Biodiversity loss and climate change: Interdependent global challenges

Approximate read time: 35 minutes

This article has been prepared ahead of the 16 January 2025 House of Lords debate:

Lord Teverson (Liberal Democrat) to move that this House takes note of the challenges caused by the effects of climate change on natural ecosystems and the role of nature conservation in combating global warming.

1. Introduction

Many, including the Labour government, have referred to the world facing a climate and nature crisis.^[1]

The earth is warming at a rapid rate, with 2024 expected to be the hottest year on record.^[2] This follows a decade of record temperatures. Among other impacts, these record temperatures are causing extreme weather events, the melting of glaciers, rising sea temperatures and negative effects on nature and communities.^[3] The UN has also warned that biodiversity loss has reached “unprecedented” levels in recent years.^[4]

It is widely accepted that these changes are caused by human activities. For example, scientists predominantly link global temperature changes to the use of fossil fuels, which result in greenhouse gas emissions that trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere.^[5] As a result, there have been global calls to lower greenhouse gas emissions and attempts to limit global temperature increases to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.^[6] However, there are severe concerns that these limits will not be met, with the UN and scientists around the world fearing “catastrophic consequences” for humanity and the planet.^[7]

This briefing focuses on biodiversity and climate change, particularly the links between the two issues. As such, it only provides summary information on global and domestic actions to prevent climate change and reduce emissions. Further information on these issues can be found in:

• World Meteorological Organisation, ‘State of the climate 2024’, 11 November 2024
• United Nations Environment Programme, ‘Emissions gap report 2024’, 24 October 2024
• House of Lords Library, ‘The 1.5-degree celsuis global warming threshold: Could it be breached in 2024?’, 12 January 2024
• House of Commons Library, ‘UK’s plans and progress to reach net zero by 2050’, 26 September 2024

2. Nature and biodiversity

Biodiversity refers to the “variety of life on Earth at all its levels, from genes to ecosystems, and can encompass the evolutionary, ecological, and cultural processes that sustain life”.^[8] The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) describe it as the “heartbeat of our planet”. They also link the importance of biodiversity to human life:

[Biodiversity] also, directly and indirectly, sustains human life—from the food we eat to the fuel and medicines we need for survival, from clean air and water to a stable climate. Our economies, our societies, our civilizations: biodiversity underpins them all.^[9]

However, the organisations have warned of increasing biodiversity loss around the world, with this primarily driven by human food systems (for example, through intensive farming practices and the expansion of agricultural land).^[10] Other threats to biodiversity include the overexploitation of natural resources, human population trends, invasive species, disease, governance issues, pollution and climate change.^[11]

2.1 Climate change and biodiversity loss

As noted above, there are many drivers of biodiversity loss. However, one of the contributory factors is climate change. This is expected to be an increasing cause of biodiversity loss over the coming decades.^[12]

Organisations and experts warn of the many ways that climate change and increasing temperatures are impacting nature and biodiversity. For example, the Royal Society has highlighted the impact of increasing temperatures on sea and land life, and also the issues caused by worsening extreme weather events linked to climate change:

A major impact of climate change on biodiversity is the increase in the intensity and frequency of fires, storms or periods of drought. In Australia at the end of 2019 and start of 2020, 97,000km² of forest and surrounding habitats were destroyed by intense fires that are now known to have been made worse by climate change. This adds to the threat to biodiversity which has already been placed under stress by other human activities. It is thought that the number of threatened species in the area may have increased by 14% as a result of the fires.

Rising global temperatures also have the potential to alter ecosystems over longer periods by changing what can grow and live within them. There is already evidence to suggest that reductions in water vapour in the atmosphere since the 1990s has resulted in 59% of vegetated areas showing pronounced browning and reduced growth rates worldwide.

