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.

Our cities’ secret gardens: we connect with nature in neglected green spaces just as much as in parks

News Feed
Wednesday, July 17, 2024

doublelee/ShutterstockAccess to nature is essential for our health and wellbeing. However, as our cities become increasingly crowded, it becomes more and more challenging to find ways to connect with nature in urban spaces. We know urban parks are key places to engage with nature. However, our research suggests informal green spaces – despite being unplanned, untended and often overlooked – are equally important. We have found people use informal green spaces, such as vacant lots and vegetated areas along railway lines, to engage with nature just as much as in formal green spaces. This raises the question: should we be doing more to embrace these neglected spaces? The vegetation growing along railway lines throughout our cities is an important example of informal green space. Jason Vanajek/Shutterstock Being connected with nature is good for us People living in cities are increasingly disconnected from nature. This has potentially far-reaching consequences. Studies have shown regular interaction with nature can be important for mental and physical health. Time in nature reduces stress and encourages mental restoration. Access to the natural environment is important for children’s mental and social development. People who do not interact regularly with nature have been shown to be less likely to engage with broader environmental issues. It’s a worrying trend, given the environmental crises we are facing. Despite the known benefits, interacting with nature is becoming increasingly difficult for people in cities. Urban areas are becoming more densely populated, increasing pressure on accessible green spaces. At the same time, the amount of green space in many cities is declining. This is due to rising urban density as well as changing housing trends. Traditional backyards are shrinking in countries such as Australia. In light of this, there is a growing need to use the green space available to us more effectively. Population growth and increasing density are putting pressure on green spaces in our cities. POC/Shutterstock The neglected value of informal green spaces Informal green spaces are the overlooked areas of vegetation scattered throughout our cities and towns. Think of the tangle of greenery thriving along railway lines, flowers growing on vacant lots, or the unmown grassy patches under power lines. These areas are not usually recognised or managed as part of a city’s official green infrastructure, but provide a unique type of green space. People report liking these spaces for their wild, unmanaged nature, in contrast to more neatly manicured parks. We know people use these spaces for a range of activities, from taking shortcuts or dog walking to creating community gardens. However, the extent to which people use informal green space to engage with nature has not been well understood until now. Our recent study sheds light on the importance of informal green space for access to nature in urban areas. We analysed data from citizen science apps such as iNaturalist. This enabled us to study how often people recorded sightings of animal and plant species in informal green spaces compared to their more formal counterparts, such as parks. It provided a measure of their interaction with nature. We found people use informal green spaces to engage with nature just as much as formal green spaces. Areas along railway lines and utility corridors were most popular. This may be due to their fixed land tenure. It allows people to become familiar with them and gives nature a better chance to establish on these sites. Street verges were also important. The data suggest they are as popular as private gardens for connecting with nature. While parks remain crucial, these findings highlight the important role of informal green spaces in giving people access to nature in cities. People often connect with nature in informal green space, such as this land left vacant after old homes were demolished in Perth. Purple Wyrm/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA Rethinking how we manage green space in cities Our works shows the need to expand our thinking about how to improve people’s connection to nature in cities. It’s important to start recognising informal green spaces as a legitimate part of urban green space networks. We can then begin to consider how best to manage these spaces to support biodiversity while encouraging public use. This will present its own challenges. We’ll need to balance the needs of people with the need to leave enough quiet spaces for nature to thrive. A majority of the world’s people already live in cities. As urban populations continue to grow, so will the need for accessible green space. Formal parks will always be important to ensure people have regular, meaningful interactions with nature for the sake of their health and wellbeing. But we need to broaden our perspective to include a more diverse selection of green spaces. By valuing and integrating informal green spaces better into existing green space networks, we can ensure nature remains part of urban life. Allowing urban residents to connect with nature will promote healthier, happier and more environmentally engaged communities. Holly Kirk receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Ian Potter Foundation. Hugh Stanford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

The tangle of greenery along railway lines, flowers growing on vacant lots, or unmown grassy patches under power lines, it turns out people in cities engage with nature in all these spaces.

doublelee/Shutterstock

Access to nature is essential for our health and wellbeing. However, as our cities become increasingly crowded, it becomes more and more challenging to find ways to connect with nature in urban spaces.

We know urban parks are key places to engage with nature. However, our research suggests informal green spaces – despite being unplanned, untended and often overlooked – are equally important. We have found people use informal green spaces, such as vacant lots and vegetated areas along railway lines, to engage with nature just as much as in formal green spaces.

This raises the question: should we be doing more to embrace these neglected spaces?

