Professor Ian Hodge's seminar for the CCRI on 24th October 2022. There are two emergent movements in the governance of rural land: voluntary and local government initiatives that assess, plan and enhance landscape and biodiversity and a largely separate central government initiative for the development of Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes as a key element of national agricultural policy. This is developed and implemented by central government with a relatively large budget. These two movements should be better integrated through the development of a system of Local Environmental Governance Organisations (LEGOs). A LEGO would stand as a ‘trustee’ with a remit to protect and enhance the quality of the local environment in the long term. It can assemble evidence on natural capital, co-ordinate amongst stakeholders and work with them to identify local priorities for nature recovery. It would search for synergies and collaborative partnerships and raise funds to support priority projects. A key point is that a proportion of central government funding should be devolved to LEGOs. This would link the vision being developed locally with the capacity to generate financial incentives for land managers to change land management. Natural Cambridgeshire as the Local Nature Partnership is developing a number of the attributes of a LEGO. It is engaging with and appears to have support from a broad variety of stakeholders and is energising actions at several different levels. Through a local deliberative process, it can have a much clearer view of local opportunities and priorities than can be possible via central government. Natural Cambridgeshire has begun to raise funds but the likelihood is that this is will be too little, relatively short term and unsystematic. Longer term core funding would give Natural Cambridgeshire the capacity to back up proposals with financial support, potentially matching funding from other sources. It would then need to monitor and audit the implementation of projects and report on expenditure and outcomes. Over time it would adopt an adaptive approach to respond to outcomes and changing threats and opportunities. National government needs to establish a framework for the development and operation of a system of LEGOs. It would continue to act in support of national standards, both through regulation and investment to meet international commitments, such as for biodiversity and climate change.

1. Towards local environmental
governance: a case study of Natural
Cambridgeshire
Ian Hodge
Department of Land Economy
University of Cambridge
Countryside and Community Research Institute Seminar
24 November 2022
1

2. Towards local environmental governance:
a case study of Natural Cambridgeshire
• The challenge of countryside recovery
• A model of collaborative local governance
• Potential architecture
• A ‘national park’ approach
• A ‘Local Nature Partnership’ approach
• Natural Cambridgeshire as an emergent LEGO
• Initiatives in Cambridgeshire
• Further development
• National requirements for local governance
• Conclusions
Department of Land Economy
2

3. The challenge of countryside
recovery
• Multiple, shifting values of rural land (ecosystem
services)
• Food, biodiversity, GhG emissions, C sequestration, flood
mitigation, public access, public health, landscape aesthetics,
• The complexity of delivery
• Public goods
• Conflicts and synergies
• Spatial variability
• Multiple stakeholders
• Governance gap
• Government silos (Defra, NE, EA, FC, Ofwat, planning, LAs)
• Limits of centralised government
• Lack of institutions to represent demand
Department of Land Economy
3

4. Two separate approaches
• Central government: esp. agri-environment
• National designations (eg SSSIs)
• Environmental Land Management
• Regulation
• Voluntary and local government
• NGOs (eg Wildlife Trust Living Landscapes)
• Local authorities & parishes (eg local and neighbourhood
plans)
Department of Land Economy
4

5. A model of collaborative local governance
• Objectives
• Representation for demands
• Devolution of decisions
• Capacity to directly influence land use decisions
• Co-ordinate shared interests
• Institutional qualities
• Public acceptance
• Transparency & accountability
• Long term perspective
• Functions
• Planning
• Coordination & facilitation
• Procurement
Department of Land Economy
5

6. Management principles:
clear responsibility and shared commitment
Sunderland, T., Rice, P., Lord, A. and Traill Thomson, J.A (2020) Natural Capital Strategy for North Devon, Natural England Research Report 083
6

7. Local Environmental Governance
Organisations
• Trustee for local environment over long term
• Brings local stakeholders together and represents
their interests
• Promotes and co-ordinates actions
• Funding to establish incentives for action
• Adaptive approach: monitoring, learning,
responding
Department of Land Economy
7

8. Figure 1: A model of local environmental governance
Assessments of local
natural capital
National funding:
ELM, Nature for
Climate, etc
LEGO
Planning and
strategy
National demands
and local priorities
Clearing house
and
procurement
Local offsetting and
Local Nature
Investment Fund
ELM contracts NbS and land-
based projects
Department of Land Economy
8

9. Developing a more coherent and
systematic approach
• Setting priorities and planning
• Assessment of natural capital (survey and research)
• Building social capital
• Identifying potential funding sources
• Assessing local priorities and planning (eg Local Nature
Recovery Strategy)
• Clearing house and procurement
• Building local funds (public and private)
• Soliciting and mediating local demands
• Managing procurement contracts
Department of Land Economy
9

10. An architecture of local governance:
A ‘national park’ approach
• Established organisation
• National Park Authority represents community (?)
• Broad interest for environment
• National Park management plans
• Executive capability
BUT
• Current duty to national rather than local interests
• Lack of capability and funding
• Only in some areas
Department of Land Economy
10

11. An architecture of local governance:
A ‘local nature partnership’ approach
• Local Nature Partnerships:
• “Drive positive change in the local natural environment,
taking a strategic view …
• Contribute to achieving the Government’s national
environmental objectives locally …
• Become local champions …”
• National network of LNPs
• Parallel with Local Enterprise Partnerships
BUT
• LNPs are different stages of development
• Lack of executive capability
• Lack of core or discretionary funding
Department of Land Economy
11

12. Natural Cambridgeshire as an
emergent LEGO
“The CPCA area has one of the lowest proportions of rich
wildlife and natural greenspaces in the UK”
• The Cambridgeshire environment
• Intensive agriculture
• Little woodland cover
• Fenland
• Rapid economic and population growth
Department of Land Economy
12

