Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Ancient DNA Decoded: Tracing Neurodegenerative Diseases to Prehistoric Herders

News Feed
Thursday, April 25, 2024

The new study has found the genes that significantly increase a person’s risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS) were introduced into north-western Europe around 5,000 years ago by sheep and cattle herders migrating from the east. Credit: SayoStudioA significant study reveals that genes associated with multiple sclerosis were introduced to north-western Europe 5,000 years ago by migrating livestock herders, impacting modern susceptibility to the disease.Researchers have created the world’s largest ancient human gene bank by analyzing the bones and teeth of almost 5,000 humans who lived across Western Europe and Asia up to 34,000 years ago.By sequencing ancient human DNA and comparing it to modern-day samples, the international team of experts mapped the historical spread of genes – and diseases – over time as populations migrated. The ‘astounding’ results have been revealed in four trailblazing research papers published in the journal Nature and provide new biological understanding of debilitating disorders.The extraordinary study involved a large international team led by Professor Eske Willerslev at the Universities of Cambridge and Copenhagen, Professor Thomas Werge at the University of Copenhagen, and Professor Rasmus Nielsen at University of California, Berkeley, and involved contributions from 175 researchers from around the globe.The scientists found:The startling origins of neurodegenerative diseases including multiple sclerosisWhy northern Europeans today are taller than people from southern EuropeHow major migration around 5,000 years ago introduced risk genes into the population in north-western Europe – leaving a legacy of higher rates of MS todayCarrying the MS gene was an advantage at the time as it protected ancient farmers from catching infectious diseases from their sheep and cattleGenes known to increase the risk of diseases such as Alzheimer’s and type 2 diabetes were traced back to hunter gatherersFuture analysis is hoped to reveal more about the genetic markers of autism, ADHD, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depressionNorthern Europe has the highest prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the world. A new study has found the genes that significantly increase a person’s risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS) were introduced into north-western Europe around 5,000 years ago by sheep and cattle herders migrating from the east.By analyzing the DNA of ancient human bones and teeth, found at documented locations across Eurasia, researchers traced the geographical spread of MS from its origins on the Pontic Steppe (a region spanning parts of what are now Ukraine, South-West Russia, and the West Kazakhstan Region).They found that the genetic variants associated with a risk of developing MS ‘traveled’ with the Yamnaya people – livestock herders who migrated over the Pontic Steppe into North-Western Europe.These genetic variants provided a survival advantage to the Yamnaya people, most likely by protecting them from catching infections from their sheep and cattle. But they also increased the risk of developing MS.“It must have been a distinct advantage for the Yamnaya people to carry the MS risk genes, even after arriving in Europe, despite the fact that these genes undeniably increased their risk of developing MS,” said Professor Eske Willerslev, jointly at the Universities of Cambridge and Copenhagen and a Fellow of St John’s College, an expert in analysis of ancient DNA and Director of the project.He added: “These results change our view of the causes of multiple sclerosis and have implications for the way it is treated.”The age of specimens ranges from the Mesolithic and Neolithic through the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Viking period into the Middle Ages. The oldest genome in the data set is from an individual who lived approximately 34,000 years ago.The findings provide an explanation for the ‘North-South Gradient’, in which there are around twice as many modern-day cases of MS in northern Europe than in southern Europe, which has long been a mystery to researchers.From a genetic perspective, the Yamnaya people are thought to be the ancestors of the present-day inhabitants of much of North-Western Europe. Their genetic influence on today’s population of southern Europe is much weaker.Previous studies have identified 233 genetic variants that increase the risk of developing MS. These variants, also affected by environmental and lifestyle factors, increase disease risk by around 30 percent. The new research found that this modern-day genetic risk profile for MS is also present in bones and teeth that are thousands of years old.“These results astounded us all. They provide a huge leap forward in our understanding of the evolution of MS and other autoimmune diseases. Showing how the lifestyles of our ancestors impacted modern disease risk just highlights how much we are the recipients of ancient immune systems in a modern world,” said Dr William Barrie, a postdoc in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and co-author of the paper.Multiple sclerosis is a neurodegenerative disease in which the body’s immune system mistakenly attacks the ‘insulation’ surrounding the nerve fibres of the brain and spinal cord. This causes symptom flares known as relapses as well as longer-term degeneration, known as progression.Professor Lars Fugger, a co-author of the MS study professor and consultant physician at John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, said: “This means we can now understand and seek to treat MS for what it actually is: the result of a genetic adaptation to certain environmental conditions that occurred back in our prehistory.”Professor Astrid Iversen, another co-author based at the University of Oxford, said: “We now lead very different lives to those of our ancestors in terms of hygiene, diet, and medical treatment options and this combined with our evolutionary history means we may be more susceptible to certain diseases than our ancestors were, including autoimmune diseases such as MS.”The Lundbeck Foundation GeoGenetics Centre – the resource underpinning the discoveriesThe new findings were made possible by the analysis of data held in a unique gene bank of ancient DNA, created by the researchers over the past five years with funding from the Lundbeck Foundation.This is the first gene bank of its kind in the world and already it has enabled fascinating new insights in areas from ancient human migrations, to genetically-determined risk profiles for the development of brain disorders.By analyzing the bones and teeth of almost 5,000 ancient humans, held in museum collections across Europe and Western Asia, the researchers generated DNA profiles ranging across the Mesolithic and Neolithic through the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Viking period into the Middle Ages. They compared the ancient DNA data to modern DNA from 400,000 people living in Britain, held in the UK Biobank.