Search

Carbon footprints are talked about a lot, but do we really understand what they mean? Rachel Dunne explains why carbon footprints may not be as simple as they seem. ‘The carbon footprint of milk is 1.39kgCO2eq…’[1] is a seemingly simple statement which in fact requires a number of important questions to be answered before its meaning is clear. Here I’d like to run you through a few of these questions, and hopefully therefore convey just how much is hidden in a carbon footprint. 1 - What is the functional unit? The functional unit associated with a carbon footprint is the amount of the relevant product that causes the stated greenhouse gas emissions over its life cycle. For example, the above carbon footprint of 1.39kgCO2eq for milk has a functional unit of 1kg milk, meaning that producing 1kg of milk emits 1.39kgCO2eq. Functional units allow the useful comparison of products. The obvious functional unit is 1kg by mass of product, e.g. 1kg beef might be compared to 1kg chicken in terms of their carbon footprints. There are other options, however. For example, in the case of beef and chicken you might compare them per kg protein. This would mean that the functional unit would be 1kg protein’s worth of the meat instead of just the simple 1kg of mass. If chicken contains 10% protein and beef 20% (made up figures!) then this would require comparing the carbon footprint of 10kg chicken to that of 5kg beef. 2 - What are the system boundaries? The system boundaries of a carbon footprint calculation define the processes in a product's life cycle that are included. Therefore the system boundaries can make a big difference to the calculated carbon footprint of a product. If a process in the product’s life cycle that emits a lot of greenhouse gases is not included in the system boundaries this could lead to a considerable under-estimation of its carbon footprint. It is particularly important when two products are to be compared that the system boundaries used for each product are as similar as possible. Often we consider either cradle-to-gate or cradle-to-grave system boundaries. The former only considers the life cycle of a product up to factory gate, while the latter additionally considers its sale, use and disposal as well as any associated transportation. 3 - Which allocation method was used? The allocation method used in the calculation of a carbon footprint is the rule used to apportion greenhouse gas emissions between multiple outputs of the same process or set of processes. For example, the rearing of dairy cattle may result in both milk and beef being produced. The greenhouse gas emissions of the rearing, slaughtering etc… can be calculated, but how is this allocated between the final milk and beef produced? Options include allocation according to the mass of each product produced, allocation according to the energy content of each product (if they are food or fuel), or allocation according to the prices at which the products will be sold at. The allocation method used in the calculation of a carbon footprint can significantly impact the result. This means that in particular when comparing products it is important to use the same allocation method in both cases. 4 - And the rest? The more information that is known about the calculations behind a stated carbon footprint the better. Further details to seek might firstly include the database used for any background data. A number of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) databases exist such as EcoInvent and Agri-Footprint, though most have to be paid for. Free options include Agribalyse and ELCD. It is also useful to know the impact assessment method used to calculate a carbon footprint. A given impact assessment method may use different global warming potentials (GWPs) for certain greenhouse gases. GWPs are the conversion factors from kg of gas emitted to kg CO2 equivalent emitted. There is still considerable scientific debate around their values. It depends in part on how far into the future you are looking as some of these other greenhouse gases are much less long-lived than others and therefore will only have their warming effect for a limited amount of time before they react to form a different chemical. The GWPs used in the calculation of a carbon footprint will affect the result, potentially changing how two products compare if they emit differing amounts of various greenhouse gases. What does this mean for me? It is important for civil servants working on the climate crisis to understand that carbon footprint statements are not as simple as they first appear. Although phrases like ‘high carbon footprint’ are in common parlance, they don’t hold a clear meaning for most people, even when quantified in kg CO2 equivalent. If possible, it is best to aid understanding by comparing one carbon footprint to that of another well-known or comparable item, for example ‘the carbon footprint of oat milk is considerably lower than that of cow’s milk...’[2] as this has a clear, actionable message. References [1] Clune, S., Crossin, E. and Verghese, K. (2016). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions from different fresh food categories. Journal of Cleaner Production 140(2) pp.766-783. [2] Carbon Cloud. Assessment of Carbon Footprint of Oatly products by CarbonCloud. Available at: https://www.oatly.com/uploads/attachments/cjz9msu5wa1g439qrdjuycbgd-carbon-footrpinting-for-oatly-20190808.pdf [Accessed 24th August 2019].

Sebastien Lechanoine writes about his role at the Office for Low Emissions Vehicles. Disclaimer: the views in this blog post are those of the individual and do not represent the views of HM Government. Photo by Andrew Roberts on Unsplash In 1879, Karl Benz patented the first reliable two-stroke internal combustion engine. Since then, despite some huge leaps in engineering and engine performance, the basic principles of vehicle engines have not changed that much – they remain internal combustion engines. Yet we are progressively starting to see a transition in how we drive and fuel our vehicles, which I believe is driven by a greater understanding of the dangers of climate change and greenhouse gases. At a local level, this is also driven by a much more tangible concern– air quality. In 2019, the UK officially set a net-zero emissions target by 2050, making history in the process. The year before, transport emissions accounted for around 28% of domestic UK greenhouse gases and became the largest emitting sector. Therefore, decarbonising all forms of transport is essential if we are to become a net zero country, and this has become a major priority for the Department for Transport. It’s quite exciting to be involved in this effort. I work at the Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV as we love acronyms in Government) which is a joint unit reporting to both DfT and BEIS ministers. Our purpose is to support the decarbonisation of road transport – and to say there is plenty to do would be an understatement. Currently, the focus is very much on Electric Vehicles (EVs) – Government is currently consulting on bringing forward the end to the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles to 2035, or earlier if a faster transition appears feasible, as well as including hybrids for the first time. My role sits within the EV infrastructure policy team – if everyone who owns a car will be owning an EV in future, they will need to be able to charge their vehicles, and charging an EV is very different to filling up at a petrol station. It’s more similar to charging your mobile phone, with a range of charging options depending on your needs. Need a quick charge? Go to a rapid station. Want to charge slowly but in the convenience of your home? Just roll into your driveway, plug in and enjoy your evening at home. But what if you don’t have a driveway, as around 40% of UK households don’t? Then what? The ‘on-street’ issue is what I work on specifically and I could write pages about it (in fact I often do at work). It has also taught me a huge amount about ‘environmental’ policy – here are some of the key things I have learned: Re-define what you think counts as ‘environmental’ policy. I’ve had to grapple with the intricacies of local government planning systems and the complexities of the energy system in my role, and at times it’s easy to lose sight of the wider picture. Like electrifying boilers, it may not always sound sexy but it is important – the ‘boringly transformative’ as Michael Gove has recently said. Tug on one string and you will find it attached to many other things, to botch a well-known quote. Who knew that building regulations could play such a key part in supporting EV uptake? How do we make sure we are getting people walking and cycling as well? As we transition towards a net zero economy, we will need a greater understanding of the various interconnections that exist today, and how to ensure that policies in one area do not lead to perverse effects elsewhere. Central government can’t do everything. It can provide leadership, but local government, companies small and big, private investors, charities and not-for-profits are all needed to reach our wider goals. How do you make sure that Government is providing the right level of support? With net zero high on the government agenda, it’s a fascinating time to be working in decarbonisation. Change can come in surprising ways and being able to embrace this and listen to those on the ground is key in my role. It’s not about going for what may seem easiest, but gaining an understanding of what could work for all involved – and doing all this at pace. It’s a great place to be, and I encourage you to join if you want – we’re not short of work! Contribute to the CSEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

