Local Nature Recovery Strategies (LNRS)

If Local Nature Recovery Strategies (LNRS) is a topic new to you, you can find out more in our earlier blog. To summarise, the production and adoption of LNRS are mandated under the Environment Act – they are spatial strategies at a county level, which are intended to identify priorities for nature recovery and map where and what actions should be delivered.

Currently 19 of 48 strategies across the country are adopted and ‘active’, with the remainder expected in the early part of 2026. The challenge now will be in realising the delivery of LNRS and we look forward to engaging with our clients to understand how it can be delivered at a field and estate level.

Earlier this year we set up a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) habitat bank for Stroud District Council using the specifics of the LNRS locally to steer the habitat design of the site and agreeing this upfront with the council as part of the legal agreement which binds the site. It will be exciting to see this one come to life within S106 – it’s a first for the council and will provide significant habitat delivery for development projects locally.

While BNG is likely to be the main catalyst for the delivery of LNRS we believe a blend of private and public finance will provide a significant boost.

We will be keeping a watchful eye on how the adoption of LNRS interacts with the planning system and emerging local plan work nationally – we know they are a material consideration in plan making and decision making but have yet to see this properly tested. 

Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG)

 2025 has been the first ‘full’ year of mandatory BNG, and what a year it has been. We’ve seen the off-site BNG market continue to mature and spread, and two important consultations where we’ve yet to see the outcome.

The first consultation was launched in May to address emerging challenges in the implementation of BNG for smaller developments. It responds to feedback that BNG is not operating as efficiently as it could do. Recognising the role SME developers and minor and medium developments will play in meeting the government’s housing target, the proposals seek to resolve operational barriers as part of the Growth Strategy. The consultation is split into three areas: amendments to the small site exemptions, new exemptions, and proposed changes to the metric and guidance.

Also in May, the government launched another consultation to extend BNG to new Development Consent Order applications from May 2026. This would align Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) with Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA) developments, including use of the metric and Biodiversity Gain Sites Register (for both the purchase of units and sale of surplus, legally secured gains). Unlike TCPA, NSIPs will be able to consider on- and off-site gains from the outset. The consultation also clarifies treatment of BNG habitat banks and nature compensation sites impacted by schemes: uplift calculations must use the enhanced habitat baseline. NSIPs will also have to follow the spatial hierarchy’s preference for local enhancement, though guidance on schemes spanning multiple Local Planning Authorities and National Construction Authorities is pending. The off-site BNG market also continues to grow rapidly, from 46 sites on the Biodiversity Gain Sites Register in February 2025 to a huge 160 at the time of publication.  Savills Environmental Exchange provides land for environmental services in the UK.

Currently the supply of BNG units is outstripping demand, with only approximately 6% of all available habitat units allocated. There are individual ‘pinch’ points with certain habitats where availability is decreasing without being replenished – for example open mosaic habitat, where 25% of all available units are ‘allocated’. We expect that in time, supply will slow down as demand catches up and those projects currently in the planning system now work through permission, condition discharges and starting on site.

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

At the end of 2025 we have seen a flurry of activity concerning Part 3 of the Bill, which focuses on the environment. In its original form, the Bill proposed a radical new system for environmental mitigation, centred around newly proposed Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs), to be produced by Natural England. These plans would be published over a set geographic area and specific to the sensitivities of the local area, with the bar being the Overall Improvement Test to demonstrate how at a landscape-scale certain ecological receptors (species/habits) would be improved as a result of the EDPs.

The EDPs would be delivered through a Nature Restoration Fund which would be paid into proportionally by developers as part of planning permissions in the EDP region if their proposals could potentially impact the receptors which the EDP covers. Site-specific assessments would then be avoided, with capital raised from development deployed instead to landscape-scale nature recovery efforts.

While amendments were suggested which would restrict the scope of EDPs to diffuse pollution issues (nutrient, water, air) and not other receptors, ultimately these were not taken forward in the final form of the Bill which is now due to receive Royal Assent in December. We are told, however, that the first tranche of EDPs will be restricted to nutrient issues, with ‘lessons learned’ and successes taken forward to improve future EDPs. It is likely that the actual publication/delivery and levies paid into the EDPs will take some time to work in practice and be available as a mitigation solution.

Case Law

We also saw a significant ruling from the UK Supreme Court relating to CG Fry versus Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government which provided clarity for nutrient neutrality of Ramsar sites.

In short, the circumstances where the consequences of this decision will apply are very rare. However, this ruling now makes clear that no matter the stage of planning (either reserved matters or condition discharge), a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) is required if either: one hasn’t been produced previously and there is potential for an impact on a European site (either at outline or full permission) or (although not specifically ruled) if an HRA has been approved, but there have been material changes since the original HRA (i.e. the context of the CG Fry case where Natural England published new advice in the light of new evidence.) To find out more about this case read our blog.

Further information

Contact Joe Dance or Francesca Fowler-Walsh