“Creating a gene bank of ancient DNA from Eurasia’s past human inhabitants was a colossal project, involving collaboration with museums across the region,” said Willerslev.He added: “We’ve demonstrated that our gene bank works as a precision tool that can give us new insights into human diseases, when combined with analyses of present-day human DNA data and inputs from several other research fields. That in itself is amazing, and there’s no doubt it has many applications beyond MS research.”The team now plans to investigate other neurological conditions including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, and psychiatric disorders including ADHD and schizophrenia.They have received requests from disease researchers across the world for access to the ancient DNA profiles, and eventually aim to make the gene bank open access.The research was funded by a €8M grant from the Lundbeck Foundation, and conducted at the Lundbeck Foundation Geogenetics Centre at the University of Copenhagen.Jan Egebjerg, Director of Research at the Lundbeck Foundation, said: “The rationale for awarding such a large research grant to this project, as the Lundbeck Foundation did back in 2018, was that if it all worked out, it would represent a trail-blazing means of gaining a deeper understanding of how the genetic architecture underlying brain disorders evolved over time. And brain disorders are our specific focus area.”References:“Elevated genetic risk for multiple sclerosis emerged in steppe pastoralist populations” by William Barrie, Yaoling Yang, Evan K. Irving-Pease, Kathrine E. Attfield, Gabriele Scorrano, Lise Torp Jensen, Angelos P. Armen, Evangelos Antonios Dimopoulos, Aaron Stern, Alba Refoyo-Martinez, Alice Pearson, Abigail Ramsøe, Charleen Gaunitz, Fabrice Demeter, Marie Louise S. Jørkov, Stig Bermann Møller, Bente Springborg, Lutz Klassen, Inger Marie Hyldgård, Niels Wickmann, Lasse Vinner, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Kristian Kristiansen, Santiago Rodriguez, Rasmus Nielsen, Astrid K. N. Iversen, Daniel J. Lawson, Lars Fugger and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06618-z“The selection landscape and genetic legacy of ancient Eurasians” by Evan K. Irving-Pease, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, William Barrie, Andrés Ingason, Alice Pearson, Anders Fischer, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Alma S. Halgren, Ruairidh Macleod, Fabrice Demeter, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Andrew H. Vaughn, Leo Speidel, Aaron J. Stern, Gabriele Scorrano, Abigail Ramsøe, Andrew J. Schork, Anders Rosengren, Lei Zhao, Kristian Kristiansen, Astrid K. N. Iversen, Lars Fugger, Peter H. Sudmant, Daniel J. Lawson, Richard Durbin, Thorfinn Korneliussen, Thomas Werge, Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Rasmus Nielsen, Fernando Racimo and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06705-1“Population genomics of post-glacial western Eurasia” by Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, Evan K. Irving-Pease, Anders Fischer, William Barrie, Andrés Ingason, Jesper Stenderup, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Alice Pearson, Bárbara Sousa da Mota, Bettina Schulz Paulsson, Alma Halgren, Ruairidh Macleod, Marie Louise Schjellerup Jørkov, Fabrice Demeter, Lasse Sørensen, Poul Otto Nielsen, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Ashot Margaryan, Melissa Ilardo, Andrew Vaughn, Morten Fischer Mortensen, Anne Birgitte Nielsen, Mikkel Ulfeldt Hede, Niels Nørkjær Johannsen, Peter Rasmussen, Lasse Vinner, Gabriel Renaud, Aaron Stern, Theis Zetner Trolle Jensen, Gabriele Scorrano, Hannes Schroeder, Per Lysdahl, Abigail Daisy Ramsøe, Andrei Skorobogatov, Andrew Joseph Schork, Anders Rosengren, Anthony Ruter, Alan Outram, Aleksey A. Timoshenko, Alexandra Buzhilova, Alfredo Coppa, Alisa Zubova, Ana Maria Silva, Anders J. Hansen, Andrey Gromov, Andrey Logvin, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Bjarne Henning Nielsen, Borja González-Rabanal, Carles Lalueza-Fox, Catriona J. McKenzie, Charleen Gaunitz, Concepción Blasco, Corina Liesau, Cristina Martinez-Labarga, Dmitri V. Pozdnyakov, David Cuenca-Solana, David O. Lordkipanidze, Dmitri En’shin, Domingo C. Salazar-García, T. Douglas Price, Dušan Borić, Elena Kostyleva, Elizaveta V. Veselovskaya, Emma R. Usmanova, Enrico Cappellini, Erik Brinch Petersen, Esben Kannegaard, Francesca Radina, Fulya Eylem Yediay, Henri Duday, Igor Gutiérrez-Zugasti, Ilya Merts, Inna Potekhina, Irina Shevnina, Isin Altinkaya, Jean Guilaine, Jesper Hansen, Joan Emili Aura Tortosa, João Zilhão, Jorge Vega, Kristoffer Buck Pedersen, Krzysztof Tunia, Lei Zhao, Liudmila N. Mylnikova, Lars Larsson, Laure Metz, Levon Yepiskoposyan, Lisbeth Pedersen, Lucia Sarti, Ludovic Orlando, Ludovic Slimak, Lutz Klassen, Malou Blank, Manuel González-Morales, Mara Silvestrini, Maria Vretemark, Marina S. Nesterova, Marina Rykun, Mario Federico Rolfo, Marzena Szmyt, Marcin Przybyła, Mauro Calattini, Mikhail Sablin, Miluše Dobisíková, Morten Meldgaard, Morten Johansen, Natalia Berezina, Nick Card, Nikolai A. Saveliev, Olga Poshekhonova, Olga Rickards, Olga V. Lozovskaya, Olivér Gábor, Otto Christian Uldum, Paola Aurino, Pavel Kosintsev, Patrice Courtaud, Patricia Ríos, Peder Mortensen, Per Lotz, Per Persson, Pernille Bangsgaard, Peter de Barros Damgaard, Peter Vang Petersen, Pilar Prieto Martinez, Piotr Włodarczak, Roman V. Smolyaninov, Rikke Maring, Roberto Menduiña, Ruben Badalyan, Rune Iversen, Ruslan Turin, Sergey Vasilyev, Sidsel Wåhlin, Svetlana Borutskaya, Svetlana Skochina, Søren Anker Sørensen, Søren H. Andersen, Thomas Jørgensen, Yuri B. Serikov, Vyacheslav I. Molodin, Vaclav Smrcka, Victor Merts, Vivek Appadurai, Vyacheslav Moiseyev, Yvonne Magnusson, Kurt H. Kjær, Niels Lynnerup, Daniel J. Lawson, Peter H. Sudmant, Simon Rasmussen, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Richard Durbin, Rasmus Nielsen, Olivier Delaneau, Thomas Werge, Fernando Racimo, Kristian Kristiansen and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06865-0“100 ancient genomes show repeated population turnovers in Neolithic Denmark” by Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Anders Fischer, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Andrés Ingason, Ruairidh Macleod, Anders Rosengren, Bettina Schulz Paulsson, Marie Louise Schjellerup Jørkov, Maria Novosolov, Jesper Stenderup, T. Douglas Price, Morten Fischer Mortensen, Anne Birgitte Nielsen, Mikkel Ulfeldt Hede, Lasse Sørensen, Poul Otto Nielsen, Peter Rasmussen, Theis Zetner Trolle Jensen, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, Evan K. Irving-Pease, William Barrie, Alice Pearson, Bárbara Sousa da Mota, Fabrice Demeter, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Andrew Vaughn, Lasse Vinner, Gabriel Renaud, Aaron Stern, Niels Nørkjær Johannsen, Abigail Daisy Ramsøe, Andrew Joseph Schork, Anthony Ruter, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Bjarne Henning Nielsen, Erik Brinch Petersen, Esben Kannegaard, Jesper Hansen, Kristoffer Buck Pedersen, Lisbeth Pedersen, Lutz Klassen, Morten Meldgaard, Morten Johansen, Otto Christian Uldum, Per Lotz, Per Lysdahl, Pernille Bangsgaard, Peter Vang Petersen, Rikke Maring, Rune Iversen, Sidsel Wåhlin, Søren Anker Sørensen, Søren H. Andersen, Thomas Jørgensen, Niels Lynnerup, Daniel J. Lawson, Simon Rasmussen, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Kurt H. Kjær, Richard Durbin, Rasmus Nielsen, Olivier Delaneau, Thomas Werge, Kristian Kristiansen and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06862-3