In October 2019, we launched the Fast Stream Environment Network. We hosted Nick Bridge, Special Representative for Climate Change, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Dr Ben Caldecott, Director of the Oxford Sustainable Finance Programme, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, Oxford University, and Dr Gemma Harper, Deputy Director Marine, Defra. You can find slides from the event here. Event Slides Upcoming events Browse our Events Calendar to watch more events like this and to register for future ones.

As part of this month's focus on Climate Justice, CSCEN's Emilio Risoli unpacks a recent study on climate-related compensation by Dr. Andrew Fanning, from the Sustainability Research Institute at the University of Leeds, and Dr. Jason Hickel, from the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics. Find the full article, published in June 2023, here. A recent research article in the scientific journal Nature Sustainability concludes that the countries of the global South are owed a total of $192 trillion in compensation for climate-related damages. $170 trillion of this is owed by countries from the global North, the researchers find. This study provides a significant contribution to debates over climate compensation and reparations, after delegates at the 2022 COP27 agreed to establish a loss and damage fund for the countries most affected by climate change. It offers an evidence-based compensation scheme, using historical data and forward-looking projections to calculate fair and accurate compensation figures. This, they argue, would help facilitate the decarbonisation of global South economies. Methodology To empirically establish who owes, and who is owed, compensation (and how much), Andrew Fanning and Jason Hickel: work out each country’s ‘fair share’ of the total global carbon budget, based on population size; assess each country's historical cumulative emissions alongside their projected future use of carbon budgets; establish how much each country exceeds/remains under their fair share of the carbon budget according to these projections; use carbon prices from the latest IPCC scenarios to then put a monetary value on emissions, in order to quantify what is owed. According to this methodology, the bigger the emitter, the larger the share of the compensation they owe. This compensation is allocated to the low-emitting countries according to how much of their ‘fair share’ allocation has been appropriated. Results The researchers make projections for a net zero scenario, in which all countries decarbonise by 2050, as well as a business-as-usual scenario, in which countries continue on their emissions trajectory. They then divide the data up according to region. As you can see in figure 1 (below), the study finds that the 39 global North countries – including the US, the whole of Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Israel – have already exceeded their collective fair share of both the 1.5°C and 2°C carbon budgets. Even in the net zero scenario, the global North’s cumulative emissions would total nearly three times more than its 1.5 °C fair share. Moreover, they find that every global North country overshoots its fair share of the carbon budget. Figure 1: World and regional cumulative CO2 emissions with respect to fair shares of global carbon budgets, historical trends (1960–2019) and scenario trends (2020–2050). They then cast their eyes to the 129 global South countries, which make up 80% of the world’s population. They find that, in the business-as-usual scenario, this group of countries would remain within their fair share of the 2 °C carbon budget by 2050, but would likely overshoot their fair share of the 1.5 °C carbon budget in 2048. If they were to collectively achieve net zero by 2050, however, they would only have used 50% of their fair share of the 1.5 °C carbon budget. In other words, in a world that achieves net zero, around half of the global South’s fair shares would be appropriated in the process, to balance the excess emissions of overshooting countries. Using their monetary calculations, they conclude that cumulative financial compensation for this can be valued at $192 trillion, which is $6.2 trillion a year (8% of the world’s GDP in 2018). Who owes what Global North countries owe around $170 trillion of this total. The graph below (figure 2) provides a visual overview of who owes what. The US owes the most ($80 trillion), and India are owed the most ($57 trillion). They also adjust the start date – conducting parallel analyses starting at 1850, 1960 and 1992 – to see how the data responds. Irrespective of this start date, they find that “the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom owe around two-thirds of the total financial compensation from overshooting countries”. Specifically, they find that (from a 1960 start date) the UK owes $7.7 trillion, which is less than Germany’s $11.8 trillion, but higher than every other EU country (next is France, who are found to owe $4.8 trillion). The “global South overshoot” on the graph refers to the higher-emitting global South countries who owe compensation, a group that includes South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE and Qatar, among some others. Figure 2: Cumulative compensation due from overshooting country groups to undershooting country groups (relative to 1.5 °C fair shares) based on data from 1960-2019 and projections for 2020-2050. Why is this significant? In short, as Fanning and Hickel put it, carbon budgets are being depleted, and “not all countries are equally responsible” for this. “Some nations have contributed more to causing this crisis than others”, they contend, and “this disproportionate historical responsibility is problematic from a climate justice perspective that recognizes the atmosphere as a shared commons, to which all people are entitled to a fair and equitable use”. And, more specifically: “If some countries appropriate more than their fair shares of the carbon budget, this has important implications. It means…that other countries must effectively forgo the full use of their own fair shares to keep the world on track for 1.5 °C, mitigating more rapidly than would otherwise be required.” To the researchers, therefore, this compensation is a prerequisite for any form of climate justice. Indeed, it’s also a prerequisite for international cooperation on climate change: “acknowledging issues of equity is essential to establishing trust and buy-in to the negotiation process”, they assert. Loss and Damage Fund This is important to bear in mind, as each country sends delegates to COP28 in the UAE this month. It is especially relevant in light of recent difficulties experienced during loss and damage discussions. As reported by the Guardian, talks between governments “started in March but broke down in rancour” in October. Following the breakdown, countries reconvened in Abu Dhabi in early November, in what was reported as “a tense two-day meeting”. At these talks, report the Guardian, governments drew up the blueprint for the fund, with developing countries making key concessions such as agreeing to the fund being managed by the World Bank (something that richer countries, including the US, pushed hard for). However, the Financial Times describes the agreement as “tentative”, and predicts that a “fight” over the fund is set to play out at COP28. A key point of contention concerns the nature of the donations, with the US proposing that contributions to the fund remain voluntary rather than obligatory. Fanning and Hickel hope that their results “may be useful inputs to inform the ongoing dialogue”. Conclusion and forward look This study shines a light on how the countries of the global North have already appropriated more than their fair share of the global carbon budget. As this overshoot is irreversible, even if net zero targets are met, Fanning and Hickel argue that financial compensation is owed to the countries of the global South. This, they add, would be separate to (and would not preclude) other forms of payment that might aid the global transition to net zero and help improve climate resilience. Other such forms might include IMF financing of the kind proposed by former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz.[i] This comes alongside other calls for climate justice and an increasing body of research on the topic. A recent Oxfam report, for example, finds that the richest 1% of the global population produced as much carbon pollution in one year as the 5 billion people who make up the poorest two-thirds. We have come a long way in this regard, however: at the 2009 iteration of COP the concept of climate debt was flatly rejected by American delegates. This time, questions of climate justice are sure to be at the centre of the discussions, and it is hoped that COP28 will see the commitment to the loss and damage fund crystallised. The next challenge, if we get there, is working out how to deliver this financing effectively, and establishing just structures that can direct resources to the right projects. [i] Stiglitz argues for an Inflation Reduction Act-style financing package to aid poor countries in transitioning their economies. This would include grants and subsidies designed to promote green growth and jobs, and would take the form of investment rather than compensation. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@energysecurity.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