Rising temperatures in the oceans affect marine organisms. Corals are particularly vulnerable to rising temperatures and ocean acidification can make it harder for shellfish and corals in the upper ocean to form shells and hard skeletons. We have also seen changes in occurrence of marine algae blooms.^[13]

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has published a series of papers on the impact of climate change on nature. These cover:

• Land degradation: The IUCN explains that soil is a key “carbon sink”, storing “more carbon than the planet’s biomass and atmosphere combined”. It is also a key part of biodiversity in its own right (for example, it is home to multiple microbes, invertebrates, fungi, etc). However, the IUCN adds that climate change can cause land degradation through extreme weather events and drought, with this negatively impacting the soil’s biodiversity and carbon storage.^[14]
• Oceans: The IUCN lists numerous effects of climate change on the world’s oceans. These include the impact of rising temperatures on oceanic circulation and chemistry, sea levels and marine life (for example, where marine life can live). Rising sea levels can cause issues on coastlines, including coastal erosion and habitat destruction. In addition, the IUCN states that CO² emissions are making the ocean more acidic, in turn making many marine species and ecosystems increasingly vulnerable. It also explains that “ocean acidification reduces the ability of marine organisms, such as corals, plankton and shellfish, to build their shells and skeletal structure”.
• Species: Climate change affects animals in many ways and is believed to be linked to the issues impacting a large number of species on the IUCN’s red list of threatened species. For example, it can cause habitat destruction, disease (for example, to coral groups) and changes to species themselves, including migration and breeding changes. This in turn may lead to alterations in food chains and invasive ‘alien species’ affecting ecosystems.

The IUCN estimates that “80% of ecological processes that form the foundation for life on Earth are impacted by climate change”.^[15]

2.2 Measurements of biodiversity loss

The WWF and ZSL’s 2024 ‘Living planet report’ attempted to measure the scale of biodiversity and nature loss.^[16] It found substantial losses in wildlife populations over the last 50 years (up to 2020), with the impact particularly bad in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia and the Pacific. Losses were less bad in Europe and North America; however, the report put this down to the impact having previously been felt in these regions, as well as more recent conservation efforts:

Over the past 50 years (1970–2020), the average size of monitored wildlife populations has shrunk by 73%, as measured by the Living Planet Index (LPI). This is based on almost 35,000 population trends and 5,495 species of amphibians, birds, fish, mammals and reptiles. Freshwater populations have suffered the heaviest declines, falling by 85%, followed by terrestrial (69%) and marine populations (56%).

At a regional level, the fastest declines have been seen in Latin America and the Caribbean—a concerning 95% decline—followed by Africa (76%) and Asia and the Pacific (60%). Declines have been less dramatic in Europe and Central Asia (35%) and North America (39%), but this reflects the fact that large-scale impacts on nature were already apparent before 1970 in these regions: some populations have stabilized or increased thanks to conservation efforts and species reintroductions.^[17]

The report stressed that these declines threaten the resilience and functioning of ecosystems, which—in turn—undermines the benefits these ecosystems bring to humans. These benefits include food, clean water, carbon storage, and broader contributions linked to cultural and social wellbeing.^[18]

The report also warned that the world is getting closer to a number of global “tipping points”. It explained these could have grave consequences for humanity and other species:

When cumulative impacts reach a threshold, the change becomes self-perpetuating, resulting in substantial, often abrupt and potentially irreversible change. This is called a tipping point.

In the natural world, a number of tipping points are highly likely if current trends are left to continue, with potentially catastrophic consequences. These include global tipping points that pose grave threats to humanity and most species, and would damage Earth’s life-support systems and destabilise societies everywhere.^[19]

It highlighted a number of examples of “fast approaching” tipping points, including:

• In the biosphere, the mass die-off of coral reefs would destroy fisheries and storm protection for hundreds of millions of people living on the coasts. The Amazon rainforest tipping point would release tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere and disrupt weather patterns around the globe.
• In ocean circulation, the collapse of the subpolar gyre, a circular current south of Greenland, would dramatically change weather patterns in Europe and North America.
• In the cryosphere (the frozen parts of the planet), the melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets would unleash many metres of sea level rise, while large-scale thawing of permafrost would trigger vast emissions of carbon dioxide and methane.^[20]

The report linked a number of these tipping points to climate change, as well as other factors. For example, it said the Amazon was being impacted by deforestation and climate change causing decreased rainfall. It said a tipping point could be reached where conditions were unsuitable for a tropical rainforest. The report also stated that a tipping point could be reached if around 20–25% of the Amazon was destroyed, and estimated that 14–17% had already been deforested. It also stated that “we will likely lose 70–90% of all coral reefs globally, including the Great Barrier Reef, even if we are able to limit climate warming to 1.5°C”.^[21]

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has also published material on the nature crisis, including estimates that:

• [Humans] are using the equivalent of 1.6 Earths to maintain our current way of life and ecosystems cannot keep up with our demands.
• One million of the world’s estimated 8 million species of plants and animals are threatened with extinction.
• 75% of the Earth’s land surface has been significantly altered by human actions, including 85% of wetland areas.
• 66% of ocean area is impacted by human activities, including from fisheries and pollution.
• Close to 90% of the world’s marine fish stocks are fully exploited, overexploited or depleted.^[22]

As with the WWF and ZSL report, the UNEP said that the majority of the loss was due to food production, specifically rapid agricultural expansion.