A significant study reveals that genes associated with multiple sclerosis were introduced to north-western Europe 5,000 years ago by migrating livestock herders, impacting modern susceptibility...

Ancient Migration Across Europe Illustration

The new study has found the genes that significantly increase a person’s risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS) were introduced into north-western Europe around 5,000 years ago by sheep and cattle herders migrating from the east. Credit: SayoStudio

A significant study reveals that genes associated with multiple sclerosis were introduced to north-western Europe 5,000 years ago by migrating livestock herders, impacting modern susceptibility to the disease.

Researchers have created the world’s largest ancient human gene bank by analyzing the bones and teeth of almost 5,000 humans who lived across Western Europe and Asia up to 34,000 years ago.

By sequencing ancient human DNA and comparing it to modern-day samples, the international team of experts mapped the historical spread of genes – and diseases – over time as populations migrated.

The ‘astounding’ results have been revealed in four trailblazing research papers published in the journal Nature and provide new biological understanding of debilitating disorders.

The extraordinary study involved a large international team led by Professor Eske Willerslev at the Universities of Cambridge and Copenhagen, Professor Thomas Werge at the University of Copenhagen, and Professor Rasmus Nielsen at University of California, Berkeley, and involved contributions from 175 researchers from around the globe.

The scientists found:

  • The startling origins of neurodegenerative diseases including multiple sclerosis
  • Why northern Europeans today are taller than people from southern Europe
  • How major migration around 5,000 years ago introduced risk genes into the population in north-western Europe – leaving a legacy of higher rates of MS today
  • Carrying the MS gene was an advantage at the time as it protected ancient farmers from catching infectious diseases from their sheep and cattle
  • Genes known to increase the risk of diseases such as Alzheimer’s and type 2 diabetes were traced back to hunter gatherers
  • Future analysis is hoped to reveal more about the genetic markers of autism, ADHD, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression

Northern Europe has the highest prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the world. A new study has found the genes that significantly increase a person’s risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS) were introduced into north-western Europe around 5,000 years ago by sheep and cattle herders migrating from the east.

By analyzing the DNA of ancient human bones and teeth, found at documented locations across Eurasia, researchers traced the geographical spread of MS from its origins on the Pontic Steppe (a region spanning parts of what are now Ukraine, South-West Russia, and the West Kazakhstan Region).

They found that the genetic variants associated with a risk of developing MS ‘traveled’ with the Yamnaya people – livestock herders who migrated over the Pontic Steppe into North-Western Europe.

These genetic variants provided a survival advantage to the Yamnaya people, most likely by protecting them from catching infections from their sheep and cattle. But they also increased the risk of developing MS.

“It must have been a distinct advantage for the Yamnaya people to carry the MS risk genes, even after arriving in Europe, despite the fact that these genes undeniably increased their risk of developing MS,” said Professor Eske Willerslev, jointly at the Universities of Cambridge and Copenhagen and a Fellow of St John’s College, an expert in analysis of ancient DNA and Director of the project.

He added: “These results change our view of the causes of multiple sclerosis and have implications for the way it is treated.”

The age of specimens ranges from the Mesolithic and Neolithic through the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Viking period into the Middle Ages. The oldest genome in the data set is from an individual who lived approximately 34,000 years ago.

The findings provide an explanation for the ‘North-South Gradient’, in which there are around twice as many modern-day cases of MS in northern Europe than in southern Europe, which has long been a mystery to researchers.

From a genetic perspective, the Yamnaya people are thought to be the ancestors of the present-day inhabitants of much of North-Western Europe. Their genetic influence on today’s population of southern Europe is much weaker.

Previous studies have identified 233 genetic variants that increase the risk of developing MS. These variants, also affected by environmental and lifestyle factors, increase disease risk by around 30 percent. The new research found that this modern-day genetic risk profile for MS is also present in bones and teeth that are thousands of years old.

