Next Article in Journal
Manufacturing Execution System Application within Manufacturing Small–Medium Enterprises towards Key Performance Indicators Development and Their Implementation in the Production Line
Previous Article in Journal
Optimizing Auto Manufacturing: A Holistic Approach Integrating Overall Equipment Effectiveness for Enhanced Efficiency and Sustainability
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 7
10.3390/su16072975
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The UK’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Gaps, Synergies and Opportunities

by
Neil Alistair Brummitt
* and
Ana Claudia Araujo
Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(7), 2975; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072975
Submission received: 21 December 2023 / Revised: 15 March 2024 / Accepted: 22 March 2024 / Published: 3 April 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The UK government’s 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment (25YEP), published in 2018, together with annual progress reports and subsequent periodic revisions, represent the most comprehensive and forward-looking single body of environmental legislation for the United Kingdom. The forthcoming update of the UK National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) addressing targets for the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Global Biodiversity Framework to 2030 is also an opportunity to revisit the monitoring framework developed for the 25YEP. Here, we present an evaluation of the goals, targets and indicators of the 25YEP in light of gaps, synergies and opportunities for aligning with the CBD 2030 Framework. We make a number of recommendations for adopting indicators already developed in the context of CBD targets that can also measure progress towards environmental targets within the UK, with a view to more holistic monitoring of biodiversity status and trends. Landscape-scale interventions and, in particular, improvements to farming—exemplified by the new Environmental Land Management Schemes—and fishing policies have the potential for the greatest enhancement to the state of the UK environment and the plants and wildlife within it.

1. Introduction

In 2018, the UK government published “A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment” [1] (hereafter, “25YEP”) and its three annexes [2,3,4], the first time such a set of policies and proposals had been produced for the UK. Although environmental policy is mostly a devolved responsibility, the ambition is that the government should leave the state of the UK environment in a better condition than they found it. A separate document presents the Outcome Indicator Framework (OIF) to measure progress towards targets of the 25YEP [5] documented in annual reports [6,7,8,9] and updates to the OIF “https://oifdata.defra.gov.uk/ (last accessed on 11 December 2023)”. Enshrined in the 2021 Environment Act is the commitment that the 25YEP will be regularly refreshed to maintain focus on “the right priorities, using the latest evidence, to deliver better value for money”, and the first revision of the 25YEP was published in 2023 [10].
The 25YEP was developed in the context of two other pieces of government legislation, the 2013 Sustainable Development Indicators [11] and the 2017 Industrial Strategy and Clean Growth Grand Challenge [12], superseded by the government’s 2021 Plan for Growth. The UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has to balance multiple demands on the landscape of the UK, including, principally, the need to produce and harvest commercial livestock and food crops and environmental products such as timber and fresh water while conserving natural environments (terrestrial, freshwater and marine) and the plants and wildlife within them. As well as being a signatory to international conventions such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), Ramsar and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (more than four pages of international legislation are listed in Annex 3 to the 25YEP [4]), the UK government also has legal jurisdiction and responsibility over the environmental resources of UK Overseas Territories (UKOTs) [13].
To evaluate the scope, aims, goals and targets within the 25YEP, it is necessary to provide context and comparison outwith the UK. As a Party to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the UK is legally obliged to enact policies to carry out decisions made by the CBD and measure progress towards its goals and targets. These are agreed upon between Parties to the Convention at the global level, although responsibility for implementing policies to achieve them lies with individual parties (almost exclusively national governments). The CBD thus offers the most appropriate context in which to determine the gaps, synergies and opportunities within the UK government’s 25YEP compared with internationally agreed aims. Although the CBD is a global convention and is naturally focused principally on biodiversity [14,15,16,17], as with the 25YEP, the targets of the CBD also address cultivated and domesticated biodiversity (i.e., crops and livestock), the use and trade of biodiversity, pollution and the amenity use of natural environments. This is thus the international comparison against which national plans can best be judged.
At the Conference of the Parties (COP) in Montreal in December 2022 (COP 15), a new set of CBD targets to be achieved by 2030, known as the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (hereafter, “the CBD 2030 Framework”), was agreed upon and adopted (decision CBD/COP/15/L.25). It contains four goals and 23 targets for urgent action over the decade to 2030 [18] and replaces the 20 Aichi Targets set at COP 10 in Nagoya in 2010. An accompanying set of indicators to monitor progress towards meeting these post-2020 targets was published simultaneously as decision CBD/COP/15/L.26 [19] and contains 25 headline indicators, more than 50 component indicators (including disaggregations of headline indicators for particular targets, such as trade or biodiversity services, e.g., Living Planet Index for used species and Red List Index (impact of pollution)) and dozens of complementary indicators.
Many post-2020 targets in the CBD 2030 Framework are similar to the goals of the UK 25YEP (Figure 1), although the two are not directly aligned. Differences between them throw into relief a change in emphasis of the goals within the 25YEP. At the same time, the UK government, as all parties to the Convention do, has legal obligations to report to the CBD on progress towards meeting these targets, which, in the UK’s case, are both within the UK and in its overseas territories. In this paper, we highlight the areas that are covered by the CBD 2030 Framework but are not covered by the 25YEP (gaps), compare policy areas with similar aims between the CBD 2030 Framework and the 25YEP where action will address both bodies of legislation (synergies), and suggest existing indicators and monitoring protocols that could either be adopted or adapted in order to measure progress towards elements of the 25YEP (opportunities). We suggest recommendations for actions that can be taken now and additional areas where further research could bring future benefits to enhance the environment and natural resources of the UK and its overseas territories.

2. Goals, Targets, Indicators and Metrics

There are 10 Goals in the 25YEP with 44 Targets (Table 1), with 66 Indicators in the OIF grouped into 16 “headlines” under 10 Themes that are aligned with the 10 Goals and related to the 44 Targets of the 25YEP (Table 2). However, there is not a one-to-one relationship: each Goal of the 25YEP is represented by at least one Theme, but one Goal of the 25YEP (“Thriving plants and wildlife”) is addressed by two Themes, “Seas and Estuaries” and “Wildlife” (and four indicator “headlines”), and two other Goals of the 25YEP (“Clean air” and “Mitigating Climate Change”, and “Enhancing biosecurity” and “Managing exposure to chemicals”) are addressed by a single Theme (“Air” and “Biosecurity, chemicals and noise”, respectively) but more than one indicator “headline” (Table 2). An additional Theme of the OIF, “International”, does not relate to any particular Goal of the 25YEP but does address this important component of the UK’s legal obligations under many bodies of existing international legislation [4]. Topics covered by Targets in the 25YEP align more or less with those of the Targets of the CBD, which, for the CBD, mostly have one or more Indicators assigned to each of them, while a few so far have none, and each indicator may be used to measure more than one CBD Target. Unlike the CBD, the Targets of the UK government 25YEP do not necessarily have single or specific quantifiable indices designed to measure the progress towards meeting them; although, where a suitable metric and its component data have been produced, the OIF provides these (see https://oifdata.defra.gov.uk/, (accessed on 11 December 2023)). Indicators in the 25YEP thus correspond more closely to what would be termed Targets in the CBD 2030 Framework, and specific values of what are termed Indicators in the CBD 2030 Framework would be termed Metrics in the 25YEP.
The need for indicators measuring progress towards these goals is set out on page 131 of the 25YEP. Some indicators already exist, some are in development and some are yet to be developed. Links between indicators, goals and targets are set out in “Measuring environmental change: outcome indicator framework for the 25 Year Environment Plan” [5] and the data behind these indicators are provided in an interactive dashboard at https://oifdata.defra.gov.uk/ (accessed on 11 December 2023). Sometimes existing indicators have been developed by other organisations in other contexts but could be adopted to measure similar goals in the 25YEP. Relationships between the Goals of the 25YEP and the Themes and Indicator Headlines with their associated indicators from the OIF are summarised in Table 2; further details of the indicators, both those that exist and those that could be adopted, against the relevant goals of the 25YEP are given in an accompanying Excel spreadsheet (see Supplementary Materials).

