Land Use framework

659.  The Government lacks a clear plan for how we will manage these competing and interrelated demands on land, according to submissions to the Review. The Net Zero Strategy showed a range of possible 2050 energy systems which deliver the target, but no similar analysis is available on how the UK's land area would need to change to deliver the varied land-based goals described above.

660.  The complexity of land use and the trade-offs described above mean it is very difficult for even the most committed land managers to ensure they are making best use of their land. Stakeholders told the Review that opportunities to maximise public investment are lost, and that the current framework does not allow land managers to deliver as many positive outcomes as they could.478

"The right approach to land management can also deliver a food system that is resilient to future climate change and conflicts, where nature thrives within and outside farmland, and where growers and producers get a fairer share of the market and help to avert the climate and nature crises just by doing their job." - RSPB479

661.  The Government made the following commitment in its recent Food Strategy:

"We will publish a land use framework in 2023 to ensure we meet our net zero and biodiversity targets, and help our farmers adapt to a changing climate, whilst continuing to produce high quality, affordable produce that supports a healthier diet." - Defra, Government Food Strategy 2022480

662.  Better data and analysis are needed to help the public and local decision-makers realise these outcomes and achieve the multiple goals set out in the Net Zero Strategy. The Land Use Framework should include analysis showing different options for how these multiple goals can be met within the land area of the UK, considering biodiversity and agricultural productivity needs, including water quality and flood protection.

663.  Land use change at a strongly spatially disaggregated level is currently an important evidence gap. This should be modelled and the principles to manage trade-offs and maximise synergies of each scenario should be clearly stated (for example, maximise land used for production of wood-derived biomass and energy crops, such as miscanthus, near the likely location of future BECCS plants; prioritise food production on high-grade agricultural land, etc.). Requiring collaboration between BEIS, Defra and DLUHC, this is an example of the kind of system thinking which is necessary to deliver net zero.

664.  Government also needs to ensure that this analysis considers the land use potential at different levels of global warming. A recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report showed that a warming of even just two degrees considerably alters the kind of crops that can be grown in different regions and changes the effectiveness of different types of land use solutions for biodiversity and flood protection (for example, wetlands no longer provide the same level of protection at two degrees of global warming).481 The analysis in the land use framework should directly address this with scenario modelling.

665.  Alongside the framework, government also needs to consider the existing incentive structures (see section below on Environmental Land Management schemes) and how aligned they are with bringing about outcomes which fulfil decarbonisation, agricultural production, and biodiversity goals, including those for land managers considering growing biomass. Land use change analysis described above needs to be joined up with an in-depth review of the regulatory and policy structures which determine land-use decision-making at different scales. It is becoming increasingly clear that our capacity to deliver upon multiple objectives will depend on how national policies support local action, and on policy coherence across silos.

666.  Stakeholders told the Review that the lack of policy consistency is a huge problem for agriculture and other users of land - affecting long-term planning and investment decisions.482 This includes issues with the planning system which is focused purely on new development and so does not interact well with decisions made on other outcomes, such as environmental protection.483

667.  The evidence seen by the Review and described above makes clear that a lack of clarity in decisions on land use is a barrier to growth and decarbonisation. It is crucial that the Food Strategy's commitment is met and that it provides the following:

•  A basis for deciding on competing land use opportunities - or a hierarchy of use;

•  A design to inform decisions made through the planning system;

•  Transparency and usability by other decision-makers, for example local authorities.