“These results astounded us all. They provide a huge leap forward in our understanding of the evolution of MS and other autoimmune diseases. Showing how the lifestyles of our ancestors impacted modern disease risk just highlights how much we are the recipients of ancient immune systems in a modern world,” said Dr William Barrie, a postdoc in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and co-author of the paper.

Multiple sclerosis is a neurodegenerative disease in which the body’s immune system mistakenly attacks the ‘insulation’ surrounding the nerve fibres of the brain and spinal cord. This causes symptom flares known as relapses as well as longer-term degeneration, known as progression.

Professor Lars Fugger, a co-author of the MS study professor and consultant physician at John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, said: “This means we can now understand and seek to treat MS for what it actually is: the result of a genetic adaptation to certain environmental conditions that occurred back in our prehistory.”

Professor Astrid Iversen, another co-author based at the University of Oxford, said: “We now lead very different lives to those of our ancestors in terms of hygiene, diet, and medical treatment options and this combined with our evolutionary history means we may be more susceptible to certain diseases than our ancestors were, including autoimmune diseases such as MS.”

The Lundbeck Foundation GeoGenetics Centre – the resource underpinning the discoveries

The new findings were made possible by the analysis of data held in a unique gene bank of ancient DNA, created by the researchers over the past five years with funding from the Lundbeck Foundation.

This is the first gene bank of its kind in the world and already it has enabled fascinating new insights in areas from ancient human migrations, to genetically-determined risk profiles for the development of brain disorders.

By analyzing the bones and teeth of almost 5,000 ancient humans, held in museum collections across Europe and Western Asia, the researchers generated DNA profiles ranging across the Mesolithic and Neolithic through the Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Viking period into the Middle Ages. They compared the ancient DNA data to modern DNA from 400,000 people living in Britain, held in the UK Biobank.

“Creating a gene bank of ancient DNA from Eurasia’s past human inhabitants was a colossal project, involving collaboration with museums across the region,” said Willerslev.

He added: “We’ve demonstrated that our gene bank works as a precision tool that can give us new insights into human diseases, when combined with analyses of present-day human DNA data and inputs from several other research fields. That in itself is amazing, and there’s no doubt it has many applications beyond MS research.”

The team now plans to investigate other neurological conditions including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, and psychiatric disorders including ADHD and schizophrenia.

They have received requests from disease researchers across the world for access to the ancient DNA profiles, and eventually aim to make the gene bank open access.

The research was funded by a €8M grant from the Lundbeck Foundation, and conducted at the Lundbeck Foundation Geogenetics Centre at the University of Copenhagen.

Jan Egebjerg, Director of Research at the Lundbeck Foundation, said: “The rationale for awarding such a large research grant to this project, as the Lundbeck Foundation did back in 2018, was that if it all worked out, it would represent a trail-blazing means of gaining a deeper understanding of how the genetic architecture underlying brain disorders evolved over time. And brain disorders are our specific focus area.”

References:

