SOLUTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN & NUTRIENT NEUTRALITY IN NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS 33 What is the ratio you have achieved so far between ‘actual’ biodiversity additions, and purchasing BNG credits?


A HIGH PERCENTAGE SAID THEY ARE CURRENTLY FINDING IT DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE 10% BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN


CHALLENGES


rucially, we asked respondents how diffi cult theyre currently fi nding it to achieve  B. orryingly, a total of  answered either very or somewhat diffi cult. A further  selected neutral, leaving only  answering somewhat or very easy. ts concerning that such a high percentage of housebuilders go so far as to say its not ust not easy but is diffi cult, and demonstrates that concerns over the lack of support and preparedness from efra, and consequently local authorities, are not unfounded. t could also be, as is often the case with legislative changes, a cost issue, which can particularly impact smaller housebuilders who dont have the same capacity to absorb additional costs as larger developers might. inally, there is also the administrative and logistical element that comes with such changes, with housebuilders either having to employ third-party consultants to assist them or spend time and money on in-house training. All of these combined undoubtedly make  B a challenge, especially for Es. ith efra outlining in their biodiversity gain hierarchy the order in which housebuilders should set about achieving  B, we asked what ratio respondents have achieved so far between actual biodiversity additions – onsite or offsite – and purchasing B credits, the least favourable option. The responses were somewhat divided –  said the ratio is , a further  said its ,  said , and  said . orryingly the fi nal  said its below . iven purchasing B credits should be a last resort, its concerning that no respondents said their ratio is more than , and that overall  said its either  or less. This clearly indicates there are some signifi cant barriers to overcome in order to encourage developers to prioritise either onsite or offsite solutions, before resorting to purchasing B credits.


ADMINISTRATIVE & LOGISTICAL ISSUES


ne of the biggest challenges for any industry when faced with legislative changes is the logistics and administration of ensuring individuals are up to speed in order to remain compliant. Theres also often a certain amount of argon to learn and understand, all of which can cause a headache for housebuilders. n that basis, we asked if the argon and logistics are creating a substantial learning curve for their fi rms, to which  said yes, and a further  said somewhat. hile it could be argued this is to be epected given the compleity of  B, and the lack of real support on offer, its nonetheless concerning


such a high percentage of developers feel theyre faced with such a steep learning curve the knock-on effect in terms of time and money spent on training and learning could equal less time and money spent on proects. e asked respondents how they have acquired credits, giving them the option of either local landowners, which  selected, or other sources which the remaining  chose.


SOLUTIONS


n order to gauge from the outset what our respondents understood of their responsibilities, we fi rst asked if they are aware of the full ramifi cations of what adding  B means for their schemes.  responded said they were aware, which is promising and shows that while there may be many obstacles to overcome, housebuilders at least feel their understanding is good – arguably the fi rst hurdle with any legislative change. e then asked respondents how they are delivering their  B requirements, asking them to select a percentage range each for onsite solutions, offsite solutions, and B credits. nsite solutions had the biggest range of answers –  said they deliver  to  of their requirements through onsite solutions, which is hugely encouraging. A further  said its  to , and another  said its  to , meaning that overall,  of respondents are delivering  or more of their  B requirements through onsite solutions, by far the most preferable.


SPECIFIC STRATEGIES To learn more about what eactly housebuilders are pursuing, we asked specifi cally what onsite solutions respondents are currently utilising, given they are more likely to cost less than offsite measures, asking them to select all that apply from the options of avoidance, minimisation, or rehabilitation  restoration. This is based on the mitigation hierarchy, which outlines the steps in order of preference. Avoidance attempts to avoid negative impacts to biodiversity, minimisation aims to reduce the severity, duration or etent or negative impacts, and restoration aims to restore habitats that have lost biodiversity value.


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68