Charities warn brownfield-first housing push risks creating ‘ecological deserts’ in poorer areas

Exempting brownfield sites risks turning a policy designed to improve neglected urban land into one that leaves poorer communities with less access to nature, the charity’s report argued.

It states: “A 2.5-hectare brownfield exemption would create huge areas of ecological desert, restricting access to nature for the poorest in the country, further exacerbating inequality.”

It claimed that 7.4 million people in England live in neighbourhoods with no immediate access to biodiversity, including 1.42 million children under the age of 15.

The report said the problem is not driven simply by a rural-urban divide, but by sharp environmental inequalities within towns and cities.

In the most deprived 20% of neighbourhoods, almost a third of residents have highly restricted access to biodiversity, nearly three times the rate in the most affluent communities.

The report said England’s Brownfield Land Register lists 35,880 sites, covering around 37,750 hectares, with stated capacity for between 1.31 million and 1.41 million new homes.

The most deprived 20% of neighbourhoods contain 30.4% of England’s stated brownfield housing capacity, equating to around 430,000 potential homes, it found.

By contrast, the least deprived 20% contain just 8% of stated capacity.

This in turn means around four times more potential brownfield homes are concentrated in the most deprived fifth of England than in the most affluent fifth.

Concerns were also raised about the government’s decision to exempt sites under 0.2 hectares from BNG requirements.

Inside Housing reported last December that the government had eased BNG requirements on small sites to speed up housebuilding, after initially proposing a larger 0.5-hectare exemption.

The new report said the small-sites exemption would fall hardest on the most deprived local authorities, where roughly 82% of applications are already under 0.2 hectares.

The exemption could mean a loss of biodiversity equivalent to nearly 11,000 mature trees or 400 football pitches of wildflower meadow across one year, the authors warned.

Richard Benwell, chief executive of 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 the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, said the proposed brownfield exemptions would “double down” on inequality.

He added: “Our 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.”

The report called on the government to introduce a statutory equality impact assessment for all BNG frameworks, tighten the de minimis threshold, review the impact of the 0.2-hectare exemption and introduce a legally binding five-year policy lock-in to protect BNG from further changes.

A government spokesperson said: “We want everyone to have access to nature, no matter where they live, which is why we are determined to make sure that nobody lives further than 15 minutes’ walk from their nearest green or blue space.

“Alongside this, we are committed to biodiversity net gain, as it plays a vital role in protecting nature while building the homes this country desperately needs.

“To help us make the right decisions, we have launched a further consultation on additional targeted exemptions for residential brownfield development, along with our wider ambition to accelerate housing delivery on well-connected urban land, and we welcome views.”