  1. “Elevated genetic risk for multiple sclerosis emerged in steppe pastoralist populations” by William Barrie, Yaoling Yang, Evan K. Irving-Pease, Kathrine E. Attfield, Gabriele Scorrano, Lise Torp Jensen, Angelos P. Armen, Evangelos Antonios Dimopoulos, Aaron Stern, Alba Refoyo-Martinez, Alice Pearson, Abigail Ramsøe, Charleen Gaunitz, Fabrice Demeter, Marie Louise S. Jørkov, Stig Bermann Møller, Bente Springborg, Lutz Klassen, Inger Marie Hyldgård, Niels Wickmann, Lasse Vinner, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Kristian Kristiansen, Santiago Rodriguez, Rasmus Nielsen, Astrid K. N. Iversen, Daniel J. Lawson, Lars Fugger and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06618-z
  2. “The selection landscape and genetic legacy of ancient Eurasians” by Evan K. Irving-Pease, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, William Barrie, Andrés Ingason, Alice Pearson, Anders Fischer, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Alma S. Halgren, Ruairidh Macleod, Fabrice Demeter, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Andrew H. Vaughn, Leo Speidel, Aaron J. Stern, Gabriele Scorrano, Abigail Ramsøe, Andrew J. Schork, Anders Rosengren, Lei Zhao, Kristian Kristiansen, Astrid K. N. Iversen, Lars Fugger, Peter H. Sudmant, Daniel J. Lawson, Richard Durbin, Thorfinn Korneliussen, Thomas Werge, Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Rasmus Nielsen, Fernando Racimo and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06705-1
  3. “Population genomics of post-glacial western Eurasia” by Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, Evan K. Irving-Pease, Anders Fischer, William Barrie, Andrés Ingason, Jesper Stenderup, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Alice Pearson, Bárbara Sousa da Mota, Bettina Schulz Paulsson, Alma Halgren, Ruairidh Macleod, Marie Louise Schjellerup Jørkov, Fabrice Demeter, Lasse Sørensen, Poul Otto Nielsen, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Ashot Margaryan, Melissa Ilardo, Andrew Vaughn, Morten Fischer Mortensen, Anne Birgitte Nielsen, Mikkel Ulfeldt Hede, Niels Nørkjær Johannsen, Peter Rasmussen, Lasse Vinner, Gabriel Renaud, Aaron Stern, Theis Zetner Trolle Jensen, Gabriele Scorrano, Hannes Schroeder, Per Lysdahl, Abigail Daisy Ramsøe, Andrei Skorobogatov, Andrew Joseph Schork, Anders Rosengren, Anthony Ruter, Alan Outram, Aleksey A. Timoshenko, Alexandra Buzhilova, Alfredo Coppa, Alisa Zubova, Ana Maria Silva, Anders J. Hansen, Andrey Gromov, Andrey Logvin, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Bjarne Henning Nielsen, Borja González-Rabanal, Carles Lalueza-Fox, Catriona J. McKenzie, Charleen Gaunitz, Concepción Blasco, Corina Liesau, Cristina Martinez-Labarga, Dmitri V. Pozdnyakov, David Cuenca-Solana, David O. Lordkipanidze, Dmitri En’shin, Domingo C. Salazar-García, T. Douglas Price, Dušan Borić, Elena Kostyleva, Elizaveta V. Veselovskaya, Emma R. Usmanova, Enrico Cappellini, Erik Brinch Petersen, Esben Kannegaard, Francesca Radina, Fulya Eylem Yediay, Henri Duday, Igor Gutiérrez-Zugasti, Ilya Merts, Inna Potekhina, Irina Shevnina, Isin Altinkaya, Jean Guilaine, Jesper Hansen, Joan Emili Aura Tortosa, João Zilhão, Jorge Vega, Kristoffer Buck Pedersen, Krzysztof Tunia, Lei Zhao, Liudmila N. Mylnikova, Lars Larsson, Laure Metz, Levon Yepiskoposyan, Lisbeth Pedersen, Lucia Sarti, Ludovic Orlando, Ludovic Slimak, Lutz Klassen, Malou Blank, Manuel González-Morales, Mara Silvestrini, Maria Vretemark, Marina S. Nesterova, Marina Rykun, Mario Federico Rolfo, Marzena Szmyt, Marcin Przybyła, Mauro Calattini, Mikhail Sablin, Miluše Dobisíková, Morten Meldgaard, Morten Johansen, Natalia Berezina, Nick Card, Nikolai A. Saveliev, Olga Poshekhonova, Olga Rickards, Olga V. Lozovskaya, Olivér Gábor, Otto Christian Uldum, Paola Aurino, Pavel Kosintsev, Patrice Courtaud, Patricia Ríos, Peder Mortensen, Per Lotz, Per Persson, Pernille Bangsgaard, Peter de Barros Damgaard, Peter Vang Petersen, Pilar Prieto Martinez, Piotr Włodarczak, Roman V. Smolyaninov, Rikke Maring, Roberto Menduiña, Ruben Badalyan, Rune Iversen, Ruslan Turin, Sergey Vasilyev, Sidsel Wåhlin, Svetlana Borutskaya, Svetlana Skochina, Søren Anker Sørensen, Søren H. Andersen, Thomas Jørgensen, Yuri B. Serikov, Vyacheslav I. Molodin, Vaclav Smrcka, Victor Merts, Vivek Appadurai, Vyacheslav Moiseyev, Yvonne Magnusson, Kurt H. Kjær, Niels Lynnerup, Daniel J. Lawson, Peter H. Sudmant, Simon Rasmussen, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Richard Durbin, Rasmus Nielsen, Olivier Delaneau, Thomas Werge, Fernando Racimo, Kristian Kristiansen and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06865-0
  4. “100 ancient genomes show repeated population turnovers in Neolithic Denmark” by Morten E. Allentoft, Martin Sikora, Anders Fischer, Karl-Göran Sjögren, Andrés Ingason, Ruairidh Macleod, Anders Rosengren, Bettina Schulz Paulsson, Marie Louise Schjellerup Jørkov, Maria Novosolov, Jesper Stenderup, T. Douglas Price, Morten Fischer Mortensen, Anne Birgitte Nielsen, Mikkel Ulfeldt Hede, Lasse Sørensen, Poul Otto Nielsen, Peter Rasmussen, Theis Zetner Trolle Jensen, Alba Refoyo-Martínez, Evan K. Irving-Pease, William Barrie, Alice Pearson, Bárbara Sousa da Mota, Fabrice Demeter, Rasmus A. Henriksen, Tharsika Vimala, Hugh McColl, Andrew Vaughn, Lasse Vinner, Gabriel Renaud, Aaron Stern, Niels Nørkjær Johannsen, Abigail Daisy Ramsøe, Andrew Joseph Schork, Anthony Ruter, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Bjarne Henning Nielsen, Erik Brinch Petersen, Esben Kannegaard, Jesper Hansen, Kristoffer Buck Pedersen, Lisbeth Pedersen, Lutz Klassen, Morten Meldgaard, Morten Johansen, Otto Christian Uldum, Per Lotz, Per Lysdahl, Pernille Bangsgaard, Peter Vang Petersen, Rikke Maring, Rune Iversen, Sidsel Wåhlin, Søren Anker Sørensen, Søren H. Andersen, Thomas Jørgensen, Niels Lynnerup, Daniel J. Lawson, Simon Rasmussen, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Kurt H. Kjær, Richard Durbin, Rasmus Nielsen, Olivier Delaneau, Thomas Werge, Kristian Kristiansen and Eske Willerslev, 10 January 2024, Nature.
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06862-3

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Nature not a blocker to housing growth, inquiry finds

Commons committee report challenges ‘lazy narrative’ used by ministers that scapegoats wildlife and the environmentNature is not a blocker to housing growth, an inquiry by MPs has found, in direct conflict with claims made by ministers.Toby Perkins, the Labour chair of the environmental audit committee, said nature was being scapegoated, and that rather than being a block to growth, it was necessary for building resilient towns and neighbourhoods. Continue reading...

Nature is not a blocker to housing growth, an inquiry by MPs has found, in direct conflict with claims made by ministers.Toby Perkins, the Labour chair of the environmental audit committee, said nature was being scapegoated, and that rather than being a block to growth, it was necessary for building resilient towns and neighbourhoods.In its report on environmental sustainability and housing growth, the cross-party committee challenged the “lazy narrative”, which has been promoted by UK government ministers, that nature was a blocker or an inconvenience to delivering housing.The report said severe skills shortages in ecology, planning and construction would be what made it impossible for the government to deliver on its housebuilding ambitions.Perkins said: “The government’s target to build 1.5m homes by the end of this parliament is incredibly ambitious. Achieving it alongside our existing targets on climate and sustainability – which are set in law – will require effort on a scale not seen before.“That certainly will not be achieved by scapegoating nature, claiming that it is a ‘blocker’ to housing delivery. We are clear in our report: a healthy environment is essential to building resilient towns and cities. It must not be sidelined.”skip past newsletter promotionOur morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionExperts say the planning and infrastructure bill – in its final stages before being passed into law – rolls back environmental law to allow developers to sidestep the need for surveys and mitigation on the site of any environmental damage by paying into a central nature recovery fund for improvements to be made elsewhere.Ecologists, environmental groups and some MPs have been fighting for changes to the draft legislation to keep protections for wildlife and rare habitats as they are. But the secretary of state for housing, Steve Reed, told MPs to vote down the changes during a Commons vote on the bill this week.The committee said it had concerns that the legislation as drafted would mean the government would miss its legally defined target to halt the decline of nature by 2030 and reverse it by 2042.The report found that local planning authorities were severely underresourced in ecological skills. It heard evidence that staff at Natural England were “stretched to their limits”, that the skills needed to deliver the ecological aspects of planning reforms “simply do not exist at the scale, quality or capacity that is needed”.This comes as Natural England will take on a major role in planning under the government’s changes. The body will oversee the national nature restoration fund, which will be funded by developers and will enable builders to sidestep environmental obligations at a particular site – even if it is a landscape protected for its wildlife.Critics of the bill have questioned the conflict of interest in giving Natural England new funds from developers while expecting the body to regulate their actions.