3. Reports on and Revisions to the 25YEP

Annual reports showing progress toward meeting the targets of the 25YEP have been published each year from 2019 onwards [6,7,8,9], with an update of the OIF usually provided later that same year. Not every one of the 66 indicators is updated: in 2022, for example, trends for 50 indicators were given, of which 10 have no new data since 2021 and 5 more are new “interim” indicators that are either supplementing or replacing one of the original 66 indicators [9]. In 2023, the first revision of the 25YEP was published [10], with the 10 Goals from the 2018 25YEP retained, but reflecting decisions agreed upon at the CBD COP 15 meeting in Montreal in December 2022, some Goals have been re-ordered in importance or slightly re-worded in the 2023 Environment Improvement Plan.
A comparison of Goals in the original 2018 25YEP corresponding to Goals in the 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan is given in Table 3. The goal of “Thriving plants and wildlife” is now established as an Apex Goal to which Goals 2–9 all contribute, with all goals contributing to the outcome of Goal 10, “Enhancing beauty, heritage, and engagement with the natural environment”. This change in emphasis is captured in the statement of the then Secretary of State in the foreword, to “halt the decline of nature by 2030”. The over-arching ambition of the CBD 2030 Framework of prioritising 30% of the world’s land surface (“30-by-30”) for conservation [20] is captured by the UK Government’s commitment to protect 30% of the land and sea for nature by 2030 through the Nature Recovery Network and designated Highly Protected Marine Areas.