The UNEP, along with WWF and ZSL, highlighted the importance of transforming conservation and our food system to tackle biodiversity loss. For example, the WWF and ZSL report said that “countries need to extend, enhance, connect and properly fund their systems of protected areas, while respecting the rights and needs of the people affected”.^[23] On food production, the report stated that the system was “inherently illogical” because it was “destroying biodiversity, depleting the world’s water resources and changing the climate”, but still was not “delivering the nutrition people need”.^[24] It called for coordinated action, including:

• scaling up ‘nature positive’ production, to provide enough food for everyone whilst also ensuring natural resources are not adversely affected
• reducing food loss and waste
• increasing financial support and fostering good governance in support of ‘nature positive’ and sustainable food production

All three organisations highlighted the importance of global action on the issue, including through international forums such as the UN biodiversity conferences (information on this can be found in section 3.2 of this briefing).

3. Nature and biodiversity’s impact on climate change

As set out above, protecting and promoting biodiversity and nature is also considered important for tackling climate change. Indeed, the Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology (POST) has described climate change and biodiversity as “interdependent”, explaining: “climate change can contribute to biodiversity loss, and biodiversity loss can make climate change and its effects worse”.^[25] Expanding on this, POST highlighted how nature and biodiversity can be utilised to mitigate the impact of emissions:

Biodiversity can mitigate climate change and support adaptation through ecosystem service provision, such as carbon storage. Mitigation refers to any intervention that reduces emissions from sources or enhances removal by sinks of GHGs [greenhouse gases]. Forests, particularly tropical forests, have large mitigation potential, due to their rate of carbon uptake when growing, and capacity for carbon storage if deforestation is avoided. Forests could provide a quarter of the emissions reductions currently pledged by nations under the Paris Agreement. However, global forest extent would need to increase every year between 2019 and 2030 by an area equivalent to the size of the UK.^[26]

In addition, POST highlighted how nature and biodiversity can help humans adapt to the impact of climate change. For example, it said that efforts to protect or restore coastal ecosystems may have a (limited) impact on protecting coastal communities from rising sea levels.

The UN has also stressed the importance of biodiversity for combating climate change, stating that it provides “natural carbon sinks” which absorb more carbon than they release. In particular, the UN has highlighted the importance of protecting and utilising forests, peatlands and ocean habitats:

Protecting, managing, and restoring forests, for example, offers roughly two-thirds of the total mitigation potential of all nature-based solutions. Despite massive and ongoing losses, forests still cover more than 30% of the planet’s land.

Peatlands—wetlands such as marshes and swamps—cover only 3% of the world’s land, but they store twice as much carbon as all the forests. Preserving and restoring peatlands means keeping them wet so the carbon doesn’t oxidize and float off into the atmosphere.

Ocean habitats such as seagrasses and mangroves can also sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at rates up to four times higher than terrestrial forests can. Their ability to capture and store carbon make mangroves highly valuable in the fight against climate change.^[27]

It said these ‘nature-based solutions’ (NbS) could provide about one-third of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions needed in the next decade. Actions forming NbS can include:^[28]

• limiting deforestation
• rewilding and restoring ecosystems (such as drained peatlands)
• improving management practices of farmed land such that emissions are reduced
• allowing waterways to continue along natural courses to reduce flood risk
• better integrating nature into urban areas and agricultural areas

3.1 Nature-based solutions as a tool to tackle climate change

The IUCN has referred to the potential benefits of NbS, highlighting studies suggesting it could contribute “around 30% of the global mitigation required by 2030/2050 to achieve the 1.5/2°C temperature rise goal agreed to under the Paris Agreement”. It also cited studies emphasising the vital importance of protecting “carbon-rich, high biodiversity” ecosystems.^[29]