13. Land use and policy funding in
Greater Cambridgeshire
Hectares %
Cereals 149,053 56
Oilseeds 14,165 5
Other arable crops 45,524 17
Uncropped arable
land
10,188 4
Horticulture 6,487 2
Grassland 30,836 12
Total Farmed Area 265,848 100
Agricultural land use in Greater
Cambridgeshire Local Nature
Partnership
AES BPS
Average payment in East of England
£/ha (FBS: 2019/20)
32 202
Farmed area (ha) in Gt Camb LNP 266k 266k
Total expenditure £8.5m £53.7m
Government expenditure on agriculture
in Greater Cambridgeshire
Department of Land Economy
13

14. Local planning exercises
• A Greater Cambridge Green Infrastructure Opportunity
Mapping project.
• Local Authority Local Plans
• Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy
• Greater Cambridge Local Plan
• Call for Sites and Call for Green Sites
• Parishes: Neighbourhood Plans
• The Oxford to Cambridge (OxCam) Arc Natural Capital
Plan.
• Water Resources East Natural Capital Plan for Eastern
England using systematic conservation planning.
• Food, Farming and Countryside Commission:
Cambridgeshire Land use framework project.
Department of Land Economy
14

15. BCN Wildlife Trust Living Landscapes
Department of Land Economy
15

16. Nature and land management initiatives
• Wildlife Trust for Beds, Cambs & Northants Living Landscapes
• RSPB Futurescapes
• The Cambridge Nature Recovery Network has identified five priority areas for landscape
enhancement.
• Fens for the Future to establish a network of waterways and wetlands across the Fens.
• The Great Fen Project: large scale Fenland restoration.
• The National Trust vision for Wicken Fen from Wicken Fen to Cambridge.
• The proposal for a UNESCO Fens Biosphere.
• Nenescape Landscape Partnership with partners from along the River Nene.
• Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Future Parks Accelerator Project to develop a shared vision
for parks and open spaces.
• The Langdyke Countryside Trust around home of poet John Clare to reverse decline of
biodiversity and celebrate and conserve the natural world.
• The Cam Ely Ouse (CamEO) Partnership working together to improve the rivers and
surrounding land.
• Farmer clusters: The West Cambs 100s/ Bourn Brook and Hen and Abbotsley Brook
Catchment Group
• Anglian Water Landscape Enterprise Networks in East Anglia.
• New life on the old west (Cambridgeshire Acre) creating and maintaining green space, training
volunteers in recording and monitoring, and learning opportunities.
16

17. 17
https://naturalcambridgeshire.org.uk/
In September 2020, Natural Cambridgeshire launched its ambitious action plan for
doubling the area of rich wildlife habitats and natural green space across the region in
order to create a world-class environment.

18. Support for Natural Cambridgeshire
18

19. Progress in Natural Cambridgeshire
• Registered charity
• To promote nature recovery for the benefit of the public by the
preservation, conservation and the protection of the environment
and the prudent use of resources.
• Quarterly Partnership Forum Events
• 6-8 speakers, up to 80 participants
• Developing with nature assessment template
• Local Nature Recovery Tool Kit
• Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Fund for Nature
Department of Land Economy
19

20. https://naturalcambridgeshire.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/priority-landscapes.pdf
Landscape
Priority Areas
20

21. http://cambridgenaturenetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Cambridge-Nature-Network-Area-Map.pdf
21

22. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Fund
for Nature
• CPCA award £1.3m to Natural Cambridgeshire to
enable acceleration and delivery of sustainable nature
projects ‘for doubling nature’
• £1m fund for nature
• £210,000 revenue
• £125,000 to BCN Wildlife Trust for baseline setting and
monitoring.
• Support projects create stream of revenue, at least
match funded, ideally self sustaining,
• Prioritise larger projects in six priority landscapes
• £100k for small-scale community projects
cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/news/cpca-board-approve-business-cases-and-funds-for-doubling-nature-in-cambridgeshire-and-
peterborough/
Department of Land Economy
22

23. Challenges for funding
• Need to create incentives reflecting social value
• Systematic assessment of demand v. organisations able
to apply
• Long term commitments and short term funding
• Projectification
• Public good character of many benefits limiting
private finance potential
• Lack of systematic data on potentials
Department of Land Economy
23

24. Developing Natural Cambridgeshire
as a LEGO
• Transparent, consistent, accountable procedures
• Systematic assessment of demand (rather than
opportunism based solely on claims)
• Explicit criteria for identifying priority areas
• Reliable long term funding (from central
government)
• Balanced stakeholder engagement and
representation
Department of Land Economy
24

25. National requirements for local
governance
• Structure and guidance for national system of
LEGOs
• Core funding for operational costs
• Devolved funding for ‘purer’ public goods
• Continued national funding for national
commitments (biodiversity, climate)
• Funding for modelling, research, case studies
• National oversight of performance and
accountability
Department of Land Economy
25

26. Conclusions
• Centralised system can’t capture details of local
priorities or energy of local initiatives
• Numerous local plans without capacity to be
implemented
• Need for mediation/ clearing house/ brokerage to
bring private and public concerns together into
deliverable projects
• A system of LEGOs has potential for this
• But needs centrally led system, core funding, local
support.
Department of Land Economy
26

27. Ian Hodge
idh3@cam.ac.uk
• Cambridge
University
Press
• 2016
27
Department of Land Economy
Gawith, David and Hodge, Ian (2019) Focus rural
land policies on ecosystem services, not
agriculture. Nature Ecology and Evolution. 3,
1136-1139; https://rdcu.be/bO9e0