How does digital technology contribute to environmental issues? Simon Doxford examines the costs and opportunities that digital technology can bring when tackling climate change. For many of us, digital technology has become an ever-present feature of our lives both at work and at home. It’s become second nature to browse the news, contact friends, stream videos and be permanently online and connected through our smart devices, wherever we are. The lifeblood of digital technology is data. It’s generated in a myriad of ways then captured, stored and moved around by a vast infrastructure of data centres. Videos, images and other media all exist in a physical format somewhere, and, when you access them, they are effectively chopped into tiny pieces and sent your device as streams of data. All these data processes use energy – i.e. electricity. Digital Technology and Climate Change Digital technology provides many opportunities to address the effects of climate change, contributing to efforts at all levels of society, from government policy making through to individual actions. For governments and organizations, digital tools contribute to understanding the environmental impact of policies and high-quality datasets inform decision-making for direct action on climate change. For individuals, digital communication can reduce the need to travel; email is more sustainable than physical letters and smart technology helps appliances run more efficiently at home – there are many more examples like these. The Cost of Digitalisation The flip side to this is that digitalisation, like any other sector, comes with its own resource costs. There are substantial CO2 emissions from the production and use of digital devices and the data centres and networks required to support them. A recent estimate by the   Boston Consulting Group suggests the digital sector accounts for around 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions and that this figure is set to grow – this puts digital CO2 emissions on par with those of the aviation sector. After all, only a small proportion of the global population will get on a plane each year, but more than 5 billion people own a smartphone, which they probably use every day. Streaming online content accounts for a big chunk of overall internet traffic and therefore the CO2 emissions associated with this. While cloud storage and streaming are efficient ways of storing and transferring data, there is some interesting accounting to be done when comparing the impact of these with local storage and even physical copies. If you’re in the habit of playing your favourite song on repeat, then it may be more sustainable to own a physical copy! In the Balance Technological solutions will clearly help us combat climate change, but we need a holistic approach that accounts for our digital carbon use as well. If you’re interested in learning more about a sustainable approach to digital technology, we’ve put together a list of key takeaways from sources across the internet – see more at: the World Economic Forum, International Energy Agency and Unicef. 1. Opportunities: Embrace the opportunities digital technology and data provide for adapting to and mitigating climate change. Use digital tools and data to assess the environmental impact of your work. 2. Turn off your video when you can: Turning off video and using audio only can reduce carbon impact by around 95% as it is much less data intensive. 3. Email judiciously: Sending an email uses a tiny amount of energy - but we send a lot of emails and this still mounts-up. Avoid unnecessary emails by skipping the thankyous and other pleasantries where you can (also delete old emails and unsubscribe from mailing lists you don't need). 4. Reduce e-waste: Before they’re even switched on, the production of electronic devices accounts for about 80% of their total lifetime carbon emissions. Use devices for as long as you can and repair/ recycle equipment to extend its total lifetime. 5. Keep on top of your cloud: Cloud storage is very efficient but still generates carbon emissions. Regularly clean out the cloud service you use, deleting files you no longer need. After all the cloud is really a not-so-light-and-fluffy data centre full of computer servers. 6. Limit unnecessary streaming: Turn off autoplay to reduce unwanted streaming and use lower resolution settings to save data – you won’t notice the difference, especially on a small screen. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@energysecurity.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

A recent pilot from the Food and Farming Countryside Commission (FFCC) explores best practice for land management around rivers to prevent pollution and floods. Paula Daina sets out key findings from the pilot. The demand for land is ever increasing: the Royal Society estimates that in the UK, to meet the current net zero and biodiversity targets, additional land twice the size of Wales is needed by 2050. In 2022, England committed to a Land Use Framework in the National Food Strategy to ensure carbon neutrality is met and farmers are supported when adapting to climate change. While the Land Use Framework is yet to be published, the Food, Farming, and Countryside Commission (FFCC), a charity promoting sustainable land use in the UK, developed a pilot to test land management at a local level. Together with the British Geological Society, the Geospatial Commission, and multiple stakeholders, FFCC delivered a Local Land Use Framework in Devon and Cambridgeshire to explore how to better manage land around rivers and prevent pollution and floods. The key area of the project involved investigating how land use decisions were made. This included understanding if spatial data and modelling were used before deciding the purpose of specific plots of land. With the importance of spatial data in mind, in the Cambridgeshire area, the model was used to develop a visual tool identifying where flood risks existed to understand which areas were best suited for agricultural or housing use, and what the flood risk was overall. The prototype developed in Devon allowed users to simulate decisions on how to use a specific land and showed the effect of different types of use on carbon sequestration and storage. This approach is likely to contribute to more effective decisions on how to optimise carbon sequestration and storage, together with encouraging better land management. A Multifunctional Land Framework Thanks to the two pilots, FFCC tested its Multifunctional Land Use Framework (MLUF), based on 6 main pillars, described in the image below, including: Land use is to ensure that land is used for what is best suited (land-led) and is adaptive and resilient. People are at the centre and local stakeholders are included in the decision-making. Public value is considered, and the land is multifunctional to meet the needs and challenges of the local communities. These principles are supported by an assessment framework providing guidance and clear questions to measure how the framework is being applied and its outcomes. In terms of governance, the FFCC suggests MLUF could be led by an independent body that works across government departments and provides national leadership while also supporting setting targets and priorities that apply at a local level by collaborating with arms-length bodies, local authorities, and regulated sectors. Forward Look FFCC suggested some lessons learnt that could support in the development of the Land Use Framework include: The need to involve locals and stakeholders from the start of the data collection. Using the same land for the production of multiple goods and functions. Creating a ‘Land Use Analysis Taskforce’. This measure is currently brought forward through the creation of the  “Land Use for Net Zero” (LUNZ) Hub, intended to provide all four UK administrations with strong evidence to develop policies for the land transformation required to achieve net zero by 2050. The hub is transdisciplinary and is aimed at bridging the gap between science and policy to achieve net zero through land use changes. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@energysecurity.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