Where’s nature positive? Australia must ensure environment reforms work to restore what’s been lost

Australia is among many countries working to protect and restore nature at scale. But long-awaited environmental law reforms won’t help much as they stand.

Kai Wing Yiu/GettyFor decades, conservation was focused on stemming how much nature was being lost. But a new era of nature positive environmental policy is taking hold worldwide, shifting from preventing further harm to restoring what’s been lost. In 2022, almost 200 countries signed up to the goal of 30 by 30 – restoring 30% of lands and seas by 2030. Globally, the goal is to restore an area almost the size of India. Australia is working towards this international goal of increasing protection and restoring the highest priority areas under its Strategy for Nature. Over the last two centuries, Australia has already lost much biodiversity. Laws should play a key role in protecting and restoring nature. But Australia’s national Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is not currently fit for purpose. The 2020 Samuel Review concluded the existing laws do not “facilitate the maintenance or restoration of the environment”. In 2022, the Australian government promised to reverse the decline of nature with new nature positive laws which would repair ecosystems and help species recover. Shortly afterwards, parliament created a national Nature Repair Market to provide incentives for land managers to restore degraded ecosystems. After a failed attempt at reform last year, the federal government last week announced its long-awaited broader reform package. In introducing the bill, Environment Minister Murray Watt said the laws would enable “stronger environmental protection and restoration”. Will these reforms be a game changer for restoration? It’s not so clear. Protecting habitat isn’t enough – restoration will be essential to stop the decline of nature. Adam Campbell/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND What would the proposed laws do for restoration? Labor’s reform bills run to over 550 pages. This level of complexity means it’s hard to give a definitive answer on what the reforms would do for restoration. At this stage, it appears that while the package contains long-awaited reforms, it falls short on ecosystem restoration. The cornerstone of the reforms will be a new power for the Environment Minister to create National Environmental Standards, as called for in the Samuel Review. Once in place, they would work by requiring environment approvals not to be inconsistent with any standard. These standards have been watered down somewhat. The Samuel Review recommended binding national standards which would outline clear requirements for protecting endangered species and other nationally significant matters. Under the current reforms, the minister is not obliged to make any standards and environment approvals need only be “not inconsistent” with them. The reform package continues Australia’s reliance on environmental offsets – the practice of allowing developers to destroy habitat in one place by “compensating” for it by restoring habitat elsewhere. The text of the draft bills suggests a developer must compensate for any long-lasting significant impact through offsets or paying a restoration contribution. The goal is to have a net gain for nature. This sounds promising, but the concept of “net gain” is unclear and the focus on offsets still assumes the loss of nature somewhere. A better option would be if developers were legally required to explore ways to avoid or mitigate environmental damage first before relying on offsets. While the minister must “consider” this hierarchy of options in making decisions, they’re not actually obliged to apply it. Overall, this is disappointing. Rather than creating new incentives for restoration at a landscape scale, restoration work will instead be linked to the traditional legal model of approval for specific, environmentally degrading projects through the use of offsets and restoration elsewhere. The new “restoration contributions” scheme is even more troubling. It would allow developers to contribute to an offset fund rather than undertake the work themselves. This would be a shortcut, allowing developers to pay for environmental destruction. Offsets should only be used where habitat can genuinely be replaced. But as they stand, these reforms don’t require assessment of whether offsets are even feasible for a particular project. Biodiversity offsets have also been thoroughly criticised for their failure to prevent loss of nature, let alone generate nature positive outcomes. The reforms would also allow biodiversity certificates issued under the Nature Repair Market to serve as offsets, despite the government ruling this out in 2023. Linking the nature repair market to offsets may divert investment away from some types of restoration projects. It diminishes the net gain from voluntary restoration when the results merely compensate for a loss elsewhere. Planning across landscapes To boost ecological restoration, the Samuel Review recommended better planning at the national and regional scale. Taking a zoomed-out view would help environmental planners connect habitat, safeguard climate refuges and protect critical habitat on a landscape scale. These new reforms seem to be a step forward on this front. The minister, though, would retain a power to make bioregional plans at their discretion. If plans are made under the environment laws, they should specify zones for development and areas where restoration will be undertaken. It’s heartening to see restoration included in these plans. The problem is, restoration is still tied to land-degrading activities such as mining or land clearing. That is, it’s done as a response to new damage caused to the environment, not to repair already degraded landscapes. Landscape-scale planning will be essential in arresting nature’s decline. Ant Le Breton/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND Time for a new model What’s missing from the proposed reforms is a positive agenda to address Australia’s deep historic losses of nature. As the draft laws are debated in parliament, the best outcome would be if clear measures to actually restore nature at landscape-scale and to do it actively, rather than as a response to development damage. An excellent example Australia could look to is the European Union’s Nature Restoration Law adopted last year. It sets ambitious targets to restore the EU’s heavily degraded ecosystems: 30% by 2030, 90% by 2050. The targets would help restore biodiversity while combating climate change and boosting nature-based adaptation. Under the law, EU states must prepare their own national restoration plans. Prototype ecosystem restoration laws are also being developed by the international Society for Ecological Restoration. After decades of decline and species loss, Australians deserve environment laws which genuinely protect and restore unique wildlife and ecosystems. The government’s proposed reforms have promise. But they don’t yet make restoration the national priority it must be. Emille Boulot receives funding from the Society for Ecological Restoration. She is affiliated with the Australian Environment Review and the Tasmanian National Parks Association. Jan McDonald receives funding from the Australian Research Council, is a Director of the Tasmanian Land Conservancy and a member of the Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water's Biodiversity Assessment Expert Reference Group.