A 2022 article by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment (part of the London School of Economics and Political Science) also considered evidence on the use of NbS to tackle climate change.^[30] It cautioned that NbS were only one component in addressing the issue and should be pursued alongside other measures, such as emissions reductions. It also said NbS would have a relatively limited impact on efforts to achieve net zero by 2050. It explained this was due to the time and difficulty of restoring already depleted ecosystems and measuring linked carbon dioxide removals. However, it did report evidence that NbS could be a “powerful” tool in temperature reductions over the next century. It explained:

Recent evidence indicates that well-designed nature-based solutions can play a powerful role in reducing temperatures over the remainder of the century. A synthesis of available evidence indicates that, under a moderately ambitious scenario, nature-based solutions could avoid or remove up to 10 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO² equivalent per year up to 2050, with 85% of these saved emissions a result of changed land management practices, such as incorporating agroforestry into conventional agricultural practices. However, emissions savings will likely be substantially lower than this unless widespread incentives to continue emissions-intensive and destructive practices for agricultural expansion such as deforestation are removed. One study finds that cost-effective nature-based solutions can only contribute around 20% of the reductions needed by 2050, with decarbonisation making up the remainder. This evidence indicates that nature-based solutions hold mitigation potential, but they cannot be relied upon alone to meet the 1.5°C target.

The Grantham Research Institute also highlighted some examples of NbS being used counterproductively or in a way that negatively impacted local communities:

In some cases, nature-based solutions have been employed with a short-sighted focus on rapid CO² removal without due attention to other environmental implications. For example, in Chile between 1986 and 2011, subsidies and poor regulatory oversight likely led to afforestation that decreased biodiversity without increasing the total carbon stored in above-ground biomass. Similarly, in Cambodia, a 34,000-hectare reforestation project resulted in native forest being replaced by a species monoculture at considerable cost to local biodiversity—and the local community. Indeed, other challenges concern the legacy of projects that have not respected land tenure or existing customary rights of Indigenous peoples or local communities and been developed without their free and informed consent. Nature-based solutions have also been charged as being a form of greenwashing, whereby emitters such as airlines can offset their emissions in a ‘nature-friendly way’ (eg by planting trees) while not pursuing overall reductions.^[31]

As such, it said that a number of UK-based organisations (including ZSL and the Nature-based Solutions Initiative at Oxford University) had worked together on guidelines for delivering successful NbS to avoid some of these potential negatives. The four key themes of the guidelines are:

• NbS are not a substitute for the rapid phase-out of fossil fuels and must not delay urgent action to decarbonise our economies.
• NbS involve the protection, restoration or management of a wide range of natural and semi-natural ecosystems; the sustainable management of aquatic systems and working lands; or the creation of novel ecosystems in and around cities or across the wider landscape.
• NbS are designed, implemented, managed and monitored by or in partnership with Indigenous peoples and local communities through a process that fully respects and champions local rights and knowledge, and generates local benefits.
• NbS support or enhance biodiversity, that is, the diversity of life from the level of the gene to the level of the ecosystem.^[32]

3.2 International policy on nature climate change

NbS is increasingly considered as part of international and domestic policies to combat climate change. For example, POST stated that NbS were included in many countries’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement.^[33] Indeed, the Grantham Research Institute’s analysis found that 102 nations (84% of the parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)) had included it in some form in their NDCs.^[34]

The UN says climate change and biodiversity are inextricably linked and both must be tackled together to secure a viable future for the planet.^[35] It therefore highlighted the dual importance of nations’ involvement and adherence with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), both established (along with the similarly linked UN Convention to Combat Desertification) at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.

The Paris Agreement, referred to above, was agreed under the UNFCCC in 2015. It set the goal of holding the increase in average global temperatures to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit temperature increases to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. However, the UN notes that in recent years world leaders have increasingly stressed the need to achieve the 1.5°C target, as evidence suggests exceeding this threshold would still likely lead to a number of severe consequences (such as severe droughts and heatwaves).^[36]

The Paris Agreement requires countries to work towards limiting temperatures and to set out national climate action plans every five years, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), for how they will do so. Although recognising and accommodating different countries’ situations (for example, that developing countries’ emissions would likely be higher over a longer period than developed countries), it said that parties to the agreement should aim to peak greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, and then rapidly reduce them (which could include making use of carbon sinks). The Paris Agreement is legally binding.^[37]

Annual conferences are held to monitor and discuss progress on climate change, including countries’ responsibilities and actions under the Paris Agreement. The most recent was held in Azerbaijan in November 2024. It provided a forum for countries to discuss their new NDCs proposals (which must be published in 2025) and saw the agreement of a new climate finance deal to assist developing countries respond and adapt to climate change. Further information on this can be found in the following briefing:

• House of Commons Library, ‘What was agreed at COP29?’, 5 December 2024.