Vegetation growing both sides of railway tracks through the city
The vegetation growing along railway lines throughout our cities is an important example of informal green space. Jason Vanajek/Shutterstock

Being connected with nature is good for us

People living in cities are increasingly disconnected from nature. This has potentially far-reaching consequences.

Studies have shown regular interaction with nature can be important for mental and physical health. Time in nature reduces stress and encourages mental restoration. Access to the natural environment is important for children’s mental and social development.

People who do not interact regularly with nature have been shown to be less likely to engage with broader environmental issues. It’s a worrying trend, given the environmental crises we are facing.

Despite the known benefits, interacting with nature is becoming increasingly difficult for people in cities. Urban areas are becoming more densely populated, increasing pressure on accessible green spaces.

At the same time, the amount of green space in many cities is declining. This is due to rising urban density as well as changing housing trends. Traditional backyards are shrinking in countries such as Australia.

In light of this, there is a growing need to use the green space available to us more effectively.

A popular outdoor public space for picnic and activities in the heart of the city
Population growth and increasing density are putting pressure on green spaces in our cities. POC/Shutterstock

The neglected value of informal green spaces

Informal green spaces are the overlooked areas of vegetation scattered throughout our cities and towns. Think of the tangle of greenery thriving along railway lines, flowers growing on vacant lots, or the unmown grassy patches under power lines. These areas are not usually recognised or managed as part of a city’s official green infrastructure, but provide a unique type of green space.

People report liking these spaces for their wild, unmanaged nature, in contrast to more neatly manicured parks. We know people use these spaces for a range of activities, from taking shortcuts or dog walking to creating community gardens. However, the extent to which people use informal green space to engage with nature has not been well understood until now.

Our recent study sheds light on the importance of informal green space for access to nature in urban areas. We analysed data from citizen science apps such as iNaturalist.

This enabled us to study how often people recorded sightings of animal and plant species in informal green spaces compared to their more formal counterparts, such as parks. It provided a measure of their interaction with nature. We found people use informal green spaces to engage with nature just as much as formal green spaces.

Areas along railway lines and utility corridors were most popular. This may be due to their fixed land tenure. It allows people to become familiar with them and gives nature a better chance to establish on these sites.

Street verges were also important. The data suggest they are as popular as private gardens for connecting with nature.

While parks remain crucial, these findings highlight the important role of informal green spaces in giving people access to nature in cities.

An unmown area of grass and scattered trees on a suburban streets
People often connect with nature in informal green space, such as this land left vacant after old homes were demolished in Perth. Purple Wyrm/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

Rethinking how we manage green space in cities

Our works shows the need to expand our thinking about how to improve people’s connection to nature in cities. It’s important to start recognising informal green spaces as a legitimate part of urban green space networks.

We can then begin to consider how best to manage these spaces to support biodiversity while encouraging public use. This will present its own challenges. We’ll need to balance the needs of people with the need to leave enough quiet spaces for nature to thrive.

A majority of the world’s people already live in cities. As urban populations continue to grow, so will the need for accessible green space.

Formal parks will always be important to ensure people have regular, meaningful interactions with nature for the sake of their health and wellbeing. But we need to broaden our perspective to include a more diverse selection of green spaces. By valuing and integrating informal green spaces better into existing green space networks, we can ensure nature remains part of urban life.

Allowing urban residents to connect with nature will promote healthier, happier and more environmentally engaged communities.

The Conversation

Holly Kirk receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Ian Potter Foundation.

Hugh Stanford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Labor to rule out controversial ‘national interest’ exemption for coal and gas if Greens back nature laws

Exclusive: Concession follows fierce criticism of the workaround but may not be enough to convince minor partyGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastLabor would prevent a contentious “national interest” exemption being used to approve coal and gas projects if the Greens agreed to support its nature laws, Guardian Australia can reveal.The offer follows a groundswell of criticism about the discretionary power, including from the author of the review that inspired the new laws, Graeme Samuel, and the former treasury secretary Ken Henry. Continue reading...