This article is part of our 'Spotlight on Policy' series. Find the full CCUS vision policy paper here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/carbon-capture-usage-and-storage-a-vision-to-establish-a-competitive-market Aerial view of the Acorn CCS cluster - source: The CCUS Vision Carbon Capture, Usage and Storage (CCUS) is the process of capturing carbon dioxide for usage or for permanently storing it, deep underground, where it cannot enter the atmosphere. On the 20th of December, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) set out the government’s vision for the UK CCUS sector in the 2030s. The vision outlines a plan to create a market-driven CCUS sector, and its primary purpose is to increase investor confidence in the UK’s nascent CCUS market. What is the vision? In the document, DESNZ “set out a vision of what a market focused CCUS sector might look like, tapping into innovation and business know-how to drive the scale up and acceleration of CCUS deployment during the 2030s”. The key point here is that the private sector will be tasked with driving the development of the CCUS sector in the 2030s. This marks a shift from the current state of play, in which the government is actively shaping the development of the CCUS sector through selecting projects and managing the delivery timelines. DESNZ state: “Our vision is to make the UK a global leader in CCUS, creating a self-sustaining CCUS sector that supports thousands of jobs and reduces emissions to ensure a better environment for future generations”. The 3 phases The 63-page document sets out three phases, through which the sector goes from government- to industry-led. The first stage, in which we are currently, is the government-led market creation phase, which involves the development of CCUS clusters across the country and the establishment of a regulatory framework for the sector. The vision anticipates that this government-led phase will allow us to store 20-30 megatonnes of CO2 per annum by 2030. This phase currently involves the establishment of the following transport and storage networks: - Track 1: the HyNet cluster (in north-west England and north Wales), the East Coast Cluster (in Teesside and the Humber). - Track 2: Acorn (in St Fergus, north-east Scotland), Viking CCS (the Humber). Beyond 2030, the vision outlines, we will need a ramp up in the commercial deployment of CCUS in order to support the emergence of the sector and deliver on its contribution to power decarbonisation. Consequently, the vision sets out the next step: the market transition phase. This involves the emergence of a commercial and competitive market, and “reducing the degree of government support needed”. Finally, the CCUS sector will have reached the final phase: “a self-sustaining CCUS market” which can allow the UK to achieve net zero by 2050. How exactly will the UK create a competitive CCUS market? In order to progress from the government-led first phase to the market-transition second phase, there is a lot of work to be done by civil servants. This includes, to list just a few of the big workstreams: a consultation on the design of a competitive allocation process for capture contracts (to be in place from 2027) work with industry and wider stakeholders to consider the strategic direction for CO2 transport networks (including options for other forms of transport, such as by ship, road and rail) reviewing regulations regarding third-party access to infrastructure developing policies to secure sufficient subsurface storage capacity establishing an industry working group on identification and adoption of cost reduction opportunities. Why are the UK investing in CCUS? In illustrating the strategic importance of CCUS in the transition to net zero, the CCUS vision quotes the Climate Change Committee (CCC) in asserting that it is a “necessity, not an option”. The document goes on to say: “In a future net zero world, we will still need materials such as cement, steel, and chemicals. For many of these sectors, CCUS is currently the only viable route to decarbonise at the scale required for us to meet our targets”. The UK are looking to gain first mover advantage in CCUS, which is made possible thanks to its unique geology: the country has the capacity to store up to 78 billion tonnes of CO2 under its seabed. This, the policy paper adds, is “one of the largest such capacities in the world”. Additionally, the CCUS sector is predicted to “unlock economic opportunities” in the UK. It has the potential to attract significant investment and support up to 50,000 “high-skill, high-value” jobs, and the ministerial foreword of the CCUS Vision proclaims that the sector will “boost our economy by up to £5 billion per year by 2050”. Look ahead It is clear that CCUS will play a key role in decarbonising our energy system in years to come. To illustrate its potential, towards the end of the publication DESNZ explore in more detail which sectors could benefit from CCUS technology. Alongside playing a role in decarbonising our electricity system, the CCUS vision states that CCUS can be incorporated to capture the carbon released by low carbon hydrogen fuel, sustainable aviation fuel and energy from waste projects. Making this happen at scale through proactive policy-making is the next challenge that the department will face. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@energysecurity.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

Andrew Goodall, Permanent Secretary of the Welsh Government, talks with Peter Binfield-Smith, CSCEN Co-Chair, about his work on climate and environment. Recorded and edited by Jacob Billingham.

Simon Case, Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, talks with Chris Hunt, CSCEN Co-Chair, about his work on climate and environment. Recorded and edited by James Butterworth.

Roddy Shaw, Development Manager at Trees for Cities - the only UK charity working at a national and international level to plant trees in cities - spoke to us about his recent experience presenting at the World Forum of Urban Forests in Washington DC. Trees for Cities has been planting trees around the UK for thirty years and had two delegates speak at the World Forum on Urban Forests in October. The delegates presented the organisation’s work in coastal towns and cities and spoke about their role in promoting the Tree Cities of the World scheme around the UK. The World Forum, organised between the UN FAO and the American NGO the Arbor Day Foundation, saw over 1,000 delegates attend from around the world. Speaking on the organisation’s recent work, CEO Kate Sheldon presented Trees for Cities’ Forgotten Places programme. With coastal communities around the UK exhibiting much lower tree cover than their inland counterparts, Trees for Cities has worked closely with the community and partner organisations in Bexhill, East Sussex to deliver community planting days alongside a package of strategic documents to support the town in developing their urban tree cover. One of seven locations where Trees for Cities piloted coastal work, they are embarking on growing this programme to include more coastal areas which may need extra support to develop their urban forests and build resilience to the effects of climate change. Trees for Cities is the UK national lead organisation for the global Tree Cities of the World (TCOW) programme - an initiative developed by the UN FAO and Arbor Day Foundation to recognise and inspire towns and cities to care for and celebrate their urban tree canopy. With 21 recognised TCOWs across the UK, UK Development Manager Roddy Shaw spoke on the experience of growing this programme across the country, and the role of national NGOs in supporting local partners with urban forests - alongside panel members from Mexico and Spain. The conversation included discussion on the state of urban forests in the three countries and there was agreement across the panel for the need to build understanding in the public and policy spheres that tree maintenance and survival are as important as tree planting numbers. With summers in the UK getting ever hotter, trees require substantial maintenance packages to ensure they establish correctly and grow to deliver the benefits that are planned for with their planting. A key narrative throughout the conference was the need to ensure that planting in urban areas was happening equitably and that all communities were benefiting from schemes - not just those neighbourhoods that already have ample tree cover. As the climate continues to warm, ensuring our most vulnerable urban communities have healthy green infrastructure is vital to ensure we protect people from the threats of a warming climate. Trees for Cities was delighted to be presenting at the conference and hear such a narrative take centre stage, having championed it for so long in their own projects - always working to ensure the right tree is planted in the right place and deliver urban forests for all, by all. November 27th marks the start of National Tree Week and as winter approaches so too does the tree planting season. For anyone interested in getting involved and supporting Trees for Cities’ work, do check out their website where you can read, donate or sign up to volunteer. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