A UN report published ahead of the latest climate conference warned that rapid and more sustained cuts in greenhouse gases were necessary to avoid higher global temperature rises with “debilitating impacts to people, planet and economies”.^[38] It called for cuts of 42% by 2030 and 57% by 2035 to get on track for 1.5°C, adding:

It remains technically possible to get on a 1.5°C pathway, with solar, wind and forests holding real promise for sweeping and fast emissions cuts. To deliver on this potential, sufficiently strong NDCs would need to be backed urgently by a whole-of-government approach, measures that maximize socioeconomic and environmental co-benefits, enhanced international collaboration that includes reform of the global financial architecture, strong private sector action and a minimum six-fold increase in mitigation investment. G20 nations, particularly the largest-emitting members, would need to do the heavy lifting.

Regarding the CBD, a new Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) was agreed by parties in December 2022. The GBF set four goals for 2050 focused on protecting and investing in nature in a sustainable and equitable way. It also contained 23 global targets requiring “urgent action” to be undertaken and completed by 2030. These included that planning and managing all areas should mitigate biodiversity loss; restoring 30% of degraded ecosystems; conserving 30% of land, waters and sea (this is often referred to as 30 by 30); and minimising the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and building resilience.^[39] However, this framework is not legally binding.

Speaking ahead of the framework’s agreement, UN Secretary General António Guterres said that the GBF “should work in synergy with the Paris Agreement on climate change and other multilateral agreements on forests, desertification and oceans”.^[40] Subsequently, at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in October–November 2024, the parties adopted a “landmark decision” agreeing the need for greater coordination of climate and biodiversity policymaking, including increased collaboration between the presidents of the CBD and UNFCCC conferences.^[41]

The following material contains further information on the GBF and the biodiversity conferences:

• House of Lords Library, ‘COP15: Global biodiversity framework’, 6 January 2023
• Nature Conservancy, ‘COP16: What happened at the 2024 UN Biodiversity Conference?’, 5 November 2024

4. UK policies on climate and nature

4.1 Overview

The UK is a party to both the CBD and UNFCCC, with these shaping the UK’s approach to its biodiversity, climate change and net zero policies.

The UK’s climate policy includes a legislative commitment to achieve net zero (total greenhouse gas emissions equal to the emissions removed from the atmosphere) by 2050.^[42] The Conservative government also set a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 68% by 2030, compared to 1990 levels, via the UK’s NDCs.^[43] The UK’s NDCs document also acknowledged the need for an integrated approach to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss.^[44]

The previous Conservative government set out policies to achieve these targets across a range of documents, but particularly in its 2021 ‘Net zero strategy’ and 2023 ‘Powering up Britain: The net zero growth plan’. For example, these papers set out plans to decarbonise energy and transport sectors and mobilise investment in green technologies. Both papers also referred to the importance of protecting and restoring nature, and included policies such as increased investment for the ‘Nature for climate fund’ (an initiative focused on reversing biodiversity loss) and incorporating these principles into the UK’s green finance framework.

The UK’s biodiversity strategies and targets are devolved across the four home nations. However, a joint biodiversity framework was published in May 2024 setting out some agreed objectives for cross-UK working on approaches to biodiversity.^[45] For example, it outlined the importance of coordinating and ensuring policy worked towards the UK’s international obligations (such as the GBF). The paper also provides some details on each devolved nation’s approach to biodiversity.