4. Analysis of Coverage and Gaps in the 25YEP

The 44 Targets of the 25YEP are arguably broader in scope than the 23 Targets of the CBD and place greater emphasis on the impact of environmental policies on human prosperity and well-being, with 25YEP Goals focused on air quality, the provision of clean water, reducing impacts from environmental hazards and exposure to harmful chemicals and increasing biosecurity (for full details, please see the accompanying Excel sheet in the Supplementary Material). The four Goals of the CBD 2030 Framework are more narrowly focused than the ten goals of the 25YEP (Figure 2). Goal A concerns the maintenance of biodiversity integrity at ecosystem, species and genetic diversity levels (broadly, CBD Targets 1–8, although CBD targets are not assigned to specific goals); Goal B concerns the sustainable use of biodiversity (~Targets 9–12); Goal C concerns monetary and non-monetary benefits arising from the use of biodiversity (~Target 13); and Goal D concerns actions and resources needed to implement the CBD 2030 Framework (Targets 14–23).
Target 1 of the CBD 2030 Framework aims to bring the loss of “areas of high biodiversity importance, including ecosystems of high ecological integrity, close to zero by 2030” through “participatory, integrated and biodiversity inclusive spatial planning”, but this does not relate directly to a specific target of the 25YEP, while the aim of CBD Target 2 is that “by 2030 at least 30 per cent of areas of degraded … ecosystems are under effective restoration”. The aim to conserve 30% of terrestrial, freshwater and marine areas by 2030 is reflected in the 2023 revision of the 25YEP but not represented by any specific target, whereas CBD Target 3 is to “ensure and enable that by 2030 at least 30 per cent of terrestrial, inland water, and of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are effectively conserved and managed”.
Under the 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan, eight of the ten Goals of the 25YEP all contribute, in addition to their beneficial impacts on people, to the Apex Goal of “Thriving plants and wildlife” for England. However, few goals or targets of the original 2018 UK 25YEP relate to ecosystem connectivity, integrity or ecosystem services. Existing National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in the UK will count towards Target 3 of the CBD 2030 Framework, but such protected areas already cover 27.8% of the land area of the UK and 38.2% of the sea (https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi-c1-protected-areas/, Table C1i (accessed on 11 December 2023)), so the 30-by-30 target of the CBD [14] is likely to be easily met. However, large areas such as National Parks are not exclusively protected for biodiversity conservation [21] or provision of ecosystem services [22] but, in the UK, are protected primarily for the preservation of intensively managed but aesthetically and culturally important historical landscapes that are largely privately owned; National Park authorities are just one of several landowners and governing bodies, with many views to be taken into account in the decision-making process.
The 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan outlines a series of SMARTer policy targets to help deliver the Apex Goal of “Thriving plants and wildlife”, which aims to “halt the decline of species by 2030” through “a growing and resilient network of land, water and sea that is richer in plants and wildlife” [10], p. 30. Given the renewed emphasis in recognition of CBD Target 3, the 25YEP had already proposed new protected areas with 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich buffer habitats restored or created, as well as restoration plans for existing National Parks and AONBs, improving the Green Belt and building a Nature Recovery Network through consultation with local partners. There is a further commitment to restore the condition of 75% of 4128 SSSIs by 2042 and a new Landscape Recovery scheme, initiatives that most closely match CBD Target 2, along with policies designed to restore woodlands, peatlands and coastal and marine habitats, including seagrass meadows.
The 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan contains so many individual narratives, new initiatives and smaller targets that it becomes difficult to evaluate progress towards the targets established in the previous 25YEP of 2018. The focus here, therefore, remains the 44 Targets and their 66 Indicators set out in the original 25YEP [1] and its OIF [5], although we have adopted the numbering of 25YEP Goals in line with the Environmental Improvement Plan [10]. The two targets of “Making sure populations of key species are sustainable with appropriate age structures” and “Taking action to recover threatened, iconic or economically important species of animals, plants and fungi, and where possible to prevent human-induced extinction or loss of known threatened species in England and the Overseas Territories“ directly relate to Target 4 of the CBD 2030 Framework, “to halt human induced extinction of known threatened species and for the recovery and conservation of species”, although globally threatened species are much more likely to be found within the UK Overseas Territories (UKOTs) than in the UK itself.
A total of 15 of the 66 Indicators of the OIF used in the 25YEP link directly to measuring progress in delivering Apex Goal 1 of “Thriving plants and wildlife” under two Themes: C Seas and Estuaries (Indicators C2–C9) and D Wildlife (Indicators D1–D7) (Table 2). Improvements in many of the other indicators will also help to improve the status of the native plants, wildlife and natural habitats in the UK. As presented in the Environmental Improvement Plan, Goals 2–9 all also help to achieve the Apex Goal of “Thriving plants and wildlife” of the 25YEP ([10], p. 10), and in a similar manner, this Apex Goal relates to CBD Targets 1–5 concerning the status and integrity of biodiversity [18] (Figure 1). The Goals of “Clean Air”, “Clean and Plentiful Water” and “Managing Exposure to Chemicals” (now Goals 2, 3 and 4, respectively, (Table 3) and grouped under “Improving Environmental Quality”) correspond to CBD Target 11 (“Restore, maintain and enhance nature’s contributions to people”) for 25YEP Goals 2 and 3, along with CBD Targets 2 (“Restore 30% of all degraded ecosystems”) and 3 (“Conserve 30% of land, waters and seas”) for 25YEP Goal 3 (“Clean and Plentiful Water”) (Figure 2), while 25YEP Goal 4 (“Managing Exposure to Chemicals”) corresponds closely to CBD Target 7 (“Reduce pollution risks and the negative impact of pollution from all sources, by 2030, to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services …”) (Figure 1). This reflects a greater focus of the goals of the 25YEP on targets that more directly affect people than impact biodiversity in general. Of these Goals, only indicators A6, A7, B6, B7, H3 and H4 directly relate to impacts on biodiversity.
The 25YEP Goals now numbered 5 “Minimising Waste” and 6 “Efficient use of natural resources” (Table 3) are grouped under “Improving our use of resources” [10]. Indicators E1, E6, E7 and E9 from the “Natural Resources” Theme and Indicators J1, J2 and J5 from the “Resource Use and Waste” Theme relate more or less directly to impacts on biodiversity; however, other indicators from these Themes also relate more directly to agricultural and sylvicultural production and to household waste recycling, respectively. In comparison with the CBD Goals and Targets, 25YEP Goal 5, “Maximise our resources, minimise our waste”, can be related to CBD Targets 15 (“Businesses assess, disclose and reduce biodiversity-related risks and negative impacts”) and 16 (“Enable sustainable consumption choices to reduce waste and overconsumption”), although the alignment is not perfect. However, the “Natural Resources” indicators of the 25YEP relating to timber and seafood harvesting do closely correspond to the targets of CBD Goal B, “Biodiversity is sustainably used and managed …”, and more specifically, it is CBD Targets 5 (“Ensure sustainable, safe and legal harvesting and trade of wild species …”) and 10 (“Enhance biodiversity and sustainability in agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries, and forestry”) that correspond most closely with 25YEP Goal 6, “Using resources from nature sustainably” (Figure 1).
Goals 7 “Mitigating and adapting to climate change” and 8 “Reduced risk of harm from environmental hazards” of the 25YEP, now grouped under the heading “Improving our mitigation of climate change” [10], are represented by only one indicator (A2) and three indicators (F1, F2, F3), respectively; Indicator J1, “Carbon footprint and consumer buying choices”, is also used to measure progress in “Mitigating and adapting to climate change”. Climate change does not feature heavily in the CBD 2030 Framework [18] as there is the independent UN Convention on Climate Change and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment process; however, CBD Target 8 is one where climate change is mentioned, and is the sole focus of this target: “Minimize the impact of climate change and ocean acidification on biodiversity and increase its resilience through mitigation, adaptation, and disaster risk reduction actions …”. This target corresponds closely to 25YEP Goal 7 (Figure 1).
The “Reduced risk of harm from environmental hazards” Theme of the 25YEP is focused primarily on the impacts of floods, erosion, wildfires and drought on humans rather than the impact of humans on the environment, so again there is little direct equivalence with CBD targets, but CBD Targets 3 (“Conserve 30% of land, waters and seas … especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services …”) and 11 (“Restore, maintain and enhance nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services … as well as protection from natural hazards and disasters …”) are the most similar (Figure 1). Goal 9 of the 25YEP, “Enhancing biosecurity”, is measured by two indicators, H1 and H2, of which Indicator H1, “Abatement of the number of invasive non-native species entering and establishing against a baseline”, corresponds closely to CBD Target 6, “Eliminate, minimize, reduce and or mitigate the impacts of invasive alien species on biodiversity and ecosystem services” [23,24,25], while CBD Target 17 aims to “Strengthen biosafety and distribute the benefits of biotechnology” (Figure 1).
These nine Goals of the 25YEP together contribute to Goal 10, “Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environment” (Table 3). The targets and indicators of Goal 10 correspond with CBD Goal B, that “Biodiversity is sustainably used and managed and nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services, are valued, maintained and enhanced, with those currently in decline being restored, supporting the achievement of sustainable development for the benefit of present and future generations by 2050”, and the three 25YEP Targets under Goal 10 are measured by seven indicators, G1–G7, and relate closely to CBD Targets 1 (“Plan and manage all areas to reduce biodiversity loss”), 12 (“Enhance green spaces and urban planning for human well-being and biodiversity”) and 14 (“Integrate biodiversity in decision-making at every level”) (Figure 1). Despite the greater emphasis on ecosystem-level measures and processes within the CBD 2030 Framework and the greater emphasis on impacts on people within the UK 25YEP, the 10 Goals and 44 Targets of the 25YEP address, whether directly or indirectly (i.e., in ways that can form part of the UK’s obligation to report on progress in addressing the CBD 2030 Framework), at least 15 of the 23 CBD Targets: Targets 1–8, 10–12 and 14–17.
In addition, through the international commitments and obligations of the UK and work in its Overseas Territories [26], the United Kingdom also helps progress towards CBD Targets 18 and 20–22. The Theme of “Global Impacts” is not represented in Figure 1 as it is not strictly a goal of the 25YEP; however, as international indicators relating to “Global Impacts” are presented in the OIF, these have been included in Figure 2. Missing from the 25YEP are policies directly addressing CBD Targets 9 (“Manage wild species sustainably to benefit people”) [this is similar to CBD Target 5, but is primarily aimed at indigenous peoples, which are not found in the UK or its Overseas Territories], 13 (“Increase the sharing of benefits from genetic resources, digital sequence information and traditional knowledge”) and 23 (“Ensure gender equality and a gender-responsive approach for biodiversity action”) (Figure 2).

5. The International Dimension of the 25YEP

The UK is a signatory to more than 50 international agreements relating to aspects of environmental policy covered in the 25YEP [4]. Although it is not a specific goal of the OIF, the international dimension of the 25YEP has two components: one is reducing the impact of the UK on environments beyond the UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (UKOTs) (Indicator Headline 15 of the OIF: “Impacts on the natural environment overseas” and Indicator K1); the other is improving the environment within the UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies (Indicator Headline 16, “Improving the environment overseas” and Indicators K3 and K4) (Figure 2). The former concerns impacts from domestic consumption linked to the sustainability of imported products (CBD Target 16) and also tackling the illegal wildlife trade both within and beyond the UK (CBD Target 5). The latter component addresses the status of endemic or globally threatened species (25YEP Indicator K3, CBD Target 4) and the extent and condition of protected terrestrial and marine areas (25YEP Indicator K4, CBD Targets 1–3) in the UKOTs (Figure 2).
A Biodiversity Strategy specifically targeting UKOTs that could also address CBD Targets 1–6 is being developed together with the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC). An additional and significant international contribution of the UK is the provision of political support, finance, scientific advice and expertise, capacity building and training to individuals and organisations working overseas (25YEP Indicator K2, “Developing countries better able to protect and improve the environment with UK support”). Financially, the UK contributes billions of pounds of International Climate Finance to nature-based climate solutions, the Biodiverse Landscapes Fund and the 10 Point Plan for Financing Biodiversity, amongst other initiatives, which all contribute to CBD Target 19 (Figure 2). The Illegal Wildlife Challenge Fund addresses the illegal wildlife trade [27,28] through legislative reform, training and media campaigns and relates to CBD Target 5. The Darwin Award scheme shares scientific knowledge, expertise and resources with local counterparts to help them achieve outcomes relating to CBD Targets 9–13 and itself relates to CBD Targets 20 and 21, while the Darwin Plus scheme is specifically aimed at the biodiversity in the UKOTs.

