Our Planet, Our Health Contents

3Nature, wildlife and the environment

Environmental damage

35.The use and exploitation of natural resources by humans means that the Anthropocene, a new geological era, marked by human induced global heating, has begun.65 Professor Sir Andy Haines, LSHTM, warned that “We have overexploited our land and our seas. We are dramatically changing the climate”.66

36.Professor Peter Cox, University of Exeter, outlined that the UK is projected to experience significantly warmer temperatures over the next 50 years:

Given the rate of warming we have globally, which is about 0.2°C a decade, and taking the slightly pessimistic view that that does not change, we are looking at probably 3-degree warming here in the UK, relative to pre-industrial. That is quite a big change.67

37.Dr Mark Mulligan, King’s College London, summarised the impacts of higher temperatures on water availability in the UK:

A warmer climate should generate a more rapid recycling of rainfall between the land and the atmosphere, and so there will be an overall increase in rainfall… If we look at the UK in terms of our water resources, of course our key issues are to do with seasonality of those resources, but also with water quality. We will see, under climate change, impacts both on the supply side of water and also, of course, in demand for water.68

38.A major concern has been the impact of human action and environmental change on global plant and animal biodiversity.69 The Planetary Health Network at the LSHTM told us that:

Current prediction rates of extinction are at 100–1000 times more than what is considered natural biodiversity loss. While biodiversity loss occurs at local—regional level, it has greater impact on the biosphere and how the Earth systems function.70

39.The landmark Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services, published in May 2019, found that, globally, the biomass of wild mammals has collapsed by 82 per cent. There has been a rapid decline in ecosystem functions and 25 per cent of animal and plant species are threatened, with around one million species at risk of extinction, and grave impacts on people around the world now likely. This loss is a direct result of human activity and constitutes a direct threat to human well-being in all countries.71

40.Professor Georgina Mace, University College London, criticised the Government’s fragmented approach to nature conservation with DEFRA divided into animal health, plant health and the environment. Climate mitigation sits with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), but responsibility for delivery lies with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and the Department for Transport (DfT).72

41.She warned that insect species variety was a key insurance measure against climate change:

The loss of invertebrates and the loss of species generally means that we do not have a lot of other kinds of services, natural pest control, natural decomposition of pollutants, natural nutrient cycling, and without those, we are increasingly going to have to intervene in ecosystems to provide those services… If you project these trends forward, we end up solving problems caused by the loss of natural systems one by one, which is a much less efficient way to solve those problems than treating the root cause of the problem, which is the depletion and degradation of the natural environment.73

Drivers of wildlife loss

42.UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) told us that “there are multiple stressors affecting biodiversity including changing land use and climate change”.74 Particular stressors identified include:

Insect populations

43.Dramatic decreases in insect populations have been widely reported. There have been press reports of “an insect Armageddon” with the Guardian reporting that UK farmland butterflies have declined by more than half since the year 2000 and Germany has lost three-quarters of its aerial insects since 1989.80

44.A meta-study of insect populations published in April 2019 concluded that “habitat loss by conversion to intensive agriculture is the main driver of the declines” and that “agro-chemical pollutants, invasive species and climate change are additional causes”.81 According to the research, 41 per cent of insect species are at risk over the next few decades, and there has been a 2.5 per cent decline in insect biomass every year.82 Commenting on the review, Georgina Mace, University College London, said that:

I do not think they are correct that extinctions will necessarily follow, the idea that—I think it was said to be by the end of the century—most insect populations will be extinct, I do not think is true. What tends to happen is that these persistent threats deplete populations, so you lose a lot of the biomass and abundance. There are some extinctions, there are some local extinctions, but insects are pretty good at going somewhere else and becoming pests somewhere else.83

45.Matt Shardlow, Buglife, told us that insects were the “canaries in the coalmine” as they were “on the frontline of the extinction crisis”.84 He told us that climate change represented a serious risk for smaller species such as birds, butterflies and dragonflies.85 He commented that: “extinction approaches with silent wings for little things”, and gave the example of the bumblebee:

In the northern hemisphere there is clear evidence of the southern parts of the ranges of the bumblebee shifting north but the northern edges of their ranges are not moving. They are getting compressed, and of course if thousands of species are all doing that, what you end up with is species going extinct over large parts of their range.86

Pollinators

46.Climate change and other stressors have led to a significant reduction in pollinating insects. Insects provide pollinator services to a wide range of crops including many fruits and vegetables that are vital for a healthy human diet. Pollination by insects is an important form of reproduction for at least 87 types of common global food crops, which account for more than 35 per cent of annual global food production by volume.87