In England, the Environment Act 2021 and connected regulations contain legally binding biodiversity targets connected to the UK’s international obligations under the CBD.^[46] Targets include:^[47]

• halting the decline in species abundance by 2030
• reversing the decline in species abundance and reducing the risk of species extinction by 2042
• restoring or creating in excess of 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat outside of current protected sites by 2042
• increasing tree and woodland cover to 16.5% of total land area in England by 2050

The previous Conservative government, then led by Boris Johnson, also committed the UK to the GBF’s target to protect 30% of the UK’s land by 2030 (the 30 by 30 target).^[48]

Policies to achieve these targets and to mitigate biodiversity loss generally were set out in several government papers. However, the principal policy in this area was provided by 2018’s ‘25 year environment plan’ and 2023’s ‘Environmental improvement plan’ progress report. These set out 10 goals, including clean air, using resources from nature sustainably, and mitigating and adapting to climate change. Policies to achieve these goals listed by the Conservative government in 2023 included:^[49]

• funding for ‘species survival’ projects (focused on protecting vital habitats)^[50]
• increasing the impetus and support for councils to improve air quality more quickly
• tackling nutrient pollution in England’s waters, including by upgrading wastewater facilities
• publishing a baseline map of soil health for England by 2028 and bringing at least 40% of England’s agricultural soil into sustainable management by 2028

In addition, in March 2023 the previous government published a strategic framework for international climate and nature action.^[51] This set out the UK’s approach for pushing forward international action on climate change and nature. Introducing the paper, the previous government said the threat of climate change and nature loss was clear and were the “two defining challenges of our time”, requiring urgent action. It continued:

Climate change and nature loss are interlinked and mutually reinforcing: climate change accelerates nature loss, in turn worsening the effects of climate change. In many cases they share common causes and the same solutions. They must be tackled together, as complex, whole economy, multi-generational issues that require long-term commitment and international collaboration. Strong and early action to tackle these challenges is economically beneficial, while delay only adds cost.

Action on climate and nature will not only protect against the worst impacts, it will allow us to take advantage of the huge opportunities in the transition to a net zero, climate resilient and nature positive future. This economic transformation is expected to result in the largest flow of capital ever seen into clean technologies, net zero cities and green and resilient industries. It will help revitalise our economies, deliver energy security, improve our health and catalyse sustainable development. Global investment in the clean energy transition, the fastest route to affordable, secure energy, rose 30% last year, to over $1tn for the first time, despite significant economic headwinds […]

To make rapid progress we need to realign financial flows, rapidly decarbonise key sectors of the global economy, eg power, transport and agriculture, and scale up efforts to adapt. We must urgently reduce and phase out the most potent greenhouse gases such as methane through initiatives such as the global methane pledge and fluorinated gases through implementation of the Montreal Protocol and Kigali amendment to phase out hydrofluorocarbons. And we must support poor and climate vulnerable countries to prepare for and deal with the consequences of climate change.^[52]

The paper set out the UK’s intention to lead on these challenges. It also said the framework would form a core part of UK foreign policy and complement its domestic policies. The following infographic provides an overview of the UK’s intention behind the framework, including the challenges and levers it was focusing on:

Figure: Overview of 2030 strategic framework

It also set out six challenges the UK would focus on as part of this agenda over the next couple of years, including working to accelerate global sectoral decarbonisation, pushing for “robust” implementation of the GBF and leading on green finance.^[53]

However, the new Labour government has not commented on whether it will be following this framework.

4.2 Concerns about UK progress

Despite these targets and policies, some concerns have been raised about the UK’s progress towards net zero and tackling biodiversity loss.

For example, the Climate Change Committee (CCC), the UK’s statutory adviser for climate change, said in its 2024 progress report that the new government “would have to act fast to hit the country’s [net zero] commitments”.^[54] It said that, despite significant achievements over successive governments, recent years had seen a slowing in progress and the apparent reversal or delay of key policies. It also criticised the “inconsistent” messages on domestic climate policy by the previous government.

Assessing progress across areas, the CCC found that many key indicators of progress were off track. In particular, it found that NbS such as woodland creation and peatland restoration were “significantly off track”. Commenting on this further, it said:

Agriculture and land use: the rate of new woodland creation has been relatively static over recent years, at around 13,000 ha [hectares, defined as 10,000 square metres] per year. This is considerably below the levels (around 15,000–20,000 ha per year) that were sustained during the 1990s. Peatland restoration rates increased to 12,700 ha in 2023 but remain considerably behind the government’s pathway. Both indicators are significantly off track.

