relation to the indirect and direct drivers of change identified in the IPBES global assessment).

How has the Government performed against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and what further progress is needed?

JNCC has produced an overview report of the UK’s progress towards the targets.

For the UK as a whole, the targets on mainstreaming (#2), protected areas (#11), implementation of the Nagoya Protocol (#16), national biodiversity strategy (#17), and mobilisation of information and research (#19) are assessed as on track to achieve the target. In Scotland nine targets (#1, # 2, #13, #15, #16, #17, #18 and #19) are on track. Some targets have proved particularly challenging despite the progress that has been made (e.g. pollution #8, climate change #10, threatened species #12, and ecosystem resilience and restoration #15).

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) global assessment has recognised the need for ‘transformative change’ in society if the 2050 vision of the Convention of Biological Diversity and the Sustainable Development Goals are to be achieved.

Recommendations for further progress

Greater ‘mainstreaming’ of biodiversity considerations into decisions and actions taken in other sectors of government (national and sub-national), the private sector and society, so that biodiversity is fully considered in policies such as trade, official development assistance, development planning and investments. Greater appreciation of humankind’s dependence on biodiversity is an important component of achieving this.

Frame the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, currently under negotiation, in a way that resonates with other sectors, including the use of appropriate language. The current targets are likely to be seen by the private sector as being written by governments for governments. Any new global biodiversity targets should ensure all stakeholders, including businesses, are more engaged.

Promote local delivery of national and international targets, as emphasised by the Edinburgh Declaration.

Where should the four nations prioritise resources to tackle biodiversity loss?

Each nation within the UK has its own environmental policies, including measures to tackle biodiversity loss. However, there are some common themes that are relevant to all four countries and also some areas where the UK as a whole has responsibilities.

The most important causes of biodiversity loss globally are habitat change, management and destruction (including deforestation and overexploitation), climate change, pollution and introduction of invasive species (IPBES, 2019). In the UK, the recent UK-wide State of Nature Report identified climate change, agriculture and air pollution as key pressures on biodiversity.

Recommendations for resource allocation

Rather than focus on each driver in isolation JNCC recommends a holistic approach that delivers multiple benefits, noting that the breadth of policies, regulations and incentives will be different for each administration in the UK. This will only be achieved by addressing the IPBES indirect drivers of change as well as the direct drivers. Specifically:

Protect and enhance natural capital and ecosystem services, by investing in approaches that place nature at their core and that maximise societal and economic benefits.

Acknowledge the crucial role that biodiversity plays in underpinning the ecosystem services that people rely on by taking a balanced view of the benefits, costs and trade-offs in decisions that affect the use of natural resources. This applies to the design of national policies (e.g. for agriculture, forestry or fisheries) as well as management actions at a local scale.

Invest in understanding the social science context and coproduction of evidence, to bring about more effective interventions and change (notably in relation to the IPBES indirect and direct drivers of change).

Invest in targeted evidence on the status of terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments, how they are changing and what is driving the changes. The UK already has world-class environmental monitoring in many respects, but additional investment is required to make the best use of new technologies (such as eDNA and Earth Observation) and to fill gaps in coverage (e.g. in the marine environment where there is insufficient evidence to confidently assess some key components of biodiversity).

Invest in targeted action to protect global biodiversity. There are opportunities for the UK to show leadership through its participation in multilateral environmental agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, and to press for strong concerted action to address the increasing threats to biodiversity across the globe.

Achieve a positive environmental footprint for the UK beyond its own shores, by ensuring, for example, that international trade deals provide benefits for biodiversity.

Ensure that Official Development Assistance (ODA) recognises the value of the natural environment in supporting the long-term sustainability of emerging economies and enhancing their resilience to climate change and natural disasters.

How can policy be better integrated to address biodiversity, climate change and sustainable development?

Biodiversity loss and climate change can only be addressed effectively if there is genuine integration of policy across all sectors of government. The main threats to the environment come from sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, infrastructure development and transportation. Environmental, economic and social issues need to be fully considered when developing policy. The underpinning evidence will often be derived from interdisciplinary approaches that integrate ecosystem-orientated management and economic decision-making. JNCC’s work has demonstrated the value of such an approach, including through many projects within the UK Overseas Territories, such as mitigation of storm surge and flooding associated with major hurricane events. There are opportunities to take similar approaches in the UK, for example as countries establish new policy and funding mechanisms to replace the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy.