6. Discussion: Synergies within the 25YEP and with Other Policy Instruments

There are synergies between different elements within the 25YEP, but there are also synergies between the 25YEP and other policy instruments produced both by the UK government and by other bodies to which the government is a signatory. Since the publication of the 25YEP in 2018, the UK government has set specific policy programmes affecting its implementation. The 2023 Environment Improvement Plan should thus be considered alongside the following:
  • Resources and Waste Strategy.
  • Clean Air Strategy.
  • Government Food Strategy.
  • England Trees Action Plan.
  • England Peat Action Plan.
  • Joint Fisheries Statement.
  • UK Marine Strategy.
  • GB Plant Biosecurity Strategy.
  • The Agricultural Transition Plan.
  • Sustainability and Climate Change: a strategy for the education and children’s services systems.
  • Levelling Up White Paper.
  • Transport Decarbonisation Plan.
As with the CBD 2030 Framework [19], several of the 66 Indicators for the 25YEP [1] and Environmental Improvement Plan [10] measure progress towards more than 1 target (full details are given in the accompanying Excel sheet in the Supplementary Material). Table 1 of the OIF lists 33 indicators of environmental factors likely to be impacted by various aspects of residential, infrastructural, commercial or industrial development [29,30,31], for example, while Table 2 lists 26 Indicators that can be used to measure the need for or successful adaptation to climate change ([5]; see also [32,33]), 11 are shared across both issues (Indicators B5, C3, C4, D1, D5, F1, F2, F3, G3, G7 and H4). Of 66 indicators, 21 measure progress towards more than 1 target, while 7 (including 4 under Global Impacts, which is not strictly a Goal of the 25YEP) do not measure any specific target. A set of biodiversity metrics for the UK was collated and published by JNCC (https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/uk-biodiversity-indicators-2022/ (accessed on 11 December 2023)); these biodiversity metrics are used as some of the indicators in the 25YEP. Currently, these are mapped to the 2010 Aichi Targets of the CBD, not the CBD 2030 Framework, although the publication of a new National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) for the UK is expected in 2024.
A total of 70% of land in the UK is used for farming. Long-term changes to farming practices will have the widest-reaching impacts on the UK environment across many different goals of the 25YEP; however, most farmland is privately owned, often small in size, distributed collectively across thousands of individual landowners and often inherited across generations. Although agriculture touches on every Goal of the 25YEP, long-term changes to UK farming will be hard to achieve [34]. Since leaving the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy, the government has pledged to evolve its Countryside Stewardship Plus scheme to subsidise a wider range of actions that increase local biodiversity, launched its Agricultural Transition Plan and Sustainable Farming Incentive to support landowners and farmers adopting nature-friendly farming, and committed to publishing a Land Use Framework. Many targets of the 25YEP, especially those to meet the 30-by-30 commitments of the CBD, rely on the involvement and contribution of local farmers and landowners, especially through the Farming in Protected Landscapes programme and the Landscapes Review, which sets targets for expected contributions to national environment and climate commitments to be embedded in management plans.
The Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS)—the Sustainable Farming Incentive, Local Nature Recovery and Landscape Recovery schemes—are expected to support farmers and land managers to improve species abundance through restoring and creating habitat, targeting action on the rarest species, and tackling pressures (including species that threaten native species or habitats) [35]. Currently, over 1.6 million hectares are under Countryside Stewardship, and 1.4 million hectares are under Environmental Stewardship [10]. These comprise 422,000 hectares of grassland under active management and have created 2500 miles of new hedges towards a target of returning hedgerow lengths in England to 10% above their 1984 peak. Alongside food production, farmers are expected to contribute at least 80%, if not 100%, to the target to restore or create more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside of protected areas by 2042, including peat restoration and biodiverse woodland creation. The agroforestry standard will be rolled out in 2024 within the Sustainable Farming Incentive, and financial support within these schemes is expected to achieve approximately 90% of the Environment Act target to increase tree cover to 16.5% of England’s land area by 2050 [10]. Through the Nature for Climate Fund, 65–80% of landowners and farmers are expected to adopt nature-friendly farming on at least 10–15% of their land by 2030 and contribute at least 50% of the target of bringing protected sites into favourable conditions by 2042 [10].
Across other Goals of the 25YEP, agriculture is expected to contribute to the following: reducing ammonia and agricultural greenhouse gas emissions [36,37] through the Slurry Infrastructure Grant scheme (Goal 2, “Clean Air”); reducing agricultural water use through the Farming Investment Fund and soil and nutrient run-off leading to eutrophication of waterways through the Catchment Sensitive Farming programme (Goal 3, “Clean and Plentiful Water”); implementing Integrated Pest Management in agricultural settings (Goal 4, “Managing Exposure to Chemicals and Pesticides”); reducing food waste, as set out in the Resources and Waste Strategy (Goal 5, “Maximise our Resources, Minimise our Waste”); halting and reversing forest loss and land degradation globally by 2030 by improving soil health, restoring peatlands and establishing and restoring woodlands and forests under the Sustainable Farming Incentive (Goal 6, “Using Resources from Nature Sustainably”); decarbonising agricultural emissions through the adoption of nature-based solutions and sustainable land management approaches through the Farming Innovation Programme, the Farming Investment Fund, the Sustainable Farming Incentive and the Countryside Stewardship Plus scheme (Goal 7, “Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change”); reducing risks and impacts from floods, droughts and wildfires through new farming schemes (Goal 8, “Reduced Risk of Harm from Environmental Hazards”); promoting antimicrobial resistance to further reduce the use of antibiotics in livestock and control or eradicate priority diseases in cattle, sheep and pigs through the Animal Health & Welfare Pathway (Goal 9, “Enhancing Biosecurity”); and supporting farmers to improve protected landscapes [38] through the Farming in Protected Landscapes programme to deliver projects across four themes (Climate, Nature, People and Place) for national parks and AONBs in England (Goal 10, “Enhancing Beauty, Heritage and Engagement with the Natural Environment”).
It is the stated intention of the Environmental Improvement Plan to align the UK Biodiversity Indicators with indicators monitoring the CBD 2030 Framework, as far as possible ([10], p. 70). Within the Apex Goal “Thriving plants and wildlife” are a series of policy initiatives to help “halt the decline of species by 2030”, such as the following: a multi-million-pound Species Survival Fund, along with Species Conservation Strategies and a Species Recovery Programme targeting 215 species across 93 projects in partnership with stakeholder organisations; a National Pollinator Strategy that established a UK Pollinator Monitoring Scheme and research partnership; a Biodiversity Net Gain condition implemented for planning permission that requires a 10% gain in biodiversity either on- or off-site, and a similar Marine Net Gain Developed for new infrastructure developments at sea; and at least GBP 500 m a year raised, rising to more than GBP 1 billion a year by 2030, from the private sector to support nature recovery through its forthcoming Green Finance Strategy. These policies will then also help progress towards Targets 4, 11, 14 and 19, respectively, of the CBD.