The 2023 FAO Report on the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World provides key data on global hunger and an opportunity to examine our food systems and draw from examples around the world. Access to adequate food In 2022, 9.2% of the global population - between 691 and 783 million people - faced hunger. In 2020, nearly one in three people in the world (2.37 billion) did not have access to adequate food. Adequate food is the availability of food in a quantity and quality sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals, free from adverse substances, and culturally appropriate to the needs of specific communities. While food quantity is concerned with the distribution of food in a sufficient measure to satisfy the needs of the world population, food quality is interconnected with social, cultural, ecological, and climatic considerations. The notion of ‘adequate food’ as intended by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR) also involves sustainability, with future generations included in the picture. Food security The international development approach to promoting access to food – i.e., food security - involves increasing the distribution and availability of food through globalised market-based solutions, with some developed countries and international organisations investing into the optimisation and mechanisation of food production and aid distribution. Although this system seeks to address food availability, it comes at a cost. Often, implementing this system instates a power dynamic based on a centralised control of food production and supply chains, at the expense of small local producers and their agency in their communities. Food sovereignty Food sovereignty is a movement recognised by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) which provides a framework to address food security needs[1] across the world through localised initiatives. It is based on the following pillars: People’s needs are at the centre of the decision-making. Food is regarded as more than a commodity. Localised food systems (reduced distance between suppliers and consumers, rejecting dependence on unaccountable corporations). Centring local control (control in the hands of local food suppliers, promotion of small-scale farmers activity, recognising the need to inhabit and share territories, rejecting privatisation of natural resources). Building and sharing knowledge and skills Working with nature (contributions to ecosystems and increased resilience by rejecting monoculture, industrial, and destructive production methods). This approach fundamentally advocates for sufficient, sustainable, and high-quality food by recognising the role small-scale farmers play in providing for their communities. This includes nature-based approaches such as refusing monocultures and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into local environments, which affect the quality of both food and soil, and where small-scale farmers would otherwise apply traditional means of production. The Nepalese case Countries like Nepal, Mali, and Bolivia have incorporated food sovereignty in their government policy. The Constitution of Nepal enshrines the right to food as a fundamental right for every citizen. The Right to Food and Food Sovereignty Act goes further to state that all farmers have a right to access lands for agricultural purposes and to ‘select and protect local seeds and species pursued traditionally’. More than 50% of Nepal’s crop production is dependant on rainfall and climatic conditions. With domestic food production sustaining 60% of the population but not being sufficient to feed all the population, Nepal has signed a Country Programming Network (CPN) plan with the FAO. This is a pioneering programme to deliver a sustainable agriculture strategy based on food security and food sovereignty by 2027. Strategic priorities within this framework build upon the transformation of the agri-food system to carry out research, integrate knowledge-sharing approaches, and increase competitiveness for farmers in accordance with the 15th Plan (FY 2019-2024). The 15th National Plan promotes agrobiodiversity, climate adaptation technologies, increased access to food, and improved food distributions systems. These policies are further supported through more targeted approaches by the government such as the Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC), aiming to provide 100% food security, a sustainable food system, and zero food waste to be achieved while increasing smallholders’ productivity to 100%. Food security and food sovereignty Due to its heavy reliance on weather conditions and vulnerability to natural disasters and conflict, food sovereignty can hardly be the immediate answer to all our food problems. Food sovereignty can, however, mitigate the effects of climate change for the future generations, while implementing an equitable system that accounts for the wellbeing of different communities. Six hundred million people are expected to be chronically undernourished in 2030. Is there anything we can learn from other governments using the food sovereignty framework to provide sufficient, sustainable, and healthy food nationally and internationally? [1] More about the current trends in international food security: https://www.foodsecurityportal.org/ Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@energysecurity.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