47.Neonicotinoid pesticides have been partly blamed for declines in bee populations, although this is contested. Neonicotinoids are the “world’s most popular insecticides” and recent evidence suggests that they “affect the insects’ abilities to navigate and communicate”.88

48.Others have suggested that climate change may also play a key role. The Committee on Climate Change Adaptation Sub-Committee told us that “some pollinator species may have high susceptibility to changes in climate, space and seasonality, with the possibility of future mismatches with flowering dates”.89 It stated that there is a need for research “to better understand the potential for mismatches due to changes in climate space and seasonality and the extent to which pollination disruption may occur, as well as how climate and non-climate pressures (including use of neonicotinoids) may interact”.90

Health risks from biodiversity loss

49.The loss of biodiversity poses a number of risks to human health. The IPBES global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services, found that:

The deterioration of biodiversity and ecosystem functions, and the consequent disruption of benefits to people, has both direct and indirect implications for public health. Emerging infectious diseases in wildlife, domestic animals, plants or people can be exacerbated by human activities such as land clearing and habitat fragmentation (established but incomplete) or the overuse of antibiotics driving rapid evolution of antibiotic resistance in many bacterial pathogens (well established). The deterioration of nature and consequent disruption of benefits to people has both direct and indirect implications for public health (well established) and can exacerbate existing inequalities in access to health care or healthy diets (established but incomplete). Shifting diets towards a diversity of foods, including fish, fruit, nuts and vegetables, significantly reduces the risk of certain preventable non–communicable diseases, which are currently responsible for 20 per cent of premature mortality globally”.91

A 2015 joint review by the World Health Organisation and the Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity,92 identified a number of ways in which “anthropogenic drivers of biodiversity loss are hindering the capacity of ecosystems to provide essential services”, including:93

Government progress on biodiversity

Aichi Targets

50.The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is the framework for international action to support biodiversity. The Aichi Targets, which sit under the CBD, are a set of 20 goals to safeguard biodiversity which are to be achieved by all member states by 2020. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee, (JNCC - the public body that advises the UK Government and devolved administrations on UK-wide and international nature conservation), reported on UK progress towards achieving the Aichi biodiversity targets in 2019.95 It found 14 out of 19 targets were progressing at an “insufficient rate”, including:

51.During our final evidence session, Dr Thérèse Coffey, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Environment, DEFRA, defended the Government’s record on biodiversity, stating that the JNCC reported the UK was “absolutely on track to achieve five of [the Aichi targets] and on 14 there is progress to be made”.99 She described some of the targets as “somewhat nebulous”.100 As an example she said that:

Even on target 1, which is about getting the public to understand more about biodiversity, when I went to CBD [Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of Parties] last year talking with other countries and with the Secretary General, just the name “biodiversity” puts up barriers to people on what does that really mean? There are things that we could do about perhaps changing it to the Convention for the Conservation of Nature.101

52.Progress towards meeting the Aichi targets by 2020 falls woefully short, and meeting only five of them will not protect the UK’s precious wildlife and fragile habitats. We recommend that the Government engage with the public on the next set of targets before the 2020 UN Biodiversity Conference and set out clear priorities for action. The targets should be formally reviewed every four years and the Government should task Natural England and devolved administrations with the responsibility for their domestic delivery.

Government policy and funding

25 Year Plan targets

53.The Government published its 25 Year Environment Plan in January 2018.102 Our inquiry into the Plan concluded that it lacked detail on targets, implementation, governance and funding and it was unlikely its ambitions would be achieved.103 Professor Peter Cox, University of Exeter, told us that “It is important to include in the metrics things we can measure and that we will be held to account on”.104 Dr Mulligan, King’s College London, added that when he read the Plan, he “kept asking: ‘How?’ to those targets as we went through them. ‘How are we going do that? What will be the mechanism?’”.105

54.A second criticism of the Plan was the siloed nature of topics, with the Plan attempting to solve “one problem at a time within different sectors of the economy”.106 Professor Georgina Mace, University College London, stated that: “the actions that are laid out in the 25 Year Plan are nearly all within sectors. […] We will clean up the water, we will stop emissions of particulates into the air, but it is not addressing the systemic problem that these things are all linked together”.107

55.The Government’s 25 Year Plan for the environment sets out actions that the Government intends to take but there are no SMART targets against which its performance can be measured. Legislative targets are needed to drive action across Government Departments and not just DEFRA. We reiterate our previous recommendations that the Environment Bill must include a framework for statutory nature and biodiversity targets and interim milestones to be achieved by Government Departments, including by the Treasury, to help them achieve the Greening Government targets. Once these targets have been established through stakeholder collaboration, the Cabinet Office must issue guidance directing Departments to explain how their work programmes will achieve the delivery of these targets in their Single Departmental Plans and the next round of Greening Government Commitments.