7. Future Directions and Opportunities for Further Policy Development

The 25YEP is UK government policy, and although targets of the CBD are not legally binding on Parties, every signatory is nonetheless obliged to submit a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) demonstrating progress towards achieving the CBD 2030 Framework. Gaps between the aims of the two policy instruments may therefore negatively impact the success and efficacy of implementing either plan and will cost money. It is therefore important that this analysis has identified those gaps and synergies, detailed in the accompanying Excel sheet in the Supplementary Material and summarised in Figure 1 and Figure 2, that need to be addressed in order that government plans can be delivered efficiently and economically. Identifying where 25YEP targets can be easily met, addressed simultaneously and rapidly evaluated using the best internationally adopted indicator(s) is a much more efficacious tactic that will lead to improved outcomes for long-term biodiversity conservation, human well-being and amelioration of extreme impacts of climate change, especially if this approach can be applied simultaneously to more than one 25YEP target while at the same time helping to achieve the CBD targets to which the government is also committed. A more integrated and multi-dimensional approach highlighting synergies between targets within the 25YEP and bridging those targets that are agreed upon globally with the CBD will make meeting these easier and quicker. More importantly, it will reduce multiple efforts but achieve greater results by addressing several targets simultaneously. Such an approach will consequently be more effective financially while placing the UK government in a prominent position globally.
A useful case in point is the nature of agriculture in the UK. Most (70%) of the land in the UK is used for farming, which in this way, touches directly or indirectly on the majority of goals of the 25YEP. Changes to farming practices thus have the greatest potential to help deliver the wider goals of both the 25YEP and the CBD 2030 Framework which indeed will be impossible to achieve without. However, it is important to recognise not only that most of the land in the UK is privately owned and either intensively farmed or extensively developed industrially or residentially [39], but that the same government department has responsibility both for farming and fishing the landscape and seascape and for the natural condition of its biodiversity and ecosystems. This notwithstanding, clearly there is considerable scope for the 25YEP to apply indicators adopted for monitoring landscape-scale targets of the CBD 2030 Framework [40], especially those to help meet the 30-by-30 commitment [41] within a UK context (Figure 2).
A map of what contributes to this 30-by-30 target in England was published at the end of 2023 [42], and currently includes Sites of Special Scientific Interest and National Nature Reserves already designated as “protected”, covering only 8.5% of the land (almost exclusively the NNRs and SSSIs), but identifies another 26.8% of England (primarily existing National Parks) as potentially contributing to the 30-by-30 target. For the UK as a whole, additional such areas include Areas of Special Scientific Interest (Northern Ireland), Ramsar Sites, Special Areas of Conservation (including candidate Special Areas of Conservation and Sites of Community Importance), Special Protection Areas, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Marine Conservation Zones, Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas, National Scenic Areas and national parks. This map for the UK is available (https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi-c1-protected-areas/, Figure C1iii (accessed on 11 December 2023)) and shows the cumulative UK total to be already close to (27.8% of land) or exceeding (38.2% of onshore and offshore UK waters) the threshold of the 30-by-30 target.
Of the twenty-three CBD Targets, two (Targets 2 and 3) explicitly mention achieving 30% by 2030 (for restoration and for conservation, respectively). These each have a single headline indicator, respectively Indicator 2.2, the “Area under restoration” and Indicator 3.1, the “Coverage of protected areas and OECMs” (other effective area-based conservation measures), and should be easy for the UK government to achieve (although more challenging for the UKOTs). There are, respectively, two and eight component indicators for these two targets and sixteen complementary indicators for them both, of which only the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems and the Status of Key Biodiversity Areas are shared across them. Two indicators, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems and the Species Protection Index, are both component and complementary indicators for Target 3, meaning that there are thirty-eight component and complementary indicators measuring progress towards the 30-by-30 target [19]. Of all these, the Environmental Improvement Plan [10] only mentions one, the IUCN Red List Index (the aim is to improve the Red List Index for England by 2042, relative to 2022 levels).
Many data on the status of UK biodiversity are already routinely gathered, and indicators are regularly published (e.g., https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/uk-biodiversity-indicators-2023/ (accessed on 11 December 2023)). However, much of this is focused on the habitat scale, on rare species, or on specific organismal groups (e.g., birds and butterflies). In particular, plants (the basis of all terrestrial ecosystems) are an obvious oversight, although, again, many data do already exist (https://www.brc.ac.uk/; https://bsbi.org/plant-atlas-2020 (accessed on 11 December 2023)) and are regularly updated [43]. Such data can be the basis for indicators of change that emulate or replicate indicators that have already been developed, proposed and adopted by the CBD. Digital twins [44,45] working at fine spatial scales provide detailed simulations of responses to future environmental change at a landscape scale, which can guide current policy-making. These can be used to measure the performance of multiple CBD-compatible indicators, give trend information both in the past and into the future and critically provide counter-factual scenarios with which to test the impact of competing policy decisions. By developing this for the UK, where there is abundant high-quality data, the sensitivity of these techniques can be tested, and similar approaches can be developed for areas lacking high-quality data, such as the UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies and, indeed, the rest of the world.
A detailed breakdown of UK Goals and Targets, their alignment with CBD Goals and Targets, and the correspondence of indicators measuring both sets of targets is provided in the accompanying Excel file (see Supplementary Materials). There is insufficient space here to go through each Target by Target or Indicator by Indicator, but Figure 2 provides a useful summary; nonetheless, the best alignment has been sought in each case. Although the onus is on the UK, as an individual Party to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, to inform the Convention of its progress within the UK and its Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies in meeting globally agreed targets, the obvious advantages of adopting similar indicators as those already used by the CBD are that this information can directly contribute to the UK’s National Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) for the CBD and provide measures of progress by the UK comparable with other countries.

8. Conclusions

A broad focus on the Goals of the 25YEP, including areas not directly covered by the CBD 2030 Framework, will help to maintain public support for these policies [46]. Where possible, Targets should be aligned [47], and common indicators between the 25YEP and the CBD 2030 Framework should be adopted (a stated intention of the Environmental Improvement Plan ([10], p. 70)). The accompanying Excel sheet provided as Supplementary Material indicates where Targets are aligned: for example, 25YEP Goal 4, “Managing exposure to chemicals and pesticides”, with CBD Target 7, “to reduce pollution to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity”; or 25YEP Goal 7, “Mitigating and adapting to climate change”, with CBD Target 8, “to minimise the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and build resilience” (see also Figure 1). Targets that are aimed at landscape-scale interventions address the greatest number of Goals of the 25YEP and also have the greatest benefit to biodiversity; in particular, improvements to farming—exemplified by the new Environmental Land Management Schemes—and fishing policies have the potential for the greatest enhancement to the state of the UK environment and the plants and wildlife within it. Such policies need community buy-in from the largest sectors of society and active contributions from a wide constituency of stakeholders, not just the government and its agencies. Existing data should be used to generate CBD-compatible indicators of trends in biodiversity wherever possible, exemplified by 25YEP Indicator D5, “the conservation status of native species evaluated using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria”, and CBD Goal A and Target 4, “to halt species extinction, protect genetic diversity, and manage human–wildlife conflicts”, which are measured using the IUCN Red List Index as a headline indicator (although see also [48]). Similarly, the IUCN Red List for Ecosystems, Living Planet Index and Biodiversity Intactness Index (Headline, Component and Complementary indicators of CBD Goal A, respectively) could be adopted to measure other targets under what is now 25YEP Target 1, Thriving Plants and Wildlife. These indicators need to be underpinned by detailed field surveys and simulations of responses to future environmental change using the latest techniques. Complementary indicators will measure multiple aspects of the same changes to biodiversity within the environment and will show multi-faceted responses to complex biological processes in the round. Reporting outcomes from these policy interventions can thus address commitments both within the 25YEP and the 2030 Global Biodiversity Framework of the CBD and allow progress towards the goals of the 25YEP to be measured relative to that of other countries.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su16072975/s1, Table S1: 25YEP_paper.xlsx.