This article is part of our 'Spotlight on Policy' series. For more on Defra’s new Biodiversity Net Gain policy, see the Defra Land Use policy team’s blog here: https://defralanduse.blog.gov.uk/. Aerial landscape view of homes on an English housing estate - Getty Defra’s Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) is a meticulously crafted policy that seeks to ensure that, rather than eroding precious habitats, new housing developments in England contribute to a net gain in biodiversity. What’s more, it makes this uplift a legal requirement. Effectively, it promises to make sure that future development projects protect, and even improve, our nation’s biodiversity. Context and Background BNG is currently voluntary under national planning policy, but it will be made mandatory in England under the Environment Act. The policy feeds into the Environmental Improvement Plan’s nature recovery targets and stems from one of Defra’s key stated goals: to leave the natural environment in a better state than we found it in. 10% Uplift It does so by making it a mandatory requirement for developers to deliver a 10% uplift to biodiversity, rather than just replacing any habitat that they choose to build on. This will be according to a metric developed by Natural England, which will ensure that the biodiversity gain is measurable. So how does BNG work? The metric is central to the mechanism of the policy, and the initial steps are as follows: A prospective developer will record what habitats exist on their site and insert this into the metric. Based off the size of the habitat and the condition it is in, the metric will give it a score. This is the score for the land before any development work. The developer then works out what the site will look like after the development work, and then inserts this into the metric for their score after the proposed works. The developer then calculates how many units are needed to get to the 10% net gain, i.e. 110% of their initial score (generated by the metric in stage 1). Onsite The developer can then go back and redesign their site: for example, by changing their construction plans to keep a certain habitat. The idea is that they iterate their design to preserve the habitats that are the most valuable. If they cannot, or choose not to, preserve these habitats, they would have to try and replace them (remember, this would be a legal requirement). To get a higher score on the metric, they would look to do this onsite – for example, by planting a new hedgerow to replace one that they have cut down to build on.[i] Failing this, they can look offsite to achieve their net gain. Hedgerows: havens for biodiversity - image from Resilience.org Offsite Developers have two choices when it comes to fulfilling their obligation offsite: They can replace the habitat on land that they own elsewhere. This can be in a different local authority, subject to permission from the local authority where the development project is taking place.[ii] Failing this, developers can also look to the offsite market – this option involves buying units from other landowners in order to fund habitat creation offsite. The Offsite Market The offsite market involves a landowner somewhere in England – such as a farmer, a conservation NGO, another developer etc. – who can use the metric and find out how many units their planned habitat creation work is worth. The developer needing to fulfil their net gain obligation can then buy these units and, in doing so, finance the habitat creation project. As an example: to achieve their 10% net gain on a housing development that involves cutting down a number of hedgerows, a developer can dip into the offsite market to buy their required units from a farmer who is planting a hedgerow on their land elsewhere. What safeguards exist for offsite market trading? The Defra Land Use policy team have made sure to mitigate against the risks that often accompany market-based solutions. Firstly, the habitat creation that landowners are selling will have to be legally secured, and it will also have to be registered before it counts as a legitimate biodiversity unit. All units that are bought or sold will be recorded by a register, operated by Natural England, which will be made publicly available. This will ensure transparency and prevent the double counting of gains. After recording any purchased offsite units on the register, the developer will then need their gain plan approved by the local planning authority, allowing the development to commence. Statutory Credits: The Last Resort Option As a last resort option – that is, when opportunities for delivering BNG both on and off site have been exhausted – developers have the option to purchase their required units as “statutory biodiversity credits”. These take the form of payments made to Defra, which are then reinvested by the department into habitat projects and Secretary of State priorities. Other Benefits Along with protecting and restoring England’s biodiversity, the BNG policy comes with a raft of other potential benefits. These include a potential boost in green jobs, a diverse (and green) income stream for farmers, and economic growth. It is also likely that BNG will be the biggest contributor to the government’s target to raise at least £500 million in private finance by 2027 to support nature’s recovery in England.[iii] Conclusion BNG is a complex policy with lots of moving parts, and there remains a lot of work to be done in tying it all together. This involves developing the offsite markets and testing the digital programmes that underpin it, writing clear guidance for all stakeholders, and finalising the implementation. This work requires continued engagement with key stakeholder groups and interest bodies. In fact, the relevant Defra policy teams have been working closely with teams in DLUHC to work out exactly how it will all be implemented through the planning system. In this way, as a final takeaway, BNG provides us with a useful blueprint for future successful climate and environment policy: it cuts across those dreaded government siloes, acting as an example for cross-departmental collaboration in the making of effective policy. [i] The metric also accounts for how long the new habitat (e.g. hedgerow) would take to grow by giving it a lower score than if the developer decides to preserve an existing habitat. [ii] Again, however, this would give the developer a lower score – you would get 0.75 worth of units for replacing a habitat one local authority away from the development site, or 0.5 worth of units for anywhere further than that. [iii] This target was set out by the Autumn Budget and Spending Review 2021. Contribute to the CSCEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSCEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

The Civil Service Environment Network (CSEN) is run by just 35 volunteers from across the organisation and has more than 3,000 members – we demonstrate the power of working together. Last month’s COP26 summit may be over, but its influence and legacy gives real hope that the agreed actions will help cut the emissions of carbon dioxide. This two-week summit was a critical test of global cooperation to tackle the climate crisis. Sir David Attenborough’s memorable message to powerful global leaders was a challenge to do more together to tackle climate change. “If working apart we are a force powerful enough to destabilise our planet, surely working together, we are powerful enough to save it.” In spite of the pandemic, 120 world leaders made their way to Glasgow for the COP26 World Leaders Summit. An amazing feat in itself, for this to have been planned and executed in the midst of a global pandemic was nothing short of amazing. The enormous effort from across government and its diplomatic network served as a reminder of the power of collaboration across departments and sectors. In the COP26 Unit in the Cabinet Office alone, there were 200 officials working to coordinate the summit and ministerial representation from 15 different departments across government. It could not have taken place without the incredible efforts of hundreds of civil servants from an array of departments, from policy to press officers to comms and finance specialists, all working to deliver such an extraordinary event. Here in the CSEN, we’re committed to supporting the goals of COP26 and beyond, and are hosting a range of diverse and inclusive events providing an impartial space to discuss key learnings and shared challenges. As we continue towards the goal of being An Ambitious Civil Service, collaboration is at the forefront of so much of our work - and our support of the COP26 commitments is no different. Who are we? Open to all civil servants, the Civil Service Environment Network was established in October 2019 and has steadily grown to more than 3,000 civil servants across 100 departments and agencies. CSEN is run remotely, with members based all over the UK, by a committee of more than 35 volunteers dedicated to arranging a range of fascinating activities and events. What we do We arrange talks with high-profile speakers, discussion groups with experts, policy workshops, volunteering opportunities, careers and networking events, a programme of online learning, podcasts and links with regional groups. Each month, we have a different theme for our content, ranging from climate security in November to regenerative agriculture and soil in December, and from intersectionality and environmental justice in January to sustainable cities in February. If COP26 has made you curious about net zero, climate change or environmental policy, then we can show you how to bring the momentum of COP26 into your work. We have a unique offer to educate, inspire and develop your environmental knowledge and capability. What we’ve been up to In the lead up to COP26, we held five ‘Behind the Scenes’ sessions, to hear from colleagues across government about their preparation for the event. The clear message from the speakers was that the cross-government aspect to work is crucial. Some of the government’s priorities – including the Net Zero Strategy – require engagement and collaboration across the Civil Service. This is one of the most distinctive and enjoyable aspects of being a part of CSEN, which enables members to network with others from a huge range of organisations. This message is also reiterated by our senior sponsor David Hill, Director Genera for Environment, Rural and Marine at Defra, who wrote a blog post for us recently about his career journey. New podcast We produced our first podcast called CSEN Environment Deep Dives where we talk to experts about the biggest issues in environmental policy. In our first episode on climate security, Jake Billingham from BEIS talks with Chitra Nagarajan. We’ve also produced a series of short Environment 101 videos, investigating biodiversity and ecosystems, sustainable development, natural resources and climate change. Our latest series explores the meaning of climate security, the way it affects the most vulnerable, and the various drivers behind it. Get involved It’s clear Sir David Attenborough was right: we can achieve more by working together. Now that COP26 has ended, the hope is for real-world action to flow from the commitments made. It can be encouraging to connect, learn and collaborate with colleagues across the Civil Service. If you want to get involved, join us at our next event, and follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter.