Shein bans sex dolls after outcry in France over ‘childlike’ appearance

France had threatened to bar the fast-fashion retailer after an investigation found that sex dolls resembling children were being sold on Shein’s platform.

Shein on Monday banned all sales of sex dolls on its site after France threatened to bar the Chinese-founded fast-fashion online retailer from operating there, citing the result of an investigation that found that sex dolls resembling children were being sold on Shein’s platform.France’s office for consumer affairs, competition policy and fraud control said last week that it had referred Shein to the country’s public prosecutor after discovering that sex dolls with a “childlike” appearance were available on the company’s website. “Their description and categorization on the site leave little doubt as to the child pornography nature of the content,” the office said in a statement.Roland Lescure, France’s finance minister, said Monday on social media that he would call for the Shein platform to be banned in France if there were any further sales of such dolls. The company is set to open its first brick-and-mortar store in France this week.Sarah El Haïry, France’s high commissioner for children, called the products a serious threat to children.In response, Shein said in a statement that it had banned the sale of all sex dolls and temporarily removed all adult products while it conducted a review. Besides selling its own products, Shein operates an e-commerce platform for other sellers.“While each seller is responsible for their own listings, SHEIN does not tolerate any breach of marketplace rules and policies,” the statement said. It added that it would cooperate with any investigations.Executive Chairman Donald Tang said in the statement that “the fight against child exploitation is non-negotiable” for the company. “These were marketplace listings from third-party sellers — but I take this personally,” he added.The French consumer affairs office also said Monday in a separate statement that it had expanded its investigation to Chinese-based online retail platform AliExpress — through which it said childlike sex dolls were also available for sale — and had also referred the matter to France’s public prosecutor.Alibaba Group, AliExpress’s parent company, said in an email that the listings are prohibited under its rules and were removed as soon as the company became aware of them. “As a third-party marketplace, we require all sellers to comply with applicable laws and our platform policies,” it said.Shein, known for its huge inventory of fast-fashion products, is set to open its first physical store Wednesday in Paris, an announcement that ruffled feathers in the couture capital of the world. It plans to open stores in six locations throughout France owned by the SGM Group, including landmark Paris department store BHV Marais, according to Reuters.Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo last month expressed concern about the upcoming store, saying in a social media post that it was “contrary to the environmental and social ambitions of Paris, which supports responsible and sustainable local commerce.”The brand had already faced union-led protests last month over its plan to open an outlet at BHV Marais, where there were more protests this week by children’s rights advocates over the sex dolls.Frédéric Merlin, president of the SGM Group, said on social media that the sex dolls for sale on Shein were unacceptable. He added that only goods produced directly by Shein would be sold at the physical stores, rather than items from third-party sellers.Leo Sands contributed to this report.

Australia must put politics aside and pass nature laws that benefit the economy and the environment. We owe it to our kids | Zoe Daniel

There’s no such thing as a perfect legislative solution. It’s about finding one that’s workable – for the community, for the economy and for natureVictoria’s Healesville Sanctuary is helping to protect and restore the critically endangered orange-bellied parrot which is predicted to be extinct within five years.With only 50 known to be left in the wild, a major breeding program aims to release up to 20 pairs of the migratory birds annually.Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads Continue reading...

Victoria’s Healesville Sanctuary is helping to protect and restore the critically endangered orange-bellied parrot which is predicted to be extinct within five years.With only 50 known to be left in the wild, a major breeding program aims to release up to 20 pairs of the migratory birds annually.It’s just one of several threatened species programs supported by the sanctuary near Melbourne, which attracts about 400,000 people every year – many of them schoolchildren – who visit to learn about and experience nature.It’s a case study that the author of the 2021 review into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, Graeme Samuel, keeps front of mind.Because the “pure politics” of the debate, he says, obscures what the conversation is about – nature – and its intrinsic value to our communities.And it’s not about environment or economy. It’s both.The EPBC Act, the latest iteration of which has just hit the federal parliament, touches on everything from “productivity to renewable energy, mining, nature and climate goals, the housing crisis, cultural heritage, and resources and energy security”.It’s a big moment, or it could be.As former Treasury secretary Ken Henry has said, with “glistening ambition” Australia can “build an efficient, jobs-rich, globally competitive, high-productivity, low-emissions nature-rich economy”.But if you want to see a case study of politics in action, look no further than nature law reform, or the lack of it.The last significant federal reform in this space happened under the Howard government a full quarter of a century ago.That version of the act is undeniably no longer fit for purpose in the face of massive loss of plants and animals and historically significant technological and industrial change.Successive reports have detailed catastrophic loss of species that is “ongoing and accelerating”. Meanwhile, business describes cumbersome environmental regulation as “the new enemy of progress”.“Without faster project approvals we will never meet our net zero ambitions, for instance,” says Bran Black, the CEO of the Business Council of Australia.It’s threading those two needles simultaneously that has been the problem.And inevitably, that has led to a long-running game of political point-scoring.It’s a fine playing field but there are no winners.It will be five years in January since Samuel delivered his review of the act, commissioned by then environment minister Sussan Ley under the Morrison government.At the time, she indicated qualified acceptance of the review recommendations, and released a pathway for reform which didn’t progress due to the 2022 change of government.Coming in with high expectations from those who care about the natural environment, the Albanese government subsequently released its ill-fated “nature positive plan”, also based on Samuel’s report. That legislative package was shelved before the 2025 election, in a definitive broken promise by Labor following pressure from business interests in Western Australia.Now it’s a question of whether Labor, the Coalition and the Greens can come up with a compromise to deliver what Samuel describes as a “massive leap forward for nature”, and for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.Instead of outright rejecting the legislation or seeking to delay progress by breaking it into separate bills which she opposed during the last parliament, Ley could take the package as a win.She started it, after all.And the Greens, always looking for the moral high ground, will need to apply some cost-benefit analysis to opposing a bill that’s undoubtedly a vast improvement on what currently exists after a five-year process.I hate to say it, but 80% is probably about as good as it’s going to get.The absence of an explicit climate trigger is problematic, however new national environmental standards would require development proposals to explicitly consider climate impact.Provisions around offsets have been tightened so they can’t be used unless every attempt has been made to mitigate or avoid damage to nature. Meanwhile, the bill enables more certainty for business for more efficient and effective decision-making.All of these things warrant careful analysis to make sure they’re as watertight as they can be. Crossbenchers are rightly critical of being landed with a 1,500-page bill this week for a likely House vote next week.It has been five years; the government should at least allow time and scope for constructive amendments that make the law better.And the minister should have to convince the Australian people – not just other parliamentarians – that the “national interest” provision not only won’t but can’t be misused to give the green light to nature-wrecking projects, or indeed, the other way around.Former industry minister Ed Husic is right to flag that ministerial discretion to override decisions could be a back door to open-slather development in the hands of a future government.Another Juukan Gorge, anyone?“We’ll do the right thing,” won’t wash in the Trump era.There’s no such thing as a perfect legislative solution. It’s about finding one that’s workable – for the community, for the economy and for nature.And, as Samuel rightly says, for our kids.

