Government's planning loopholes risk stripping nature from the most deprived communities in England 

• 7.4 million people in England live in neighbourhoods with no immediate access to nature, including 1.42 million children.

• Four in five developments in England's most deprived local authorities could now dodge rules which require developers to improve biodiversity (Biodiversity Net Gain), thanks to proposed new Government exemptions.

• A further proposed BNG exemption for brownfield sites will see poorer areas hit the hardest, with deprived areas having almost four times the share of brownfield sites as compared to rich areas.

London, 4th June: Government loopholes that let developers dodge planning rules risk stripping England's poorest communities of green space, trees and wildlife, new research warns.

A report commissioned by Wildlife and Countryside Link, funded by several environmental NGOs and ecological organisations, and carried out by Stack Data Strategy, finds that millions of people are already living in "nature poverty". 7.4 million people in England live in neighbourhoods with no immediate access to biodiversity, including 1.42 million children. In the most deprived 20% of neighbourhoods, almost a third have very limited access to biodiversity — measured using Natural England's Accessible Green Space Standard, of a 300m straight-line buffer around qualifying biodiverse habitat. That is nearly three times the rate in the most affluent areas.

Communities which are already the most nature-deprived will face the biggest impact from current and proposed exemptions to Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) rules. 

BNG is a world-leading policy, introduced in 2024 to ensure developers leave nature in a better state than before they build. The report finds that new and proposed exemptions could let developers avoid those duties in the very communities that already have the least access to nature, deepening inequality and locking poorer communities out of the health, well-being and climate resilience benefits that nature provides. By weakening the delivery of biodiversity gains, these exemptions risk reducing access to vital ecosystem services — from urban cooling and flood mitigation to cleaner air and water — that are increasingly essential as communities face the growing impacts of climate change.

Small sites exemption

Earlier this year, the Government introduced a blanket exemption from BNG rules for development sites under 0.2 hectares. The poorest communities will be hit hardest by these rules.  In England's most deprived local authorities, roughly four in five (82%) of planning applications are already under 0.2 hectares. 

Across one year, the report says the exemption could mean the loss of biodiversity equivalent to nearly 11,000 mature trees or 400 football pitches of wildflower meadow.

De minimis loophole

The de minimis exemption was meant for tiny developments with almost no impact on nature. However, the report warns that it has become the main route for developers to avoid delivering BNG.

Between March 2024 and February 2025, the de minimis exemption accounted for 62% of all BNG exemptions and 57% of all planning applications in England. Use of the loophole also rose by 178% in the first year of mandatory BNG.

The report finds that developers in the most deprived parts of England are 17% more likely to make de minimis exemption claims than less deprived areas, suggesting the poorest communities are already being unfairly impacted by BNG exemptions. 

Brownfield exemption

The Government is also considering a new exemption for residential brownfield sites up to 2.5 hectares. Brownfield land is heavily concentrated in poorer communities. The most deprived 20% of neighbourhoods contain 30.4% of England's brownfield housing capacity, compared with just 8% in the wealthiest 20% of neighbourhoods. 

This means that around four times as many potential brownfield homes are concentrated in the poorest fifth of England's population, as compared to the richest fifth of the population. 

More than half of the land in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods sits within 300 metres of a registered brownfield site, compared with less than a fifth in the least deprived 10%.

If brownfield developments are exempt from BNG, thousands of new homes could be built in already nature-poor areas without any duty to improve local biodiversity. This risks creating  "urban ecological deserts", where poorer families are robbed of trees, wildlife and green spaces.

The report calls on the Government to drop plans to introduce a 2.5 hectare brownfield exemption and tighten the de minimis loophole so it cannot be exploited. It also calls for the introduction of a statutory Equality Impact Assessment for all BNG frameworks, and for a commitment to not change BNG policy for a further five years. This will allow the impact of BNG on deprived communities to be fully assessed and analysed before any further exemptions could be introduced. 

Without urgent action, the report warns that planning policy will continue to entrench inequality, leaving Britain's poorest communities with poor access to the benefits of nature.

Richard Benwell, CEO at Wildlife and Countryside Link, said:

"Nature should not be a luxury reserved for the wealthy. England's poorest communities are already being left with the worst access to nature, and Biodiversity Net Gain loopholes are further exacerbating this problem. 

"If Ministers are serious about tackling inequality and improving people's health, they must stop weakening nature protections and make sure every community benefits from greener, healthier places to live. If Ministers weaken these rules, it is ordinary people in poorer communities who lose out."

Jason Reeves, Head of Policy at CIEEM said: 

"Four in five planning applications in England's most deprived areas already fall below the threshold for mandatory nature improvement. This report shows the government's proposed brownfield exemptions double down on that inequality: brownfield housing capacity is four times more concentrated in deprived areas than wealthy ones.

"On the ground, this could mean hundreds of thousands of potential homes built where nature is already scarce, with no duty to improve it. CIEEM members see every day how nature-integrated development reduces flood risks, protects property values and brings positive health outcomes. Denying the nation's poorest communities those benefits isn't just bad for the environment, it risks undermining the government's own housing ambition of safe and decent homes for all."

Abi Bunker, Executive Director of Nature Recovery at The Woodland Trust said: 

"Communities without trees live with dirtier air, hotter homes and poorer health. Biodiversity Net Gain was supposed to help neighbourhoods that include new developments access nature, but the proposed exemptions mean England's poorest communities could be robbed of their trees and wildlife and all the health benefits they provide."

Carl Bunnage, the RSPB's head of nature policy in England, said: 

"Having access to nature should never be reduced to a postcode lottery. It's time for the UK Government to stop dismantling what should have been a world-leading policy, especially as those in society already missing out will be hit hardest. The BNG system must be restored so it delivers nature on everyone's doorsteps as originally intended."

Simon Towers, chairman at Green Earth Developments Group, said:

"Brownfield land is disproportionately concentrated in some of England's most deprived communities. Without Biodiversity Net Gain, many of these sites will remain fenced off, unmanaged and disconnected from the people who live around them. The biggest misconception we must tackle is that BNG is a barrier to regeneration. The opposite is true.  BNG helps fund the restoration of undevelopable brownfield sites that might otherwise remain neglected, which then provides a practical route for housing, infrastructure and regeneration projects to move forward on brownfield land which is developable.

"Exempting more brownfield developments from BNG risks creating a two-tier system where the communities with the least access to nature are the least likely to benefit from environmental improvement. That would be a significant step backwards for nature recovery, regeneration and levelling up. We should be expanding these opportunities, not reducing them."

Carolin Göhler, President of the Landscape Institute, said:

"Exempting Brownfield sites from any biodiversity enhancement requirements will hit the poorest communities the hardest, namely precisely those groups that lack greenspace most in their neighbourhoods. Recent years – exemplified by the Covid period – have taught us the value of quality greenspace for the health and wellbeing of both people and wildlife. Reducing the quality of new developments including biodiversity thresholds will damage long-term sustainability. It risks sowing the seeds for the slums of tomorrow, devoid of any quality green space."

Full Report: https://www.wcl.org.uk/docs/green_gap_report.pdf