• Tree planting will rapidly need to more than double in rate to get as close as possible to the government’s target of 30,000 ha per year by 2025. This higher rate will then need to be maintained through the rest of the decade and beyond. Due to the lag in sequestration, tree planting must be upscaled in the 2020s for its abatement impact to be felt from 2040 and beyond.
• A similar increase will also be needed in peatland restoration rates, to reach the government’s target of 32,000 ha per year by 2026, which is in turn significantly less ambitious than the CCC’s recommendation.^[55]

However, the CCC saw opportunities in the decreasing cost of low carbon technologies, and said this offered “an opportunity for the UK to boost investment, reclaim global climate leadership and enhance energy security by accelerating take-up”. It concluded that the new government would need to:

[S]et out a clear commitment to the net zero transition, backed with rapid policy action and a sharp-eyed focus on removing barriers to deployment. This will build confidence for investors, businesses and consumers and create the right conditions for markets to deliver. Policy must also address the urgent need for effective and integrated adaptation action and be designed to ensure the transition is delivered in a fair way.^[56]

Turning to biodiversity in the UK, the 2023 ‘State of nature report’ described the UK (based on declines since the 1970s) as one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world.^[57] The report was published by the State of Nature Partnership, made up of a range of nature organisations, including Natural England, the WWF and ZSL. The report provides detailed information across many species, with some showing increases and other declines. However, on average, the report found a continuing decline in biodiversity in the UK. For example, it said:

• The abundance of 753 terrestrial and freshwater species has on average fallen by 19% across the UK since 1970. Within this average figure, 290 species have declined in abundance (38%) and 205 species have increased (27%).
• Since 1970, the distributions of 54% of flowering plant species and 59% of bryophytes (mosses and liverworts) have decreased across Great Britain. By comparison, only 15% and 26% of flowering plants and bryophytes, respectively, have increased.
• 10,008 species were assessed using [IUCN] red list criteria. 2% (151 species) are extinct in Great Britain and a further 16% (almost 1,500 species) are now threatened with extinction here.^[58]

Overall, the report stated that, despite recent policy work, more needed to be done to address biodiversity loss in the UK:

[D]espite progress in ecosystem restoration, conserving species, and moving towards nature-friendly land and sea use, the UK’s nature and wider environment continues, overall, to decline and degrade. The UK has set ambitious targets to address nature loss through the GBF, and although our knowledge of how to do this is excellent, the size of the response and investment remains far from what is needed given the scale and pace of the crisis.^[59]

Commenting on the report, the director of science at Natural England, Pete Brotherton, said that despite the many concerns it raised, the report did show some “glimmers of hope”. For example, he noted increases in bat populations and some groups of freshwater insects. He then made four recommendations to accelerate nature recovery:^[60]

• improve the quality of our protected sites on land and at sea
• create more, bigger and messier places for wildlife (such as ponds and untrimmed hedgerows)
• reducing pollution on land (notably pesticides and excess fertilisers) and reducing the pressure on marine environments
• targeted species recovery action

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee, which advises the government and devolved administrations on nature conservation, also publishes figures assessing biodiversity trends in the UK. These are split by measures and indicators across a range of areas. In summary, it found that:

Overall, while around half of the assessed indicator measures are improving in the long term, in the short term [usually five years] more are either deteriorating or showing little or no change than improving.

• No indicators have changed category over the short term to become improving. Many indicators already showing improvement in the long term remained as improving in the short term.
• Of those indicators which have been improving in the long term, some have begun to show no change or even deteriorate in the short term.
• Of those indicators which have been deteriorating in the long term, some have stopped deteriorating in the short term.^[61]

For example, most of the bird categories showed signs of deterioration in the short or long term, and species of butterflies showed little or no change or deterioration across categories. The percentage of woodland defined as “sustainably managed” showed long term improvement, but little or no change in the short term.^[62]

In its January 2022 report assessing the then government’s ambitions for NbS to support progress towards net zero, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee declared them ambitious, but with a “severe risk of failure”.^[63] It feared this could then undermine the 2050 net zero target and the UK’s agricultural sector. It listed a number of reasons for its concerns, including:^[64]

• difficulties assessing carbon storage across all natural resources (for example, moving the focus beyond tree-planting)
• the need for more skills and funding to fully utilise NbS
• competing demands on land
• the need to fully engage the farming community

Based on these concerns, it said:

We recommend that the government, as a matter of urgency, invests in research, skills training, and delivery of nature-based solutions. At the same time, the government needs to tell land managers how they will be paid for delivering nature-based solutions, to set out how competing demands on land will be balanced, and to facilitate private investment in high-quality nature-based solutions.^[65]

4.3 Labour Party position

In its manifesto, Labour described the climate and nature crisis as the greatest long-term challenge the world faced.^[66] Among other things, the party committed to a clean energy transition and tackling the “nature emergency”, including pollution in the UK’s rivers and sea. It said it would improve access to nature, promote biodiversity and protect wildlife. For example, the government has introduced the Great British Energy Bill, which would set up Great British Energy as a new, publicly owned energy production company focused on clean energy. This is currently progressing through Parliament.