Nature groups rebuke Reeves for ‘cynical’ 11th-hour planning bill changes

Chancellor accused of removing environmental protections to win short-term growth and save her budgetUK politics live – latest updatesLast-minute changes to the government’s landmark planning bill have sparked a furious backlash from nature groups who have mounted an attack on the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, over her plans to remove environmental protections.The changes to the legislation come as it enters its final stages before being signed into law. Continue reading...

Last-minute changes to the government’s landmark planning bill have sparked a furious backlash from nature groups who have mounted an attack on the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, over her plans to remove environmental protections.The changes to the legislation come as it enters its final stages before being signed into law.Promoted by Reeves, they are designed to make it easier for developers to side-step environmental laws in order to build major projects such as AI datacentres.They include new powers for the government to overrule local democracy if councils refuse developments based on environmental grounds, or on issues such as water shortages.But in outspoken attacks on the chancellor, charities including household names such as the RSPB and Wildlife Trusts say Reeves is seeking to grab short-term growth headlines to save her budget, rather than well-thought-out reforms to planning.Reeves is pushing for the planning bill to be passed before her budget on 26 November so that she is able to factor it into forecasts by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which could give her about £3bn extra breathing room against her own debt rules.The charities have spent months working with ministers in an attempt to forge the best planning bill to ensure growth and nature recovery go hand in hand.Dr James Robinson, the RSPB’s chief operating officer, said: “Dropping 67 amendments to the planning bill at the 11th hour isn’t just poor process, it’s legislative chaos. There’s no time for proper scrutiny, no clarity on the cumulative impact, and no confidence this is about good planning rather than political optics.“It looks like a cynical attempt to game a better forecast from the OBR, rather than a serious effort to fix the planning system.”The intervention by Reeves into the landmark bill comes after she was filmed boasting about her closeness to a major developer after she intervened to lift legal blocks to their housing plans.The objections to 21,000 homes being built in Sussex concerned water shortages and concerns over the amount of water being taken from rivers and wetlands in the Arun Valley, which risked affecting protected wildlife and local water resources. The MP for Horsham, John Milne has criticised the chancellor’s intervention, stating that it was top-down government at its worst.“This decision rides roughshod over the work that Horsham district council has been carrying out to find a balanced solution.”One amendment promoted by Reeves would allow more central government intervention in local decision making. It allows the secretary of state to overrule councils that refuse permission for projects, even if they have legitimate concerns on environmental grounds, or there are issues relating to water shortages.The amendment is designed to ease the path of major infrastructure projects, for example AI datacentres, which create vast amounts of CO2 and put huge pressure on water resources.Alexa Culver, an environmental lawyer from RSK Wilding, said: “For the first time, the secretary of state will be able to make orders that prevent refusals of planning permission by planning authorities.“This could direct authorities to ignore real-world infastructure and environmental constraints – like water shortages – to allow harmful development through that leaves local communities stranded.”Joan Edwards, director of policy and public affairs at the Wildlife Trusts, said Reeves was trying to grab headlines about growth measures before her budget.“The chancellor continues to fail to understand that a healthy natural environment underpins a healthy economy. These performative amendments represent neither a win for development or the economy, and promise only delay and muddle in planning and marine policy.”Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said the government’s race to speed up planning decisions would fall flat on its face if it did not include the environment at its core.“Last-minute changes to the bill are being made in a hurried and piecemeal approach,” he said. “This kind of scattergun policymaking doesn’t give businesses or investors the certainty they need to drive growth, and it puts the UK’s irreplaceable natural environment at risk.”Government officials have said the amendments were required in part because an earlier watering down of the bill in the summer damaged investor confidence. However, no data has been provided to back this claim.The government said if passed, each of these “pro-growth changes” would accelerate the government’s “plan for change” to build 1.5m homes, achieve clean power by 2030 and raise living standards across the country.Steve Reed, the housing secretary, said: “Britain’s potential has been shackled by governments unwilling to overhaul the stubborn planning system that has erected barriers to building at every turn. It is simply not true that nature has to lose for economic growth to succeed.“Sluggish planning has real-world consequences. Every new house blocked deprives a family of a home. Every infrastructure project that gets delayed blocks someone from a much-needed job. This will now end.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.