Back in September we introduced you to the regional environmental networks. These networks span the entirety of the Civil Service, and now the whole of mainland UK, and were encouraged by Civil Service Local and they have been organising exciting and interesting events from the beginning. Six months on from our original introduction we wanted to reintroduce let you know what they have been up to, their current plans for the future and how you can get involved. Scotland Environment Network The network has been raising awareness of climate change and the environment and helping people to understand what steps they can take as an individual to reduce their carbon footprint. The network has held events such as a session on Greenwashing from the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The network is also currently looking for a new chair, so if you are keen in taking on this role, or joining the network in general please contact jenny.dee@dwp.gov.uk for more info. Civil Service North West Environment Network The network is open to all civil servants across the North West region who want to use their volunteering time and develop their skills no matter what you can do or how little time you have. As well as organising litter picks in their local areas for Members to do separately during Covid, the network held a virtual ‘Market Stall’ event, which gave attendees the opportunity to hear from a range of environmentally-focused local businesses to actively help to reduce their environmental footprint and give some inspiration to live more sustainably. Topics included plastic-free food and household products, repairing and up cycling, sustainable clothing, and activities in the local area to get involved in. Future events include lunchtime sessions on zero waste/sustainable food and growing your own fruit and veg (that includes small spaces); renewables/solar energy/grants; electric and hybrid cars/cycling and incentive schemes; and a special edition newsletter on recycling. Please email Chair jenny.hagan@hse.gov.uk for more info. North East, Yorkshire & the Humber The network in the North East, Yorkshire and Humber was launched July where the aim of the network is about exchanging ideas, shifting attitudes and taking tangible actions towards a better future. Natalia, the network's chair adds “As an individual and as a civil servant, I feel that there is an opportunity for all of us to do more to support our government in reaching its commitment to significantly reduce carbon emissions by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050”. Please contact Natalia.Tochenykh@dwp.gov.uk for more info. Midlands The Midlands Environment Network is the most recent regional network to be launched. It was launched back in December last year, this now means that there is a regional network covering all of mainland UK. At the launch event new members spoke about their aims for the network. It is a really good time to join the group and help shape what it can achieve. Please contact vanessa.boden@cabinetoffice.gov.uk for more info. South West and Wales The South West and Wales Environmental Network was relaunched in 2021 following a hiatus. They have already worked with the Environment Agency to set up events to promote Plastic-Free July, and have been working with Paint360 to encourage the re-engineering of waste paint into brand new paint. With many miles of coastline in their region, another activity they are supporting is voluntary beach clean-ups. Please contact co-chairs Laura-Jane.Harris@hmpo.gov.uk or Sue.Roach@dwp.gov.uk for more info. East, South East and London The purpose of the East, Southeast and London Environmental Network (ESEL-EN) is to connect people from a range of different government departments with a common interest in Environmental and Sustainability issues to encourage collaboration, share best practice and reduce duplication. Over the past year the network has held events such as Join the Green Side (reducing carbon footprint for home workers) and Plant Based Diets Lunch & Learn (educating about plant-based diets via personal experience of members). There are more events to come too, on 28 April the network will be hosting a Stop Food Waste Day a Teams event to raise awareness and share tips and best practises. Then on 8 June will be World Oceans Day, organising an individual or group beach cleans . On 22 September will be World Car Free Day, a mini competition to encourage participants to show how they moved around in a carbon-free way on the day. Please email matthew.dalton@food.gov.uk for more info. Next Steps Do you want to support environmental activity in your local area? Are you looking for ways to reduce your carbon footprint? Do you want to gain transferable work skills as part of your personal development? If so, joining your local regional network could help you achieve all of these. If you would like to get involved please use the contact details above for your respective region and enjoy! Contribute to the CSEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

Emma Charles, from CSEN’s new partner Kin + Carta, shares why the digital transformation company is proud to work with us at CS Live and on meeting environmental goals. For me, this is a deeply personal intersection of purposes. I was a civil servant for 15 years – holding positions in the Home Office, Valuation Office and HMRC – before discovering an interest in carbon measurement and climate change. I found Kin + Carta, an organisation that shares my passions, and joined as Director of Public Sector Delivery. Kin + Carta is slightly different to more conventional end-to-end digital transformation provided. As a listed company, we must make a profit, so I am always interested in hearing about your digital projects. However, two other p-words are equally important to us. We equally balance people, planet and profit in our decisions. When it comes to people, our goal is to become internationally recognised as a best place to work, which means we must look after our kin. Our diversity and inclusion programme, IDEA, is designed by our people to ensure that everyone can be their authentic self in the workplace, that we have diverse teams who are paid equitably, and that our people are diversity and inclusion thought leaders in the wider industry. The third p is planet. Our goal is to save our clients 1 million tonnes of CO2e. We’re doing all the right basic stuff, measuring our scope 1 and 2 emissions, thinking about our sourcing strategies, and publishing our net zero plan. But we want to go much further than that and we actively encourage each other to speak to civil servants and other clients about how to measure and manage their carbon emissions. The effects are really showing. We are working with the Trade Remedies Authority and Planning Inspectorate to measure and reduce the carbon footprints attributable to the digital projects we are working on together, and our participation in CS Live has already opened doors to further conversations. If you’re interested in ways to measure the carbon footprint of your project, rejig your development practices to make them leaner and more climate friendly, or design your hosting infrastructure to (literally) save tonnes of carbon emissions, please do get in touch. Combining profit, people and planet allowed us to put ourselves forward for B-Corp accreditation, for which we were rigorously assessed over three years. We achieved certification last December and were the first company listed on the London Stock Exchange to do so. It was such a significant achievement, that our Global CEO J Schwan was invited to ring the bell at the LSE to start trading one morning. Now, back to that intersection I mentioned, between Kin + Carta and CSEN. It’s a beautiful combination for me as it brings together my attachment to the Civil Service and my drive to help people understand climate change and how they can, and should, do what they can to make a positive impact. K+C can help CSEN members extend their reach and speak to even more people about bringing environmental considerations into their work, and running their projects carbon consciously. K+C and CSEN can make impacts individually, but together we will drive real change.

The policy profession has defined a common set of standards at different levels of experience and seniority. What the standards do not do is specify skills according to policy subject areas, or depth of knowledge and expertise that is vital to effective decision making through to delivery for citizens, communities and the UK. As policy evolves as a profession, we want to better define and support policy careers across the UK. To do this, we want to test out (in partnership with others) where career groupings already exist across public service that encourage policy professionals (and others) to deepen domain expertise and move away from the often criticised culture of the generalist (from the Fulton Report in 1968 to Institute for Government Better policy making in 2022), whilst also supporting movement and career growth. There are existing specialisms in policy work including security, international and trade. We want to explore an expansion of these subject areas and whether we could formalise one based on Climate Change and Environmental Policy. The Head of Policy Profession, Tamara Finkelstein has commissioned Lee McDonough and David Hill to lead the testing of this as a career anchor for the profession (if this works, there will be others following). Many colleagues (including BEIS) are already working with GSCU to design a learning portfolio around climate change. We want to align our exploratory work to ensure that we co-create a robust programme that is useful and ultimately attractive. To achieve this, we need to know what would be credible for you, the environmental network members of the Civil Service. We are keen to set up workshops to explore further some core questions, including: What are some of the common knowledge areas needed across roles in climate change and the environment, irrespective of grades and departments? What are the work experiences common across climate change and the environment that set it apart as a career anchor? What would you want to see from the Policy Profession in support of a Climate Change and Environmental career anchor? What would you not want to see? Our inaugural Policy Festival Week will commence from Monday, 9th May. Wednesday, 11th May will focus on Climate change & Environment; we want to share the prospect of this work as well as topical knowledge. We will provide more information about the event but keen you save the date for now. If you’d like to be involved in a workshop to explore these questions, and share your views on climate change and environment as a career anchor, please email us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk Contribute to the CSEN Blog If you're interested in contributing to the CSEN Blog, get in touch with us at environment.network@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk. We'd love to hear your ideas!