On 30 July 2024, shortly after coming into office, the government announced that it would carry out a rapid review of the previous administration’s ‘Environmental improvement plan’. It said this would lead to a new statutory plan to protect and rebuild the natural environment, based on Environment Act 2021 targets. It explained:

This will focus on cleaning up our waterways, reducing waste across the economy, planting millions more trees, improving air quality and halting the decline in species by 2030. The review will engage with stakeholders across environment and nature, farming, resources, waste and water sectors, working hand in glove with businesses, local authorities and civil society across the country to develop new ambitious plans to save nature.^[67]

This has not yet been published. However, Baroness Hayman of Ullock, parliamentary under secretary of state at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, indicated that a statement of key findings would be published in early 2025. She said this would then be followed by a revised environmental improvement plan.^[68]

At the COP29 climate conference, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced that the UK’s updated NDCs will set a target of an 81% reduction in UK greenhouse gas emissions, compared to 1990 levels, by 2035. This was in line with recommendations from the CCC. In a press release accompanying this announcement, the government stated:

By 2030, to combat climate catastrophe, global emissions need to fall by 43% on 1990 levels (whereas the most optimistic scenario of NDC implementation implies a reduction of around only 5.9% by 2030), climate finance needs to increase at least fivefold, we need to phase out coal seven times faster and reduce forest loss four times faster.

That is why the UK has set an ambitious target and will be urging other countries to bring forward ambitious, economy-wide nationally determined contributions by the February 2025 deadline to address the urgency of the climate crisis.^[69]

It said this would be supported by investment in green energy and increased delivery of green energy projects, including removing the ban on onshore wind farms.

Other developments and announcements since Labour have come to office have included:

• publishing criteria and plans for how it will achieve the ‘30 by 30’ target (doing so in the context of the COP 16 biodiversity conference)^[70]
• pledging £239mn at the COP 29 climate conference to help countries tackle deforestations (it said that this would be in addition to pre-existing funding promises)^[71]
• appointing Ruth Davis, a long-time environment specialist and advisor, as the UK’s first special representative for nature^[72]

Speaking shortly after her appointment, Ruth Davis spoke about the importance of nature in achieving the world’s climate and development goals. She stated:

We need to put nature at the heart of our discussions on climate and development. A thriving natural environment is critical for building our resilience to face the demands of a changing climate. We know that our global network of peatlands, seas and forests act as carbon sinks, sequestering and holding carbon dioxide to regulate the Earth’s climate. It is not possible to reach our net zero or sustainable development goals without restoring nature.^[73]

In addition, in his first speech as foreign secretary (at Kew Gardens, London in September 2024), David Lammy said that climate and nature policy were too often considered in isolation. He therefore stated that “action on the climate and nature crisis will be central to all that the Foreign Office does”.^[74] As part of this, he said the UK would work with countries around the world to mobilise increased climate and nature finances. For example, he highlighted the UK’s work to lead a ‘Global Clean Power Alliance’, whereby countries will work together on renewable energy and energy efficiency commitments.^[75]

5. Read more

• United Nations, ‘Biodiversity: Our strongest natural defence against climate change’, accessed 7 January 2025
• House of Commons Library, ‘Biodiversity loss: The UK’s international obligations’, 11 July 2024
• House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, ‘An extraordinary challenge: Restoring 30% of our land and sea by 2030’, 26 July 2023, HL Paper 234 of session 2022–23; and ‘Government response’, 8 November 2023
• Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology, ‘Biodiversity loss and nature recovery’, 7 October 2024
• Economist, ‘Nature and climate on the line: COP16 must deliver on both’, 28 October 2024; and ‘Nature can protect us—if we protect it. Five changes that will help the private sector invest in nature—now’, 21 June 2023
• Conservation International, ‘Study: How nature can fight climate change—and how it can’t’, 23 January 2024; and ‘Stabilizing our climate by protecting and restoring nature’, accessed 7 January 2025

---

Photo by Milin John on Unsplash