Funding

This research was funded by Natural Environment Research Council grant number NE/T010355/1.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article and Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

This paper was adapted from a report commissioned by the University of Leicester via the NERC Landscape Decisions programme. We thank them for supportive comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. UK Government. A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2018; 151p. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/25-year-environment-plan (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  2. UK Government. A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment. Annex 1: Supplementary Evidence Report; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2018; 145p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/673492/25-year-environment-plan-annex1.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  3. UK Government. A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment. Annex 2: Government Strategies to Protect and Improve the Environment; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2018; 3p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/673160/25-year-environment-plan-annex2.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  4. UK Government. A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment. Annex 3: The UK’s International Agreements to Protect or Improve the Environment; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2018; 5p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/678681/25-env-plan-annex3.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  5. UK Government. Measuring Environmental Change: Outcome Indicator Framework for the 25 Year Environment Plan; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2019; 131p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/925779/25-yep-indicators-2019.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  6. UK Government. 25 Year Environment Plan Progress Report, January 2018 to March 2019; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2019; 75p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/803266/25yep-progress-report-2019-corrected.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  7. UK Government. 25 Year Environment Plan Progress Report, April 2019 to March 2020; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2020; 63p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/891783/25yep-progress-report-2020.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  8. UK Government. 25 Year Environment Plan Annual Progress Report April 2020 to March 2021; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2021; 111p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032472/25yep-progress-report-2021.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  9. UK Government. 25 Year Environment Plan Annual Progress Report April 2021 to March 2022; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2022; 63p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1092495/25yep-annual-progress-report-2022.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  10. UK Government. Environmental Improvement Plan 2023. First Revision of the 25 Year Environment Plan; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2023; 262p. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-improvement-plan (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  11. UK Government. Sustainable Development Indicators; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London, UK, 2013; 100p. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223992/0_SDIs_final__2_.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  12. UK Government. Industrial Strategy: Building a Britain Fit for the Future; Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy: London, UK, 2017; 256p. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/industrial-strategy-building-a-britain-fit-for-the-future (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  13. Montana, J. Mediating sovereignty for the environment in the British Overseas Territories. Small States Territ. 2022, 5, 103–120. [Google Scholar]
  14. Baillie, J.E.M.; Zhang, Y.P. Space for nature. Science 2018, 361, 1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Visconti, P.; Butchart, S.H.; Brooks, T.M.; Langhammer, P.F.; Marnewick, D.; Vergara, S.; Yanosky, A.; Watson, J.E. Protected area targets post-2020. Science 2019, 364, 239–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dinerstein, E.; Vynne, C.; Sala, E.; Joshi, A.R.; Fernando, S.; Lovejoy, T.E.; Mayorga, J.; Olson, D.; Asner, G.P.; Baillie, J.E.M.; et al. A global deal for nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaaw2869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Díaz, S.; Zafra-Calvo, N.; Purvis, A.; Verburg, P.H.; Obura, D.; Leadley, P.; Chaplin-Kramer, R.; De Meester, L.; Dulloo, E.; Martín-López, B.; et al. Set ambitious goals for biodiversity and sustainability. Science 2020, 370, 411–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. CBD. Agenda Item 9A, Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Decision CBD/COP/15/L.25. 2022. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/e6d3/cd1d/daf663719a03902a9b116c34/cop-15-l-25-en.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  19. CBD. Agenda Item 9B, Monitoring Framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Decision CBD/COP/15/L.26. 2022. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/179e/aecb/592f67904bf07dca7d0971da/cop-15-l-26-en.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  20. Woodley, S.; Locke, H.; Laffoley, D.; MacKinnon, K.; Sandwith, T.; Smart, J. A review of evidence for area-based conservation targets for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Parks 2019, 25, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Butchart, S.H.; Clarke, M.; Smith, R.J.; Sykes, R.E.; Scharlemann, J.P.; Harfoot, M.; Buchanan, G.M.; Angulo, A.; Balmford, A.; Bertzky, B.; et al. Shortfalls and solutions for meeting national and global conservation area targets. Conserv. Lett. 2015, 8, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Maxwell, S.L.; Cazalis, V.; Dudley, N.; Hoffmann, M.; Rodrigues, A.S.; Stolton, S.; Visconti, P.; Woodley, S.; Kingston, N.; Lewis, E.; et al. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 2020, 586, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Burgman, M.A.; McCarthy, M.A.; Robinson, A.; Hester, S.M.; McBride, M.F.; Elith, J.; Panetta, F.D. Improving decisions for invasive species management: Reformulation and extensions of the Panetta-Lawes eradication graph. Divers. Distrib. 2013, 19, 603–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Braun, M.; Schindler, S.; Essl, F. Distribution and management of invasive alien plant species in protected areas in Central Europe. J. Nat. Conserv. 2016, 33, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Essl, F.; Latombe, G.; Lenzner, B.; Pagad, S.; Seebens, H.; Smith, K.; Wilson, J.R.; Genovesi, P. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)’s Post-2020 target on invasive alien species–what should it include and how should it be monitored? NeoBiota 2020, 62, 99–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Clubbe, C.; Ainsworth, A.M.; Bárrios, S.; Bensusan, K.; Brodie, J.; Cannon, P.; Chapman, T.; Copeland, A.I.; Corcoran, M.; Dani Sanchez, M.; et al. Current knowledge, status, and future for plant and fungal diversity in Great Britain and the UK Overseas Territories. Plants People Planet 2020, 2, 557–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Esmail, N.; Wintle, B.C.; Sas-Rolfes, M.; Athanas, A.; Beale, C.M.; Bending, Z.; Dai, R.; Fabinyi, M.; Gluszek, S.; Haenlein, C.; et al. Emerging illegal wildlife trade issues: A global horizon scan. Conserv. Lett. 2020, 13, e12715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Margulies, J.D.; Bullough, L.A.; Hinsley, A.; Ingram, D.J.; Cowell, C.; Goettsch, B.; Klitgård, B.B.; Lavorgna, A.; Sinovas, P.; Phelps, J. Illegal wildlife trade and the persistence of “plant blindness”. Plants People Planet 2019, 1, 173–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Almenar, J.B.; Elliot, T.; Rugani, B.; Philippe, B.; Gutierrez, T.N.; Sonnemann, G.; Geneletti, D. Nexus between nature-based solutions, ecosystem services and urban challenges. Land Use Policy 2021, 100, 104898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Balzan, M.V.; Zulian, G.; Maes, J.; Borg, M. Assessing urban ecosystem services to prioritise nature-based solutions in a high-density urban area. Nat.-Based Solut. 2021, 1, 100007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Castellar, J.A.; Popartan, L.A.; Pueyo-Ros, J.; Atanasova, N.; Langergraber, G.; Säumel, I.; Corominas, L.; Comas, J.; Acuna, V. Nature-based solutions in the urban context: Terminology, classification and scoring for urban challenges and ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 779, 146237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fremstad, A.; Paul, M. Neoliberalism and climate change: How the free-market myth has prevented climate action. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 197, 107353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Saunders, S.P.; Grand, J.; Bateman, B.L.; Meek, M.; Wilsey, C.B.; Forstenhaeusler, N.; Graham, E.; Warren, R.; Price, J. Integrating climate-change refugia into 30 by 30 conservation planning in North America. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2023, 21, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Adams, W.M.; Hodge, I.D.; Sandbrook, L. New spaces for nature: The re-territorialisation of biodiversity conservation under neoliberalism in the UK. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 2014, 39, 574–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tyllianakis, E. Assessing the Landscape Recovery Scheme in the UK: A Q methodology study in Yorkshire, U.K. Bio-Based Appl. Econ. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Pye, S.; Li, F.G.; Price, J.; Fais, B. Achieving net-zero emissions through the reframing of UK national targets in the post-Paris Agreement era. Nat. Energy 2017, 2, 17024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Seddon, N.; Chausson, A.; Berry, P.; Girardin, C.A.; Smith, A.; Turner, B. Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2020, 375, 20190120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Stratigos, M.J.; Ward, C.; Hatfield, J.H.; Finch, J. Areas of Outstanding Nineteenth Century Beauty: Historic landscape characterisation analysis of protected areas in England. People Nat. 2023, 5, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Potter, C. Agricultural stewardship, climate change and the public goods debate. In What is Land For? Winter, M., Lobley, M., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2009; pp. 247–261. [Google Scholar]
  40. Silvestro, D.; Goria, S.; Groom, B.; Sterner, T.; Antonelli, A. The 30 by 30 Biodiversity Commitment and Financial Disclosure: Metrics Matter. 2023. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4594937 (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  41. Leadley, P.; Obura, D.; Archer, E.; Costello, M.J.; Dávalos, L.M.; Essl, F.; Hansen, A.; Hashimoto, S.; Leclère, D.; Mori, A.S.; et al. Actions needed to achieve ambitious objectives of net gains in natural ecosystem area by 2030 and beyond. PLoS Sustain. Transform. 2022, 1, e0000040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Delivering 30by30 on Land in England. 2023. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65735eca049516000f49bf45/Delivering_30by30_on_land_in_England.pdf (accessed on 11 December 2023).
  43. Stroh, P.A.; Walker, K.J.; Humphrey, T.A.; Pescott, O.L.; Burkmar, R.J. (Eds.) Plant Atlas 2020. Mapping Changes in the Distribution of the British and Irish Flora; Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland, Durham & Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2023; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  44. Klippel, A.; Sajjadi, P.; Zhao, J.; Wallgrün, J.O.; Huang, J.; Bagher, M.M. Embodied digital twins for environmental applications. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2021, 4, 193–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Trantas, A.; Plug, R.; Pileggi, P.; Lazovik, E. Digital twin challenges in biodiversity modelling. Ecol. Inform. 2023, 78, 102357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Brown, D.; Brisbois, M.C.; Lacey-Barnacle, M.; Foxon, T.; Copeland, C.; Mininni, G. The Green New Deal: Historical insights and local prospects in the United Kingdom (UK). Ecol. Econ. 2023, 205, 107696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Geijzendorffer, I.R.; Regan, E.; Pereira, H.M.; Brotons, L.; Brummitt, N.A.; Gavish, Y.; Haase, P.; Martin, C.S.; Mihoub, J.-B.; Secades, C.; et al. Bridging the gap between biodiversity data and policy reporting needs: An Essential Biodiversity Variables perspective. J. Appl. Ecol. 2016, 53, 1341–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hoban, S.; Bruford, M.; D’Urban Jackson, J.; Lopes-Fernandes, M.; Heuertz, M.; Hohenlohe, P.A.; Paz-Vinas, I.; Sjögren-Gulve, P.; Segelbacher, G.; Vernesi, C.; et al. Genetic diversity targets and indicators in the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework must be improved. Biol. Conserv. 2020, 248, 108654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 02975 g001
Figure 1. Synergies between goals of the 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan [10] revision of the 25YEP and targets of the CBD 2030 Global Biodiversity Framework [18]. “Global Impacts” is not strictly a goal of the 25YEP, so it is not included here. See text for full details.
Figure 1. Synergies between goals of the 2023 Environmental Improvement Plan [10] revision of the 25YEP and targets of the CBD 2030 Global Biodiversity Framework [18]. “Global Impacts” is not strictly a goal of the 25YEP, so it is not included here. See text for full details.
Sustainability 16 02975 g001
Sustainability 16 02975 g002
Figure 2. Synergies between Indicators of the 25YEP [1] and CBD 2030 Framework Goals and Targets [18]. Trapezoids are 2030 Framework Goals; square boxes show corresponding 25YEP Indicators with the aligned 2030 Framework Targets in rectangular boxes below, indicated by colour-matching respective arrows; triangles show misalignments between 25YEP Indicators and 2030 Framework Targets. Note that, unlike in Figure 1, where it is not a goal of the 25YEP, Global Impacts are included here as the Outcome Indicator Framework contains the International Targets K1–K4.
Figure 2. Synergies between Indicators of the 25YEP [1] and CBD 2030 Framework Goals and Targets [18]. Trapezoids are 2030 Framework Goals; square boxes show corresponding 25YEP Indicators with the aligned 2030 Framework Targets in rectangular boxes below, indicated by colour-matching respective arrows; triangles show misalignments between 25YEP Indicators and 2030 Framework Targets. Note that, unlike in Figure 1, where it is not a goal of the 25YEP, Global Impacts are included here as the Outcome Indicator Framework contains the International Targets K1–K4.
Sustainability 16 02975 g002
Table 1. The 10 Goals and 44 Targets of the UK Government’s original 25YEP [1].
Table 1. The 10 Goals and 44 Targets of the UK Government’s original 25YEP [1].
GoalTarget
1. Clean airMeeting legally binding targets to reduce emissions of five damaging air pollutants. This should halve the effects of air pollution on health by 2030.
1. Clean airEnding the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2040.
1. Clean airMaintaining the continuous improvement in industrial emissions by building on existing good practice and the successful regulatory framework.
2. Clean and plentiful waterReducing 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.
2. Clean and plentiful waterReaching 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.
2. Clean and plentiful waterSupporting 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.
2. Clean and plentiful waterMinimising 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.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeReversing the loss of marine biodiversity and, where practicable, restoring it.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeIncreasing the proportion of protected and well-managed seas, and better managing existing protected sites.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeMaking sure populations of key species are sustainable with appropriate age structures.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeEnsuring seafloor habitats are productive and sufficiently extensive to support healthy, sustainable ecosystems.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeRestoring 75% of our one million hectares of terrestrial and freshwater protected sites to favourable condition, securing their wildlife value for the long term.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeCreating or restoring 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside the protected site network, focusing on priority habitats as part of a wider set of land management changes providing extensive benefits.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeTaking action to recover threatened, iconic or economically important species of animals, plants and fungi, and where possible to prevent human-induced extinction or loss of known threatened species in England and the Overseas Territories.
3. Thriving plants and wildlifeIncreasing woodland in England in line with our aspiration of 12% cover by 2060: this would involve planting 180,000 hectares by end of 2042.
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazardsMaking 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.