Labor would prevent a contentious “national interest” exemption being used to approve coal and gas projects if the Greens agreed to support its nature laws, Guardian Australia can reveal.The offer follows a groundswell of criticism about the discretionary power, including from the author of the review that inspired the new laws, Graeme Samuel, and the former treasury secretary Ken Henry.The concession alone may not be enough to win over the Greens, who demand protections for native forests and consideration of the climate impacts of projects in exchange for backing the proposed overhaul of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.With the government desperate to pass the laws in parliament’s final sitting of the year, the environment minister, Murray Watt, is locked in negotiations with the Greens and Coalition in the hope of landing a deal next week.Neither side supports the bill in its current form, putting the onus on Labor to cough up concessions if it wants to avoid the long-awaited reform collapsing for the second time in 12 months.The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, is willing to support the laws if Labor agrees to gut environment protections and strip back the powers of its proposed environment protection agency (EPA).Sign up: AU Breaking News emailA senior government source confirmed to Guardian Australia that, under a potential deal with the Greens, it would rewrite the proposed “national interest” test to prevent it being used to approve fossil fuel projects.Critical minerals projects could still be approved.Under the provision, which Samuel initially supported in his 2020 review of the EPBC Act as a “rare exception”, the minister would be able to ignore environmental standards and greenlight a project if it was deemed in the “national interest”.While Watt has stressed the provision was intended for projects related to defence, national security and emergencies, the level of discretion written into the legislation has left him unable to rule out the possibility of exemptions for coal and gas.The Labor MP Ed Husic previously warned a future Coalition minister could misuse the power while Henry and Samuel both predicted a “conga line” of developers would lobby for special carveouts.Labor’s grassroots environmental action group also called for the power to be axed or at least subject to parliamentary oversight.As of Friday afternoon, the Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, and the shadow environment minister, Angie Bell, were still waiting for Labor’s options for a potential deal.The amendments would need to put forward in coming days to give both sides time to get a deal through their respective party-rooms early next week.The EPBC bills are listed for debate in the Senate on Wednesday. Parliament rises for the year on Thursday.Eucalypt forest at Waratah Gully in NSW’s South East Forest national park. Photograph: Auscape/Universal Images Group/Getty ImagesHanson-Young on Friday reiterated that the Greens wouldn’t support the legislation without extra protections for forests and the climate.Labor cast the Greens as perpetual “blockers” in the previous term of parliament, but Hanson-Young said the party wasn’t feeling pressure to cave to the government’s demands.“What plays on my mind is not allowing this government off the hook when they’re pushing for laws that will fast-track coal and gas,” she said.Ahead of Friday’s hearings, an alliance of major environment groups, including the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Wilderness Society and the legal firm Environmental Justice Australia, urged major changes to a bill that it warned “[does] not protect nature”.Among its suggested changes, the alliance called for the removal of new discretionary powers for the minister, the closing of loopholes for native forest logging, better engagement with First Nations communities, scrapping or limiting a proposed “restoration contributions” fund, consideration of climate impacts and reversing the decision to delegate decisions under the so-called “water trigger” to the states.The alliance also wants the federal EPA to be the main decision-maker on projects, with the minister only allowed to intervene in “exceptional circumstances”.Under the government’s model, which critics note is not genuinely independent, the minister would either make decisions or delegate that responsibility to an EPA official.“We call on the Labor government to substantially improve the bills and negotiate in good faith with members of the Senate that care about nature and a vibrant, healthy Australia,” the groups said.At Thursday’s round of inquiry hearings, the celebrated environmentalist and former Greens leader Bob Brown said the laws were an “insult to the environmental conscience of Australia”.He said the absence of a requirement for decision-makers to consider a project’s greenhouse gas emissions – known colloquially as a “climate trigger” – was analogous to stripping a treasurer of powers over taxation.“And I say that must be taken seriously, because that’s how the situation is,” he said.

Sea level rise threatens thousands of hazardous sites: Study

Rising sea levels could flood thousands of hazardous sites in marginalized communities mostly across seven states by 2100 should greenhouse gases continue to build up in the atmosphere, a study published Thursday in Nature Communications warns. Flooding could strike 5,500 sites and release contaminants should flood waters hit these sites. Eighty percent of the sites...