Biodiversity net gain

56.Biodiversity net gain is a commitment that any new construction or development leaves biodiversity in a better state than before. Where a development has an impact on biodiversity it requires developers to provide an increase in natural habitat and ecological features greater than that being lost by construction.

57.The Government’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment explains that strengthening biodiversity net gain requirements would enable planning authorities to “develop locally-led strategies to enhance the natural environment, creating greater certainty and consistency and avoiding increased burdens on developers, including those pursuing small-scale developments”.108 It expects that this should have a net positive impact on overall development.

58.In December 2018, the Government held a consultation on biodiversity net gain, which sought: “views on how we can improve the planning system in England to protect the environment (biodiversity net gain) and build places to live and work”. Kit Malthouse, then Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government), told us that “subject to that consultation coming back, we will mandate [biodiversity net gain] in the upcoming Environment Bill”.109

59.Kit Malthouse also told us that he was intending to embed biodiversity into the planning system. “We will also be bringing out planning guidance in the next two or three months, hopefully, around the [National Planning Policy Framework] and what the local authorities should be looking for and should be interpreting in planning to provide effectively, […] space for nature in new developments and generally across the piece”.110

60.However, this effort is hampered by the significant budget cuts to Natural England, the public body responsible for ensuring protection and improvement of the natural environment. Matt Shardlow noted that Natural England “has suffered 40 per cent or so cuts. It is in a very bad place”.111

The Environment Bill

61.The draft Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill, was published on 19 December 2018 and sets out the future governance arrangements for the environment in England in the event the UK leaves the EU. We heard that sustainable development is already embedded in policy in Wales through the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which requires public bodies to “carry out sustainable development” and meet well-being objectives.112 Witnesses stated that the Future Generations Act was a “pioneering bit of legislation”.113 The Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill is an opportunity for a similar obligation on public bodies in England to embed health and the environment, climate change and sustainable development into their decision making.

62.The second part of the Bill (intended to cover environmental themes other than governance and principles) should contain further details of UK environmental policy. Commentators have set out their hopes for what might be included in the Bill. Greener UK wrote that:

Part II of the bill is essential to deliver the pioneering new green governance system the government has committed to. This must include the creation of a new overarching environmental duty along with binding objectives and a framework for legally binding targets, and the creation of mechanisms to achieve these targets and objectives, including a commitment to the effective spatial mapping, planning and delivery of nature recovery networks, improved cross-government working and new processes for environmental monitoring, reporting and reviewing.114

63.We are disappointed that Natural England has lost half of its budget over the last 10 years. It needs a rapid increase in funding to achieve current objectives. Any new obligations placed under new legislation should be adequately resourced. The Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill is an opportunity to consider holistically the governance frameworks for planetary health in the UK. We recommend that a principle to achieve a high level of environmental protection is put on the face of the Bill and all public bodies be required to achieve this. The Government provided us with the draft version of the first half of the Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill, on which we reported earlier this year. Much of the detail of the Government’s proposals for environmental protection, such as on biodiversity net gain, will be contained in the second half of the Bill and we urge the Government to make this available to the Committee for pre-legislative scrutiny as soon as possible, especially given the severe environmental and public health risks of a no-deal Brexit on October 31st.

64.The Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill should include provision for new targets to increase green and blue urban infrastructure. Our heatwaves report recommended that the revised National Planning Policy Framework should set a target for councils to achieve, which aims to increase urban green space to 2001 levels, and higher if possible.115 This should also be included in the revised National Planning Policy Framework to ensure space for nature and people to help adaptation to climate change.

