Annex
Case study 1—Agri-Environment Review
The Government signalled the need for a fundamental
review of agri-environment schemes in England in 1999. The formal
review process started in mid-2001 and DEFRA has been very keen
to make the review process as open and inclusive as possible.
In addition to the normal process of written consultation DEFRA
has:
— made commissioned research on assessment
of schemes available to stakeholders;
— developed a clear timetable and review
and consultation process to seek views to seek views at each stage
of the process;
— held a number of bilateral meetings
with a range of key stakeholders, NGOs, Agencies and farmers;
— established a joint Government Agency/NGO
steering group to overview the review process;
— used existing DEFRA forums, such
as the ERDP Consultation Group, to explain and invite involvement
from a very wide range of stakeholders;
— publicly acknowledged significant
inputs into the review from various stakeholders; and
— set up a regional consultation process
in parallel to the national review.
While EN would not expect, or welcome, this
intensity of consultation on all issues we do believe that it
has shown a commitment to an open and inclusive approach to a
major review of a policy area that is of considerable interest
to a wide range of stakeholders.
Case study 2—DEFRA Science Directorate
The recent appointment of a new Chief Scientific
Adviser provides a timely opportunity for the DEFRA to realign
its research and development programme to meet its vision, aim
and objectives. MAFF's Research Strategy 2001-05 did not support
even its own stated aims and too high a proportion of its research
budget was allocated to maintaining and increasing food production,
in some cases with potential adverse environmental effects. Given
the broader remit of DEFRA, there is an even greater need for
a fundamental shift in emphasis of its research programme away
from food production towards more sustainable farming systems.
Ensuring policies are properly informed by sound
science and that the science is presented in an open and transparent
way is critical to ensuring public confidence in DEFRA. We believe
that the DEFRA research programme should formulated through wider
consultation and research results promulgated more thoroughly.
This should include more peer reviewed publications and more use
of the Internet.
We therefore welcome the increased partnership
with external organisations and statutory agencies, such as English
Nature, that DEFRA has pursued recently. This way of working provides
much greater opportunities for collaboration, running joint projects
and using external expertise to get the best value for the funds
available.
English Nature is actively engaged with the
review of Science in DEFRA and with the related ongoing review
of DEFRA's scientific agencies. We are also strengthening our
links with DEFRA science strategists and managers.
Case study 3—National Sheep Envelope
In late 2001, Ministers and officials put huge
effort into securing a change in the sheep regime at EU level
to allow member states to use part of the regime to secure environmental
outcomes—the National Sheep Envelope (NSE). This followed
the example of flexibility allowed under the beef regime. Use
of such flexibility to achieve environmental outcomes was also
recommended by the Curry Commission.
The key issue behind creating the NSE was to
address overgrazing in the Uplands. Such overgrazing is the main
reason for the unfavourable condition of many upland SSSIs, with
73 per cent of upland heath and 67 per cent of upland calcareous
grassland in SSSIs in unfavourable condition. Use of the NSE would
be a significant step towards the DEFRA PSA target to achieve
favourable condition of 95 per cent of SSSIs by 2010.
Progress on translating the NSE into a practical
scheme to meet this objective has been slow and difficult, but
English Nature is now working with DEFRA to develop environmental
options for the envelope that will be phased in over a number
of years, hopefully with a first tranche in 2002-03.
Case study 4—Environmental Impacts of EU
Sugar Regime
DEFRA is required by the EU to submit a report
in 2002 to the European Commission on the environmental impact
of cultivating sugar beet and measures proposed to address these
impacts. A stakeholder meeting organised by DEFRA in December
2001 was dominated by producer interests (six representatives
from British Sugar and the NFU), and English Nature was the only
environmental organisation invited. DEFRA appeared to be taking
a minimalist approach to the review process, rather than a considered
assessment of environmental impacts. English Nature offered advice
on the initial consultation process and, to DEFRA's credit, subsequent
meetings and consultation were more inclusive and even-handed.
Case study 5—Environmental Impact Assessment
(Uncultivated Land and Semi-Natural Areas) (England) Regulations
2001
The former MAFF delayed extending the implementation
of EC Directive 85/337/EC on Environmental Assessment to agricultural
land for 17 years. Again it is to DEFRA's credit that it has introduced
the Environmental Impact Assessment (Uncultivated land and semi-natural
areas) (England) Regulations 2001 with effect from 1 February
2002. English Nature has not been granted additional resources
to implement these regulations, and so we are depending on DEFRA
to do so with due diligence and regard for compliance with other
EU Directives, including the future requirements of the Water
Framework Directive. DEFRA's approach must not be guided by farmers
concerns about "gold plating", but rather by a clear
understanding of the positive role that these long overdue powers
will play in environmental protection (for example in relation
to priority habitats and species under the UK Biodiversity Action
Plan) and in promoting sustainable agriculture.
30 May 2002
| 