Rising sea levels could flood thousands of hazardous sites in marginalized communities mostly across seven states by 2100 should greenhouse gases continue to build up in the atmosphere, a study published Thursday in Nature Communications warns. Flooding could strike 5,500 sites and release contaminants should flood waters hit these sites. Eighty percent of the sites at the greatest risk of severe flooding are located in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, California, New York and Massachusetts. The study suggests that if destabilized, these hazardous sites could harm neighborhoods that researchers identified as “Hispanic, households with incomes below twice the federal poverty line, households without a vehicle, non-voters, and renters.” “Racial residential segregation and the inequitable distribution of stormwater infrastructure further contribute to racialized patterns of flood risk across U.S. cities,” researchers said. More than half of these sites could start to face severe flood risks much sooner, as early as 2050, the study stated. This is due to extreme coastal flooding that is expected to double by that year. Researchers studied hazardous sites in Puerto Rico and 23 states with a coastline. Using historical sea level measurements, they then analyzed sea level rises based on low- and high-level emission scenarios. The low-level scenario showed that 11 percent of sites were at risk. “Under the high emissions scenario, over a fifth of coastal sewage treatment facilities, refineries and formerly used defense sites, roughly a third of power plants, and over 40% fossil fuel ports and terminals are projected to be at risk by 2100,” researchers wrote. Rising flood waters could also bring health risks if industrial animal farms or sewage treatment plants are struck, University of Maryland professor Sacoby Wilson told The Associated Press. People near these waters could be exposed to bacteria like E. coli, while flooded industrial sites could expose chemicals that cause rashes, headaches, fatigue and burning of the eyes. “For folks who are vulnerable, maybe have an underlying health condition, those health conditions could be exacerbated during those flood events,” Wilson, who was not behind the new study, told the AP. The goal of the study is to “get ahead of the problem by looking far out into the future,” Lara J. Cushing, associate professor in the University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, told the AP at a press conference Wednesday. “We do have time to respond and try to mitigate the risks and also increase resilience,” added Cushing, who co-authored the paper. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Shein pressed over sale of "childlike sex dolls" by bipartisan representatives

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is demanding answers from fast-fashion giant Shein related to the possible sale of dolls "with a childlike appearance" to U.S. consumers.The big picture: The rare cross-party scrutiny piles onto years of criticism the Chinese-founded online retailer has faced over its environmental and labor practices and comes as it faces new trade barriers to its sale of ultra-cheap goods.Driving the news: The letter, addressed to Shein's CEO, expressed deep concern that the company's website may have been used to sell "childlike sex dolls" to American customers.The lawmakers pointed to the company's 2024 Sustainability and Social Impact Report, which states sellers are prohibited from hawking products that promote "child abuse and exploitation."The letter reads, "There is no question as to whether these dolls encourage child abuse and exploitation."The Hill was the first outlet to report on the letter.Catch up quick: French officials recently threatened to cut off Shein from the country's market after the nation's consumer and anti-fraud watchdog reported the company over the dolls, saying the description of them "makes it difficult to doubt the child pornography nature of the content."A Shein spokesperson said in a statement to Axios that the e-commerce titan imposed "strict sanctions on sellers involved in the sale of child-like dolls" following the French report and that it implemented a "complete ban" on all sex-doll products.Donald Tang, the company's executive chairman, said the marketplace listings were from third-party sellers and that Shein was "tracing the source and will take swift, decisive action against those responsible."Zoom in: The lawmakers said that while they commended Shein for banning the sale of sex dolls, "it is unacceptable that these products were ever allowed to be sold on Shein's website."They imposed a December 20 deadline for the company to answer whether such dolls were ever available for sale in the U.S. via the Shein e-commerce marketplace and if they were sold to American customers, among other inquiries. What they're saying: "It is incredibly disappointing that a major global retailer allowed childlike sex dolls to be sold on its platform, products that are known to fuel pedophilia and endanger children," said Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), who led the letter alongside Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.).In another bipartisan effort to crack down on the sale of such products, Buchanan introduced a bill in February with Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) to make it a crime to import, transport, buy, sell, distribute or possess a sex doll that resembles a child.The bill was introduced after a local South Florida station reported that a woman said her daughter's likeness had been stolen and used to create a sex doll that was for sale online.The bottom line: Wasserman Schultz said in a statement that "[w]e cannot end the sexual exploitation of children if these repulsive products are built, sold and shared."Go deeper: The biggest threat to Chinese e-commerce sites

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is demanding answers from fast-fashion giant Shein related to the possible sale of dolls "with a childlike appearance" to U.S. consumers.The big picture: The rare cross-party scrutiny piles onto years of criticism the Chinese-founded online retailer has faced over its environmental and labor practices and comes as it faces new trade barriers to its sale of ultra-cheap goods.Driving the news: The letter, addressed to Shein's CEO, expressed deep concern that the company's website may have been used to sell "childlike sex dolls" to American customers.The lawmakers pointed to the company's 2024 Sustainability and Social Impact Report, which states sellers are prohibited from hawking products that promote "child abuse and exploitation."The letter reads, "There is no question as to whether these dolls encourage child abuse and exploitation."The Hill was the first outlet to report on the letter.Catch up quick: French officials recently threatened to cut off Shein from the country's market after the nation's consumer and anti-fraud watchdog reported the company over the dolls, saying the description of them "makes it difficult to doubt the child pornography nature of the content."A Shein spokesperson said in a statement to Axios that the e-commerce titan imposed "strict sanctions on sellers involved in the sale of child-like dolls" following the French report and that it implemented a "complete ban" on all sex-doll products.Donald Tang, the company's executive chairman, said the marketplace listings were from third-party sellers and that Shein was "tracing the source and will take swift, decisive action against those responsible."Zoom in: The lawmakers said that while they commended Shein for banning the sale of sex dolls, "it is unacceptable that these products were ever allowed to be sold on Shein's website."They imposed a December 20 deadline for the company to answer whether such dolls were ever available for sale in the U.S. via the Shein e-commerce marketplace and if they were sold to American customers, among other inquiries. What they're saying: "It is incredibly disappointing that a major global retailer allowed childlike sex dolls to be sold on its platform, products that are known to fuel pedophilia and endanger children," said Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), who led the letter alongside Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.).In another bipartisan effort to crack down on the sale of such products, Buchanan introduced a bill in February with Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) to make it a crime to import, transport, buy, sell, distribute or possess a sex doll that resembles a child.The bill was introduced after a local South Florida station reported that a woman said her daughter's likeness had been stolen and used to create a sex doll that was for sale online.The bottom line: Wasserman Schultz said in a statement that "[w]e cannot end the sexual exploitation of children if these repulsive products are built, sold and shared."Go deeper: The biggest threat to Chinese e-commerce sites

Coalition to help Labor rush through new nature laws if environmental protections dropped

Sussan Ley’s offer allows a clear path to pass laws to rewrite Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act in final sitting weekGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe Coalition has offered to help Labor rush through new nature laws if it agrees to gut environment protection, challenging Labor to side with business interests over green groups to implement the long-awaited changes.Environmental lawyers are urging the government against further weakening already flawed laws at the “behest of industry”. Continue reading...

The Coalition has offered to help Labor rush through new nature laws if it agrees to gut environment protection, challenging Labor to side with business interests over green groups to implement the long-awaited changes.Environmental lawyers are urging the government against further weakening already flawed laws at the “behest of industry”.The new offer from the opposition leader, Sussan Ley, gives Anthony Albanese a clear path to pass the laws to re-write the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act when parliament returns next week for the final sitting of the year.Sign up: AU Breaking News emailBut it would require ceding to the Coalition’s demands to water-down protection for nature and stripping back the powers of Labor’s proposed environment protection agency (EPA), risking a major backlash from environmentalist and potentially members of Labor’s backbench.After Guardian Australia revealed senior Liberals were optimistic about a deal, Ley confirmed the opposition would agree to overhaul the EPBC Act if Labor accepted its amendments while rejecting the Greens’ demands, which include new protection for native forests and measures to consider the climate impact of projects.The opposition wants changes to address seven points of concern, including the powers of the EPA, the requirement for large projects to disclose projected emissions upfront and threat of “excessive” financial penalties for breaches of nature laws and “stop-work” orders that could halt projects.The Coalition is also concerned about two provisions designed to protect nature: a new definition of “unacceptable impact” on the environment and a “net gain” test that is supposed to force developers to make up for damage and deliver an overall benefit for the environment.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy 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 promotion“The Coalition is seeking sensible amendments,” Ley said in a statement.“If they are adopted, then we will be supportive of legislation next week. However, if the government rejects sensible suggestions and chooses to put jobs at risk, then we will vote against them, with an open mind to revisit negotiations next year.”The environment minister, Murray Watt, remains open to striking a deal with either the Coalition or the Greens to get the laws through the Senate before parliament wraps up for 2025 next Thursday.On Thursday, Watt was adamant that the legislation would pass next week despite not yet having the support of either party.The Greens leader, Larissa Waters, said if Labor stitched up a deal with the Coalition then it wasn’t serious about protecting nature.“I think if the Labor government wants to do a deal with the climate denying, anti-science dinosaurs in the Liberal party that tells you everything that you need to know about what the government’s motivations are. It’s not the environment. It’s lining the pockets of big corporates,” she told ABC’s Afternoon Briefing.The warning came as the Environmental Defenders Office told a senate committee examining the government’s legislation that the bills, as drafted, risked making the failings of the current laws “worse”. EDO’s deputy director of policy and law reform, Rachel Walmsley, told the committee the parliament had three options: fail to pass the legislation and keep the failed EPBC Act in place for many more years, pass the bills as proposed or even weakened at the “behest” of industry or strengthen the bills and “actually deliver outcomes for nature”. “It has to be option three,” she said.

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.

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.