Agriculture Bill

65.The Agriculture Bill, introduced in 2018, sets out a new payment system for farmers and landowners, should the UK leave the EU. It proposes a system that is based on “public money for public goods” as set out in the policy statement: The future of food, farming and the environment.116

66.We note that the Agriculture Bill was introduced in September 2018, and are disappointed that it has not reached Report stage one year on. We urge the Government to ensure that the Bill is carried over to the next Parliamentary session. Witnesses to this inquiry praised the Bill’s intention to use “public money for public goods”. Professor Cox, University of Exeter, considered that “how you value the relative use of land is really key”.117 Matt Shardlow, Buglife told us:

The concept that we want to invest in public good[s] and put the money into improving the environment, reversing some of those bad things that have happened in the past and also creating new assets and new resources for the public to engage with and to deliver that biodiversity is absolutely right.118

Professor Georgina Mace, University College London, thought that there would need to be “synergies” between the Agriculture Bill and the 25-Year Plan to deliver them “in parallel rather than as two separate plans”.119

67.The Adaptation Committee of the Committee on Climate Change commented in its written evidence that: “With the Government’s Agriculture Bill (and possibly also the proposed Environment Bill) set to direct future policy on agricultural land use, [the Committee on Climate Change’s “Land Use” report] identified the current political climate to be an opportune time to define a better land strategy, including for crop and food production, that responds fully to the challenges of climate change”.120

68.The need for change was outlined by the British Dietetic Association, which said that: “As a proportion of the UK’s [greenhouse gas] output, agriculture and the food system are actually growing, because the sector has remained static while other areas, such as energy and waste, have improved. The Committee on Climate Change has raised its concerns about the fact that the agriculture sector has not seen progress since 2008, with nearly half of farmers not taking any action to reduce GHG emissions. The Committee makes it clear that a stronger framework for this sector is needed as voluntary approaches are not working, especially if the UK wants to meet its own emissions targets”.121

69.Similar concerns were raised about pesticides regulation. When asked whether he thought the Agriculture Bill would allow better management of the rural environment, Matt Shardlow, Buglife, noted:

I certainly hope so. The wording is there in the draft bill… On pesticides, I think it is a little bit more complex. We have talked about how some of these problems are difficult to fix at a national level. Pesticides are one because you are dealing with multinational industry. The United Nations Human Rights Council did a report on pesticides in 2017 that concluded the international trade in pesticides was a human rights abuse. This is because 25 per cent of developing countries have no pesticide regulation whatsoever. We sell them the chemicals we ban here because they damage human health and the environment, and they use them in those countries that have no regulations.122

70.In response to this report, the Government should set out the principles behind the design of the new environmental land management schemes, and the ‘public money for public goods’ principle, should the UK leave the EU as set out in the future for food, farming and the environment policy statement. These should include steps to minimise high pesticide use and actions to align land use, food production and mitigation and adaption to climate change.

71.We were told that UK companies currently sell chemicals to countries with no regulation of pesticides whose use is banned here. UK policy should be consistent at home and abroad. In the event we leave the EU, the Government has said it will replicate the EU REACH system. Any new UK regulations should review pesticide laws. In the meantime, the Government should review pesticide export regulations and ensure that UK businesses protect planetary health and do not export toxic chemicals which are driving wildlife loss globally.


66 Q2

69 Aelys Humphreys et al., Global dataset shows geography and life from predict Modern pant extinction and rediscovery, Nature Ecology and evolution, Vol. 3 (2019), pp.1043–1047

70 LSHTM Planetary Health Alliance (PLA0020)

74 UK Research and Innovation (PLA0024)

76 Medact (PLA0027)

79 Medact (PLA0027)

81 Francisco Sanchez-Bayo and Kris A. G. Wyckhuys, Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers, Biological Conservation, Vol. 232 (2019), pp.8–27

82 Francisco Sanchez-Bayo and Kris A. G. Wyckhuys, Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers, Biological Conservation, Vol. 232 (2019), pp.8–27

88 Gretchen Vogel, ‘Where have all the insects gone?’, Science, (10 May 2017)

89 Committee on Climate Change (PLA0016)

90 Committee on Climate Change (PLA0016)

92 World Health Organization and the Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity, Connecting Global Priorities: Biodiversity and Human Health, (2015)

93 Medact (PLA0027)

94 Medact (PLA0027)

97 Ibid.

98 Ibid.

102 HM Government, A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment, (2018)

103 Environmental Audit Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2017–2019, The Government’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment, HC803

105 Ibid.

106 Ibid.

107 Ibid.

108 HM Government, A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment, (2018)

112 Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, Part 2 Clauses 3(1) and 3(1)(a)

114 Greener UK (DEB0027)

115 Environmental Audit Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2017–19 Heatwaves: adapting to climate change. HC 826, para 91

116 Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, The Future for food, farming, and the environment: policy statement, (2018)

120 Committee on Climate Change (PLA0016)

121 British Dietetic Association (PLA0018)




Published: 17 September 2019