The Natural Capital Committee (NCC) is warning that there is little evidence of progress and worrying evidence of declines in its latest assessment of how the government is performing against its own ten 25 Year Environment Plan (YEP) goals.

The warning comes in the NCC’s new assessment of the government’s second Progress Report for 2020 which sets out how the government is performing against the ten 25 YEP goals.

The analysis by the independent advisory committee, which was established to provide advice to the government on the sustainable use of natural capital, paints a largely negative picture of the Government's progress over the last year.

Commenting in the foreword to the NCC’s Interim Response to the 25 Year Environment Plan Progress Report and advice on a green economic recovery, Professor Dieter Helm, Chairman said:

“The Committee provided an assessment of the government’s first Progress Report in 2019. In the absence of a natural capital baseline, the Progress Report focused on a long list of actions, with very little evidence of improvements in the state of our natural capital.”

“The 2020 Progress Report repeats many of these mistakes and the integrated, system based approach the 25 YEP demands is at real risk of being lost. The report continues to reflect these fundamental weaknesses, and again is unable to provide an assessment of progress, of which there has been very little.”

“Nine of the 25 years have already passed and it is now looking very likely the next generation will inherit a poorer set of natural assets.”

According to Professor Helm, the NCC is “seriously concerned” about the absence of appropriate metrics to measure environmental performance.

The Committee has previously advised the government that it is crucial to use the right framework and metrics or risk “multiple policy failures"- including the success of the 25 YEP, all future Environmental Improvement Plans, the delivery of Environmental Land Management schemes and environmental net gain.

The NCC’s interim response covers four areas:

i) provides an initial assessment of overall progress to the extent that is possible;

ii) explains why the reporting framework and indicators used by the government to provide evidence of progress need reworking;

iii) sets out an alternative natural capital asset-based framework for assessing progress, and;

iv) highlights the opportunity to realise the significant economic benefits from investing in natural capital assets and delivering the 25 YEP in a more cost-effective way as part of a resilient green recovery from COVID-19.

The NCC is warning that the government is not on course to achieve its objective to improve the environment within a generation and that as a consequence, the next generation will “inherit a poorer set of natural assets.”

Overall, the NCC is concerned that the evidence presented in the Progress Report at best provides only a partial picture and mostly shows declines in England’s environment. In the Progress Report, five arrows are used to summarise the government’s assessment of changes in data trends.

The NCC response says:

“Progress is framed using a series of arrows which fail to accurately represent the state of the environment.”

The response draws particular attention to lack of progress in improving surface water bodies.

The 25 YEP commits to improving at least 75% of water bodies to be as close to their natural state and met the ‘good ecological status’ standard as soon as practicable; currently only 16% of England’s surface water bodies are in a ‘high’ or ‘good’ condition status, and this percentage is declining.

The NCC comments:

“A stable arrow has been issued when the commitment is nowhere near being met and no definition for ‘as soon as practicable’ has been provided…..It is therefore difficult to justify how a stable arrow has been issued against this indicator."

The response also points out that there has only been a 2.2% increase in restoring terrestrial and freshwater protected sites to favourable condition since 2013; the figure currently stands at 38.9%, against a 25 YEP target of 75%.

Government still not put in place appropriate metrics and baseline to measure changes in the environment – and current environmental spending is inefficient and siloed

The reponse says that the government has still not put in place the appropriate metrics and baseline required to measure changes in the environment, as advised by the NCC. “This not only prevents a proper assessment of progress but also misses opportunities to identify the projects with the highest economic value.”

The NCC is also warning that the evidence from the 2020 Progress Report indicates that “current environmental spending is inefficient and siloed, targeting particular environmental outcomes irrespective of the other 25 YEP goals.“

“This will lead to inefficiencies and perverse economic and environmental outcomes. Taking an integrated approach that accounts for each policy’s impacts across the natural environment is crucial not only to avoid unintended negative consequences, but also to realise fully the potential benefits of spending in each area.”

Professor Helm concludes in the foreword:

“ A green recovery will not be possible unless the government understands the baseline position of the environment. From the ad hoc evidence presented in the Progress Report, not only is there little evidence of progress, but some worrying evidence of declines.”

The Committee said it will publish its final response to the 25 YEP Progress Report in October 2020, demonstrating how a natural capital framework can be applied to independently scrutinise progress, and thereby laying the foundation for the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) to undertake this function from 2021.

Click here to read the NCC Interim Response