Recommendations for policy integration

Place sustainability, natural capital and ecosystem services at the heart of policy making. This provides a mechanism for assessing the benefits and costs of different options and explicitly considering circular/regenerative economy trade-offs.

Ensure integration across stakeholders. Nature conservation in the UK is delivered by a broad coalition of national and local governments, NGOs, businesses, landowners, farmers, fishers and private individuals, with different interests and motivations, but often working in partnership. The current crisis caused by Covid-19 is having a detrimental impact on the stability and capability of this social coalition, which should be stabilised and nurtured.

Review the experience gained from local policy implementation (both in terms of reviewing costs and assessing outcomes), to feed back in to re-evaluate national and regional strategies.

Policy-relevant research must continue to be addressed by multiple stakeholders as part of academic collaborations across research funding councils, universities, research institutes, governments and their agencies.

Promote co-ordination and collaboration between the UK Government and devolved administrations, where beneficial, while recognising that environmental policy is a devolved responsibility within the UK. For example: to meet international obligations; to address problems such as invasive non-native species; to share experiences; to have access to high-quality science and evidence that can be used flexibly to meet individual country priorities; and to share good practice and techniques for understanding and identifying integrated and multi-benefit approaches.

How well is the UK addressing biodiversity loss in its Overseas Territories and in international development partnerships with other countries?

Environment is a devolved responsibility to the UK’s Overseas Territories (OTs), which have globally important wildlife populations, with over 32,216 native species, at least 1,549 of which are endemic (UK State of Nature, 2019).

JNCC engagement

JNCC has worked in the OTs for two decades and prepared the 2011 UK OT Biodiversity Strategy on behalf of Defra. JNCC supports the OTs, and UK Government, in the implementation of Multilateral Environmental Agreements and UK Government policy in the Territories (including application of the 25 Year Environment Plan). Other JNCC work in the OTs has involved implementing a series of Environmental Mainstreaming / Green Economy projects, demonstrating how biodiversity supports economic security and disaster resilience, applying natural capital techniques and developing Coral Reef Action Plans.

Since 2016, JNCC has implemented projects in Chile, Colombia, Peru, Namibia and South Africa, through UK Government funding, some of which was Official Development Assistance (ODA). This work used UK expertise and adopted an ‘ODA compliant’ approach, simultaneously benefitting livelihoods, disaster resilience and biodiversity.

Recommendations (some of which are based on JNCC’s response to the 2019 ‘Safeguarding the environment in British Overseas Territories: call for evidence’

Provide more comprehensive training and capacity building programmes across all sectors of society to maximise the transfer of knowledge and skills from UK institutions. Current training is too often linked to short-term, highly focussed projects, and leaves a limited legacy.

Support work programmes that maximise the value of existing data by increasing funding for projects that explicitly draw on previous and current work.

Build strategic data/information management capacity, including on-island capacity supplemented by off-island, cloud-based storage.

Support a ‘natural capital approach’ to policy making and planning. This approach can help to make the economic and disaster resilience values of biodiversity explicit.

Build strong local partnerships and invest time and money in using these partnerships to identify national and regional problems and potential solutions.

Mobilise UK science ‘at its best’ to transfer skills into partner countries and organisations. JNCC focuses on knowledge transfer around the use of Earth Observation, natural capital assessments and nature-based solutions.

Develop interventions at catchment/landscape/seascape scale to address issues in the right geographical, social and biodiversity context.

Which nature-based solutions are most effective in achieving both climate and biodiversity goals?

Nature-based solutions are an approach, rather than a set of off-the-shelf projects or practices. They will be as effective in achieving multi-layered objectives as the level of effort put into their design and management.

To the best of our knowledge there has been no stringent assessment of the effectiveness of nature-based solution type projects in the UK to date but several groups are working on this, including the Inter-agency Climate Change Group, the British Ecological Society, the Nature-based Solutions Initiative at Oxford University and Defra. The concept has gained much interest and attention internationally as well and will be an important part of the agenda for the UN Climate Change Conference (CoP 26) in 2021.

JNCC engagement

JNCC’s work on nature-based solutions has included projects on mitigation of hurricane impacts in the Caribbean, enhancement of agricultural resilience to climate change in Peru, Colombia and Chile and demonstration of the value of Marine Protected Areas in climate change mitigation. Each of these projects was designed on an individual basis, working with local communities to consider the specific ecological, geographical and socio-economical context.

Recommendations

Decide on a clear definition of the term nature-based solutions for the UK. There are various definitions, such as those given by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the European Commission. A common understanding of what is meant by the term across the science, policy and environmental communities would provide a foundation for UK project development and allow a more rigorous assessment of goal achievement.

Gain input from a range of social and natural scientists, economists and other stakeholders to ensure that the design of any nature-based solutions delivers an effective package of ecosystem goods and services, including health and wellbeing.

Improve the evidence base around impact of implementation.

What would constitute clear indicators of progress and cost-effectiveness of nature-based solutions and how should trade-offs and co-benefits associated with nature-based solutions, biodiversity and socioeconomic outcomes be considered?

Nature-based solutions are context-dependent and should be tailored depending on the problem, the location and even the governance. Trade-offs should be considered at the design stage when options, benefits, costs and beneficiaries are discussed among stakeholders. As most people prefer benefits received now as opposed to in the future, the value of future benefits may be given less weight in the calculation of net present value. This can be accommodated with adjustments to the interest rate employed for the calculation.

Recommendations

Nature-based solution indicators should be:

Project-specific and SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timely) with regard to the goals and objectives of the activity.

Defined at the beginning of an investment process.

Focus on easily repeatable and cost-effectively measurable aspects specifically linked to the characteristics of concern that remain relevant over the lifetime of the project’s installation, not just the project’s implementation.

Include analysis of cost-effectiveness, measuring the costs relative to a specific desired outcome (e.g. net costs per tonne of carbon emission reduction).

Include economic analysis, considering the wider costs and benefits of an intervention comparing the business-as-usual or an alternative scenario. This may give a better representation of the wide spectrum of benefits received from an intervention. For example, a nature-based solution is likely to be addressing a complex set of issues such as climate change mitigation and adaptation, poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation.

Consider the anticipated lifetime of the installation (e.g. in a tree planting project over the full lifespan of the trees, rather than the period within which they are planted).

Include maintenance costs as well as investment costs and all benefits, including co-benefits accruing to society from the intervention and risks to the assets arising from climate change.

How can funding be mobilised to support effective nature-based solutions to climate change? How can the private sector be encouraged to contribute to funding?

To attract investment in nature-based solutions there is a need for interface between public and private sectors. Five elements are likely to determine the interest of the private sector in any particular investment: regulatory compliance, net revenue, risk, reputation and resilience.

Several aspects of nature-based solutions may moderate private sector interest: (1) the public or diffuse nature of the benefits; (2) the long payback period that can be experienced before positive net returns are achieved; and (3) the long-term cost commitment. Innovative ways must be considered to alleviate any burden perceived by the private sector from these characteristics.

There is an increasing number of publications in this area, with the European Commission, the Green Finance Institute, the Natural Capital Finance Alliance and many others putting together guidance for investors to contribute to nature-based solutions.

Drivers to unlocking investment include:

Using natural capital approaches to underpin the implementation of nature-based solutions to mitigate hidden financial risks and identify investment opportunities. For example, JNCC work in the British Virgin Islands has shown that the coral reef systems provide protection of at least US$74 million per year in avoided costs from storm surge impacts.

Considering how environmental risk scenarios (e.g. drought, floods, pest outbreak) affect corporate lending portfolios of financial institutions.

Devising investible projects at scale that generate a return on investment and help institutions ensure risk mitigation and develop cleaner, greener more future-proof investment portfolios, e.g. the Farming Pilot “Payment by Results” in England.

Developing tools that address the missing link between corporate environmental risk and financial value. Many such tools were reviewed in JNCC’s ‘Linking Environment to Trade Guide’ (due to be published on the JNCC website, October 2020), including the Accelerating Sustainable Finance initiative and the Equator Principles Risk Management Framework.

September 2020