**
The UK government’s newly unveiled strategy for nature restoration in England has been met with significant backlash, branded as “pathetic” and “completely insufficient” by environmental advocates. With just four years remaining until the international commitment to restore 30% of nature by 2030, critics argue that the plan relies too heavily on voluntary participation from private landowners rather than instituting robust legal protections.
A Plan in Crisis
The long-anticipated plan, released on Monday, aims to mobilise landowners to voluntarily enhance and protect natural habitats. This approach, however, has raised concerns among critics who feel that it inadequately addresses the escalating environmental crisis facing the nation. The strategy is aligned with a global commitment made by over 100 nations at the Cop15 summit in Montreal in 2022, which identified the restoration of 30% of nature by 2030 as a crucial minimum target to halt biodiversity loss.
According to government data, only 7% of England’s land currently meets the criteria necessary for the 30by30 goal. While the new plan identifies approximately 32% of the land that could potentially contribute to this target, it acknowledges that significant enhancements in ambition, coordination, and execution are essential to achieve the desired outcomes.
Criticism from Environmental Advocates
Mary Creagh, the Environment Minister, has framed the strategy as a call to action for various stakeholders, including farmers, land managers, and communities, to collaboratively safeguard the natural systems that are vital for a healthy and prosperous society. However, Guy Shrubsole, a prominent nature writer, has lambasted the government’s approach, asserting that it represents a continuation of failed policies from the last four decades. He believes the government is abdicating its responsibility by depending on private landowners to make voluntary commitments.
“It’s pathetic,” Shrubsole stated. “In the twilight of [Keir] Starmer’s government, ministers have openly acknowledged their failure to meet their own targets for nature restoration in England. Instead of presenting a comprehensive plan with innovative policies, they’ve resorted to a desperate plea for voluntary action from landowners.”
Echoing these sentiments, the RSPB has described the strategy as “deeply disappointing and completely insufficient.” The plan does refer to sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) as crucial components of the restoration effort but lacks specific plans or timelines for the establishment of new SSSIs.
The Church of England’s Role
Adding to the complexity of the situation, the Church of England, one of the country’s largest landowners, is set to vote on a motion advocating for the rewilding of 30% of its land by 2030. Rev Canon Val Plumb, who will introduce the motion at the upcoming General Synod, emphasized the urgent need for action, stating that the land is “crying and dying out for liberation.” Currently, only 3.5% of the Church’s land is designated for nature restoration, a figure Plumb deems wholly inadequate.
Nevertheless, there are dissenting voices within the Church. William Nye, Secretary General of the Archbishops’ Council, has expressed concerns that the motion conflicts with the Church’s legal obligations, which prioritise long-term capital growth. Veteran Conservative environmentalist Ben Goldsmith has similarly dismissed the motion, arguing that there are numerous revenue opportunities from nature that have emerged in recent years.
Environmental advocate Chris Packham points to the skewed land ownership in England, with 50% of land controlled by merely 1% of the population, as a significant barrier to reaching the national 30by30 target. He argues that the Church should play a pivotal role in rewilding its extensive land holdings, much of which is currently allocated to industrial farming.
Legal Opinions and Future Considerations
For the motion to pass, it will require majority support from the 480 members of the synod. The Church Commissioners, responsible for managing the Church’s endowment fund, maintain that their current strategy for managing farmland aligns with their legal duties. However, a legal opinion commissioned by the Wild Card campaign group suggests that the Church is legally entitled to pursue the 30by30 target and should do so promptly to avoid litigation.
In response to these criticisms, the Church Commissioners acknowledged the importance of the 30by30 target but highlighted that their focus is primarily on sustainable farming, forestry, renewable energy, and fostering thriving communities, rather than solely on conservation.
Why it Matters
The government’s failure to take decisive action on nature restoration has far-reaching implications that extend beyond mere environmental concerns. As biodiversity continues to decline at alarming rates, the repercussions will inevitably affect food security, water quality, and overall ecosystem health. The reliance on voluntary measures from landowners raises questions about the effectiveness of this approach in genuinely addressing the nature crisis. As the clock ticks down to the 2030 deadline, the need for a comprehensive and enforceable strategy has never been more urgent. The choices made today will shape the environmental legacy for generations to come.