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazardsBringing the public, private and third sectors together to work with communities and individuals to reduce the risk of harm.
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazardsMaking sure that decisions on land use, including development, reflect the level of current and future flood risk.
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazardsEnsuring interruptions to water supplies are minimised during prolonged dry weather and drought.
4. Reducing the risks of harm from environmental hazardsBoosting the long-term resilience of our homes, businesses and infrastructure.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficientlyMaximising the value and benefits we get from our resources, doubling resource productivity by 2050.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficientlyImproving 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.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficientlyIncreasing timber supplies.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficientlyEnsuring that all fish stocks are recovered to and maintained at levels that can produce their maximum sustainable yield.
5. Using resources from nature more sustainably and efficientlyEnsuring that food is produced sustainably and profitably.
6. Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environmentSafeguarding and enhancing the beauty of our natural scenery and improving its environmental value while being sensitive to considerations of its heritage.
6. Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environmentMaking 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.
6. Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environmentFocusing on increasing action to improve the environment from all sectors of society.
7. Mitigating and adapting to climate changeContinuing 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 percent by 2050 when compared to 1990 levels.
7. Mitigating and adapting to climate changeMaking sure that all policies, programmes and investment decisions take into account the possible extent of climate change this century.
7. Mitigating and adapting to climate changeImplementing a sustainable and effective second National Adaptation Programme.
8. Minimising wasteWorking towards our ambition of zero avoidable waste by 2050.
8. Minimising wasteWorking to a target of eliminating avoidable plastic waste by end of 2042.
8. Minimising wasteMeeting all existing waste targets—including those on landfill, reuse and recycling—and developing ambitious new future targets and milestones.
8. Minimising wasteSeeking 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.
8. Minimising wasteSignificantly reducing and where possible preventing all kinds of marine plastic pollution—in particular material that came originally from land.
9. Managing exposure to chemicalsSeeking in particular to eliminate the use of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by 2025, in line with our commitments under the Stockholm Convention.
9. Managing exposure to chemicalsReducing land-based emissions of mercury to air and water by 50% by 2030.
9. Managing exposure to chemicalsSubstantially 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.
9. Managing exposure to chemicalsFulfilling our commitments under the Stockholm Convention as outlined in the UK’s most recent National Implementation Plan.
10. Enhancing biosecurityManaging and reducing the impact of existing plant and animal diseases; lowering the risk of new ones and tackling invasive non-native species.
10. Enhancing biosecurityReaching the detailed goals to be set out in the Tree Health Resilience Plan of 2018.
10. Enhancing biosecurityEnsuring strong biosecurity protection at our borders, drawing on the opportunities leaving the EU provides.
10. Enhancing biosecurityWorking with industry to reduce the impact of endemic disease.
Table 2. Alignment of Goals of the 25YEP with Themes, Targets and Indicator headlines of the accompanying OIF measuring progress towards delivering the 25YEP, as given in Figure 1 of the OIF ([5], p. 8); note that there are slight discrepancies between the assignment of indicators to headlines in Figure 1 on page 8 and Figure 3 on page 11 of the same report, so here, we follow headline indicator assignments given in Figure 3 of the OIF. * “Global impacts” is not a goal of the 25YEP but a legal obligation of the UK government in its overseas territories and is listed in the first version of the OIF [5] as if it were a goal.
Table 2. Alignment of Goals of the 25YEP with Themes, Targets and Indicator headlines of the accompanying OIF measuring progress towards delivering the 25YEP, as given in Figure 1 of the OIF ([5], p. 8); note that there are slight discrepancies between the assignment of indicators to headlines in Figure 1 on page 8 and Figure 3 on page 11 of the same report, so here, we follow headline indicator assignments given in Figure 3 of the OIF. * “Global impacts” is not a goal of the 25YEP but a legal obligation of the UK government in its overseas territories and is listed in the first version of the OIF [5] as if it were a goal.
25YEP GoalOutcome Indicator
Framework Theme		Indicator Headline
and Indicators
Clean airA Air1. Air quality (A1, A3, A6)
Mitigating Climate Change2. Greenhouse gas emissions (A2)
Clean and plentiful waterB Water3. Water and the water environment (B3, B4, B5)
Thriving plants and wildlifeC Seas and estuaries4. Diversity of our seas (C3, C4, C5)
5. Health of our seas (C7, C8)
D Wildlife6. Wildlife and wild places (D2, D5)
7. Nature on land and water (D1, D4, D7)
Efficient use of natural resourcesE Natural resources8. Production and harvesting of natural resources (E1, E3, E4, E7, E9)
Reduced risk from environmental hazardsF Resilience9. Resilience to natural hazards (F1, F2, F3)
Enhanced beauty and engagementG Natural beauty and engagement10. Landscapes and waterscapes (G1, G2, G3)
11. People enjoying and caring about the natural environment (G4, G5, G6, G7)
Enhancing biosecurityH Biosecurity, chemicals and noise12. Exotic diseases and invasive non-native species (H1, H2)
Managing exposure to chemicals13. Exposure of people and wildlife to harmful chemicals (H3, H4)
Minimising wasteJ Resource use and waste14. Resource efficiency and waste (J2, J4, J5, J6)
Global impacts *K International15. Impacts on the natural environment overseas (K1)
16. Improving the environment overseas (K2, K3, K4)
Table 3. Comparison of wording and order of Goals in the 25YEP of 2018 [1] with the Environmental Improvement Plan of 2023 [10], the first revision of the 25YEP. * “Global impacts” is not a Goal of the 25YEP but a legal obligation of the UK Government in its overseas territories and is listed in the first version of the OIF [5] as if it were a Goal.
Table 3. Comparison of wording and order of Goals in the 25YEP of 2018 [1] with the Environmental Improvement Plan of 2023 [10], the first revision of the 25YEP. * “Global impacts” is not a Goal of the 25YEP but a legal obligation of the UK Government in its overseas territories and is listed in the first version of the OIF [5] as if it were a Goal.
25 Year Environment Plan (2018)Environmental Improvement Plan (2023)
1. Clean airGoal 2. Clean Air
2. Mitigating Climate ChangeGoal 7. Mitigating and adapting to climate change
3. Clean and plentiful waterGoal 3. Clean and plentiful water
4. Thriving plants and wildlifeGoal 1. Thriving plants and wildlife
5. Efficient use of natural resourcesGoal 6. Using resources from nature sustainably
6. Reduced risk from environmental hazardsGoal 8. Reduced risk of harm from environmental hazards
7. Enhanced beauty and engagementGoal 10. Enhancing beauty, heritage and engagement with the natural environment
8. Enhancing biosecurityGoal 9. Enhancing biosecurity
9. Managing exposure to chemicalsGoal 4. Managing exposure to chemicals and pesticides
10. Minimising wasteGoal 5. Maximise our resources, minimise our waste
11. Global impacts *
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Brummitt, N.A.; Araujo, A.C. The UK’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Gaps, Synergies and Opportunities. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2975. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072975

AMA Style

Brummitt NA, Araujo AC. The UK’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Gaps, Synergies and Opportunities. Sustainability. 2024; 16(7):2975. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072975

Chicago/Turabian Style

Brummitt, Neil Alistair, and Ana Claudia Araujo. 2024. "The UK’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment and the Convention on Biological Diversity: Gaps, Synergies and Opportunities" Sustainability 16, no. 7: 2975. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072975

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop