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.

Unveiling the Molecular Mechanisms Behind PTSD and Depression: Latest Findings

News Feed
Tuesday, June 11, 2024

Researchers from McLean Hospital and collaborating institutions have discovered shared and distinct molecular changes in brain regions, genomic layers, cell types, and blood of individuals with PTSD and MDD, offering new insights for therapeutic and diagnostic advancements. Credit: SciTechDailyStudy reveals molecular distinctions and similarities in PTSD and depression, highlighting potential therapeutic targets and biomarkers.A comprehensive examination of multiple biological processes is essential for understanding the development of stress-related disorders. Recent research conducted by scientists at McLean Hospital, along with collaborators from The University of Texas at Austin and Lieber Institute for Brain Development, has revealed both shared and unique molecular changes in brain regions, genomic layers, cell types, and blood among individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD). These findings, published in Science, could pave the way for innovative treatments and biomarkers.The Complexity of PTSD Explored“PTSD is a complex pathological condition. We had to extract information across multiple brain regions and molecular processes to capture the biological networks at play,” explained lead author Nikolaos P. Daskalakis, MD, PhD. Stress-related disorders develop over time, stemming from epigenetic modifications caused by the interplay between genetic susceptibility and traumatic stress exposure. Although previous research has identified factors such as hormonal, immune, methylomic, and transcriptomic influences, the limited availability of postmortem brain tissues from PTSD patients has hindered a comprehensive understanding of these brain-based molecular changes.Multi-omics Approach to Studying PTSD and Depression“Our primary goals for this study were to interpret and integrate differential gene and protein expression, epigenetic alterations and pathway activity across our postmortem brain cohorts in PTSD, depression and neurotypical controls,” said senior author Kerry Ressler, MD, PhD, chief scientific officer and director of Division of Depression and Anxiety Disorders and Neurobiology of Fear Laboratory at McLean Hospital, and a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. “We essentially combined circuit biology with powerful multi-omics tools to delve into the molecular pathology behind these disorders.”For this, the team analyzed multi-omic data from 231 PTSD, MDD, and neurotypical control subjects, along with 114 individuals from replication cohorts for differences in three brain regions — the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG) and central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA). They also performed single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) of 118 PFC samples to study cell-type-specific patterns and evaluated blood-based proteins in more than 50,000 UK Biobank participants to isolate key biomarkers associated with stress-related disorders. Finally, the overlap of these key brain-based disease process genes was compared with genome-wide association studies (GWAS)-based risk genes to identify PTSD and MDD risk.Molecular Variations and Disease MechanismsIndividuals with PTSD and MDD shared altered gene expression and exons in the mPFC but differed in the localization of epigenetic changes. Further analysis revealed that a history of childhood trauma and suicide were strong drivers of molecular variations in both disorders. The authors noted that MDD disease signals were more strongly associated with male-specific results, suggesting that sex differences may underlie disease risk.Top disease-associated genes and pathways across regions, omics, and/or traits implicated biological processes in both neuronal and non-neuronal cells. These included molecular regulators and transcription factors, and pathways involved in immune function, metabolism, mitochondria function, and stress hormone signaling.Implications for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Advances“Understanding why some people develop PTSD and depression and others don’t is a major challenge,” said investigator Charles B. Nemeroff, M.D., PhD, chair of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Dell Medical School of UT Austin. “We found that the brains of people with these disorders have molecular differences, especially in the prefrontal cortex. These changes seem to affect things like our immune system, how our nerves work, and even how our stress hormones behave.”The genetic components of the work built on a study published last month by researchers including Ressler and Daskalakis in Nature Genetics, in which they identified 95 locations, or loci in the genome (including 80 new) associated with PTSD. Their multi-omic analyses found 43 potential causal genes for the disorder.The researchers now could reveal only limited overlap between the top genes and those implicated in GWAS studies, underscoring the gap in current understanding between disease risk and underlying disease processes. In contrast, they discovered greater correlations between brain multi-omics and blood markers.“Our findings support the development of brain-informed blood biomarkers for real-time profiling,” said Daskalakis.Ressler added, “These biomarkers could help overcome current challenges in obtaining brain biopsies for advancing new treatments.”Future DirectionsLimitations of the study include the inherent biases in postmortem brain research, including population selection, clinical assessment, comorbidities, and end-of-life state. The authors also caution that they did not fully characterize all cell subtypes and cell states and that future studies are required to understand contrasting molecular signals across omics or brain regions.The team plans on using this database as groundwork for future analysis of how genetic factors interact with environmental variables to create downstream disease effects.“Learning more about the molecular basis of these conditions, PTSD and MDD, in the brain paves the way for discoveries that will lead to more effective therapeutic and diagnostic tools. This work was possible because of the brain donations to the Lieber Institute Brain Repository from families whose loved ones died of these conditions,” said Joel Kleinman, MD, PhD, associate director of Clinical Sciences at the Lieber Institute for Brain Development. “We hope our research will one day bring relief to individuals who struggle with these disorders and their loved ones.”For more on this research, see New Molecular Insights Into PTSD and Depression.Reference: “Systems biology dissection of PTSD and MDD across brain regions, cell types, and blood” by Nikolaos P. Daskalakis, Artemis Iatrou, Chris Chatzinakos, Aarti Jajoo, Clara Snijders, Dennis Wylie, Christopher P. DiPietro, Ioulia Tsatsani, Chia-Yen Chen, Cameron D. Pernia, Marina Soliva-Estruch, Dhivya Arasappan, Rahul A. Bharadwaj, Leonardo Collado-Torres, Stefan Wuchty, Victor E. Alvarez, Eric B. Dammer, Amy Deep-Soboslay, Duc M. Duong, Nick Eagles, Bertrand R. Huber, Louise Huuki, Vincent L. Holstein, Mark W. Logue, Justina F. Lugenbühl, Adam X. Maihofer, Mark W. Miller, Caroline M. Nievergelt, Geo Pertea, Deanna Ross, Mohammad S. E. Sendi, Benjamin B. Sun, Ran Tao, James Tooke, Erika J. Wolf, Zane Zeier, PTSD Working Group of Psychiatric Genomics Consortium**, Sabina Berretta, Frances A. Champagne, Thomas Hyde, Nicholas T. Seyfried, Joo Heon Shin, Daniel R. Weinberger, Charles B. Nemeroff, Joel E. Kleinman and Kerry J. Ressler, 24 May 2024, Science.DOI: 10.1126/science.adh3707Disclosures: Nikolaos P. Daskalakis is on the scientific advisory boards for BioVie Inc., Circular Genomics, Inc., and Feel Therapeutics, Inc.; Daniel R. Weinberger is on the advisory boards of Pasithea Therapeutics and Sage Therapeutics for unrelated work; Duc M. Duong is a cofounder of ARC Proteomics, and cofounder and paid consultant of Emtherapro Inc.; Chia-Yen Chen is an employee of Biogen Inc.; Mohammad S. E Sendi receives consulting fees for unrelated work from Niji Corp, Benjamin B. Sun is an employee and stockholder of Biogen Inc.; Kerry J. Ressler has received consulting income from Alkermes and sponsored research support from Brainsway and Takeda, and is on the scientific advisory boards for Janssen, Verily, and Resilience Therapeutics for unrelated work.Funding: This work was supported by grants from NIMH, the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation, Stichting Universitas / the Bontius Foundation, the Dutch Research Council (NWO) fund, and McLean Hospital.

Study reveals molecular distinctions and similarities in PTSD and depression, highlighting potential therapeutic targets and biomarkers. A comprehensive examination of multiple biological processes is essential...

PTSD Brain Differences Art

Researchers from McLean Hospital and collaborating institutions have discovered shared and distinct molecular changes in brain regions, genomic layers, cell types, and blood of individuals with PTSD and MDD, offering new insights for therapeutic and diagnostic advancements. Credit: SciTechDaily

Study reveals molecular distinctions and similarities in PTSD and depression, highlighting potential therapeutic targets and biomarkers.

A comprehensive examination of multiple biological processes is essential for understanding the development of stress-related disorders. Recent research conducted by scientists at McLean Hospital, along with collaborators from The University of Texas at Austin and Lieber Institute for Brain Development, has revealed both shared and unique molecular changes in brain regions, genomic layers, cell types, and blood among individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD). These findings, published in Science, could pave the way for innovative treatments and biomarkers.

The Complexity of PTSD Explored

“PTSD is a complex pathological condition. We had to extract information across multiple brain regions and molecular processes to capture the biological networks at play,” explained lead author Nikolaos P. Daskalakis, MD, PhD.

Stress-related disorders develop over time, stemming from epigenetic modifications caused by the interplay between genetic susceptibility and traumatic stress exposure. Although previous research has identified factors such as hormonal, immune, methylomic, and transcriptomic influences, the limited availability of postmortem brain tissues from PTSD patients has hindered a comprehensive understanding of these brain-based molecular changes.

Multi-omics Approach to Studying PTSD and Depression

“Our primary goals for this study were to interpret and integrate differential gene and protein expression, epigenetic alterations and pathway activity across our postmortem brain cohorts in PTSD, depression and neurotypical controls,” said senior author Kerry Ressler, MD, PhD, chief scientific officer and director of Division of Depression and Anxiety Disorders and Neurobiology of Fear Laboratory at McLean Hospital, and a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. “We essentially combined circuit biology with powerful multi-omics tools to delve into the molecular pathology behind these disorders.”

For this, the team analyzed multi-omic data from 231 PTSD, MDD, and neurotypical control subjects, along with 114 individuals from replication cohorts for differences in three brain regions — the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG) and central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA). They also performed single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) of 118 PFC samples to study cell-type-specific patterns and evaluated blood-based proteins in more than 50,000 UK Biobank participants to isolate key biomarkers associated with stress-related disorders. Finally, the overlap of these key brain-based disease process genes was compared with genome-wide association studies (GWAS)-based risk genes to identify PTSD and MDD risk.

Molecular Variations and Disease Mechanisms

Individuals with PTSD and MDD shared altered gene expression and exons in the mPFC but differed in the localization of epigenetic changes. Further analysis revealed that a history of childhood trauma and suicide were strong drivers of molecular variations in both disorders. The authors noted that MDD disease signals were more strongly associated with male-specific results, suggesting that sex differences may underlie disease risk.

Top disease-associated genes and pathways across regions, omics, and/or traits implicated biological processes in both neuronal and non-neuronal cells. These included molecular regulators and transcription factors, and pathways involved in immune function, metabolism, mitochondria function, and stress hormone signaling.

Implications for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Advances

“Understanding why some people develop PTSD and depression and others don’t is a major challenge,” said investigator Charles B. Nemeroff, M.D., PhD, chair of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Dell Medical School of UT Austin. “We found that the brains of people with these disorders have molecular differences, especially in the prefrontal cortex. These changes seem to affect things like our immune system, how our nerves work, and even how our stress hormones behave.”

The genetic components of the work built on a study published last month by researchers including Ressler and Daskalakis in Nature Genetics, in which they identified 95 locations, or loci in the genome (including 80 new) associated with PTSD. Their multi-omic analyses found 43 potential causal genes for the disorder.

The researchers now could reveal only limited overlap between the top genes and those implicated in GWAS studies, underscoring the gap in current understanding between disease risk and underlying disease processes. In contrast, they discovered greater correlations between brain multi-omics and blood markers.

“Our findings support the development of brain-informed blood biomarkers for real-time profiling,” said Daskalakis.

Ressler added, “These biomarkers could help overcome current challenges in obtaining brain biopsies for advancing new treatments.”

Future Directions

Limitations of the study include the inherent biases in postmortem brain research, including population selection, clinical assessment, comorbidities, and end-of-life state. The authors also caution that they did not fully characterize all cell subtypes and cell states and that future studies are required to understand contrasting molecular signals across omics or brain regions.

The team plans on using this database as groundwork for future analysis of how genetic factors interact with environmental variables to create downstream disease effects.

“Learning more about the molecular basis of these conditions, PTSD and MDD, in the brain paves the way for discoveries that will lead to more effective therapeutic and diagnostic tools. This work was possible because of the brain donations to the Lieber Institute Brain Repository from families whose loved ones died of these conditions,” said Joel Kleinman, MD, PhD, associate director of Clinical Sciences at the Lieber Institute for Brain Development. “We hope our research will one day bring relief to individuals who struggle with these disorders and their loved ones.”

For more on this research, see New Molecular Insights Into PTSD and Depression.

Reference: “Systems biology dissection of PTSD and MDD across brain regions, cell types, and blood” by Nikolaos P. Daskalakis, Artemis Iatrou, Chris Chatzinakos, Aarti Jajoo, Clara Snijders, Dennis Wylie, Christopher P. DiPietro, Ioulia Tsatsani, Chia-Yen Chen, Cameron D. Pernia, Marina Soliva-Estruch, Dhivya Arasappan, Rahul A. Bharadwaj, Leonardo Collado-Torres, Stefan Wuchty, Victor E. Alvarez, Eric B. Dammer, Amy Deep-Soboslay, Duc M. Duong, Nick Eagles, Bertrand R. Huber, Louise Huuki, Vincent L. Holstein, Mark W. Logue, Justina F. Lugenbühl, Adam X. Maihofer, Mark W. Miller, Caroline M. Nievergelt, Geo Pertea, Deanna Ross, Mohammad S. E. Sendi, Benjamin B. Sun, Ran Tao, James Tooke, Erika J. Wolf, Zane Zeier, PTSD Working Group of Psychiatric Genomics Consortium**, Sabina Berretta, Frances A. Champagne, Thomas Hyde, Nicholas T. Seyfried, Joo Heon Shin, Daniel R. Weinberger, Charles B. Nemeroff, Joel E. Kleinman and Kerry J. Ressler, 24 May 2024, Science.
DOI: 10.1126/science.adh3707

Disclosures: Nikolaos P. Daskalakis is on the scientific advisory boards for BioVie Inc., Circular Genomics, Inc., and Feel Therapeutics, Inc.; Daniel R. Weinberger is on the advisory boards of Pasithea Therapeutics and Sage Therapeutics for unrelated work; Duc M. Duong is a cofounder of ARC Proteomics, and cofounder and paid consultant of Emtherapro Inc.; Chia-Yen Chen is an employee of Biogen Inc.; Mohammad S. E Sendi receives consulting fees for unrelated work from Niji Corp, Benjamin B. Sun is an employee and stockholder of Biogen Inc.; Kerry J. Ressler has received consulting income from Alkermes and sponsored research support from Brainsway and Takeda, and is on the scientific advisory boards for Janssen, Verily, and Resilience Therapeutics for unrelated work.

Funding: This work was supported by grants from NIMH, the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation, Stichting Universitas / the Bontius Foundation, the Dutch Research Council (NWO) fund, and McLean Hospital.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

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.

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.

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.