The CSEN surge and innovation team's Rebecca Robertson presents Offshoots: a series of content to increase your access to the most up to date science and evidence for environmental issues. As part of this new series, we will host bitesize talks by experts (academics or practitioners), who will give a 15-minute plain English session highlighting the scientific evidence for common queries surrounding key environmental issues. There will be plenty of space for questions and clear signposting to resources or follow-up opportunities with experts. We hope you will come away from these sessions having learned something new and equipped with knowledge and resources to share with your colleagues. We aim to cover questions like why you should care about X, what the current situation is for X environmental issue (what we know and what don’t we know), quick wins for the environment and success stories from environmental research. We will collaborate with science professionals and practitioners internally, and externally through university networks, learned societies and professional bodies. Please contact us if there is a particular speaker or topic, you’d like us to add to our series (rebecca.robertson@faststream.civilservice.gov.uk) and keep your eye out for future Offshoots content on the website and in the newsletter. Launch event with the British Ecological Society The first in our Offshoots series takes place on 5 December (1-1.30pm) with the British Ecological Society (BES), which brings together almost 7,000 members around the world, with a shared vision of the importance of nature and people thriving in a world inspired by ecology. This is a non-campaigning organisation, and they aim to inform environmental policy by making the best ecological evidence accessible to decision-makers. Find out more about their policy work and opportunities in their guest blog on the CSEN website. We’re hosting a special short talk to tie in with the upcoming Montreal Biodiversity Conference (COP 15) 7-19 December 2022, where governments from around the world will come together to agree on a new set of goals to guide global action through 2030 to halt and reverse nature loss. Protected areas will play an integral part in nature recovery, provision of ecosystem services and limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. Protected areas are likely to feature regularly in negotiations. The BES’s Protected Areas report focuses on effective protection for biodiversity within the UK, and how 30% of land and sea can be effectively protected for nature by 2030 (30x30). We examine existing protection that is in place and whether this is sufficient to address the causes of biodiversity loss and reverse it, in line Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) strategic goals. In the report, we also assess the role of national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs) and the emerging role of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in delivering the 30 x 30 target meaningfully in the UK. We provide guidelines for effective nature conservation on land and in the sea. Speakers: Dr Joseph Bailey is Lecturer in Ecology, Conservation, and Sustainability at Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, and lead author of the BES protected areas report. He’s interested in broad-scale biodiversity patterns and landscape ecology, the study of the relationship between geodiversity (landforms, geology, hydrology) and biodiversity, and the application of these areas to conservation. Rick Stafford is Professor of Marine Biology and Conservation at Bournemouth University and chair of the British Ecological Society’s Policy Committee. His research interests include protected areas, blue carbon, fishing and artificial reefs, as well as modelling approaches to identify effective solutions to environmental problems.

CSEN's surge and innovation team introduce its first Offshoots series guest, the British Ecological Society (BES) with a deep-dive into the organisation's policy priorities. The British Ecological Society (BES) is a learned society which brings together almost 7,000 members around the world, with a shared vision of nature and people thriving in a world inspired by ecology. The BES is a non-campaigning organisation, and our policy team aims to inform environmental policy by making the best ecological evidence accessible to decision-makers. The BES has English, Scottish and Welsh Policy Groups, which aim to unite ecologists with an interest in influencing policy with policymakers, including civil servants. Activities of the BES policy team and devolved nations policy groups include the following areas. Policy reports and briefings The BES Policy Team produces policy reports, synthesising ecological knowledge on policy-relevant topics into readable reports for policymakers and other groups of key stakeholders, in order to contribute to key policy discussions and influence the design of new policy developments. The first two policy reports focussed on Protected Areas and Nature Recovery and Nature-based Solutions, for which we hosted launch events and received substantial media coverage. The next big project is a report that will summarise the ecological evidence on regenerative agricultural practices and provide policy recommendations for a transition to more sustainable farming methods. Responding to consultations The BES Policy Team answers consultations from governments and other relevant authorities, synthesising the ecological evidence available by tapping into our network and the expertise of our members. Recent consultations we have responded to include three Defra’s consultations on environmental targets, the green paper on nature recovery and the use of peat in horticulture, the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy and the Brecon Beacons National Park Authority’s management plan consultation. Hosting events for ecologists and policymakers The devolved nations' policy groups hold policy roundtables that bring together ecologists and policymakers. The BES Scottish policy group recently hosted a policy debate on National Parks in Scotland, the outcome of which will inform the group’s response to the Scottish Government’s consultation on the same topic. The Welsh policy group will host an event early next year on biodiversity net gain and what it means for Wales. In addition, the BES policy team and policy groups hold expert workshops to inform specific key policy developments. Policy training for ecologists The BES hosts training workshops and produces training guides for early career ecologists with an interest in engaging with policy. We also write posts for our website to allow our members to stay up-to-date with the latest domestic and international environmental policy developments, including an upcoming post on the new Global Biodiversity Framework and its effects on UK devolved biodiversity policies. Policy fellowships The BES policy team offers fellowships to ecologists looking to expand their knowledge and experience of policy. The annual BES POST Fellowship gives the opportunity for an ecology PhD student to hone their ability to communicate scientific issues to policymakers by writing policy briefs and POST Notes. Next year we will work with Natural Resources Wales to offer a post-doc fellowship on regenerative agriculture in Wales. Other work at the BES BES Events The BES hosts Europe’s largest annual ecology conference and this year’s meeting will be held in Edinburgh in December, with ecologists attending from all over the world for talks, poster sessions and workshops on the latest developments in ecological science. In-person registration is sold out but it’s not too late to attend virtually. See our full events calendar here and past event recordings here. Sign up to their public engagement newsletter for the latest events, training, and funding opportunities in public engagement, schools outreach, and science communication. BES Special Interest Groups (SIGs) The BES has 19 Special Interest Groups (SIGs), which are volunteer groups of ecologists focusing on a specific area of ecology, including agricultural ecology, conservation ecology and invasion science. SIGs organise meetings and events that unite ecologists working in those areas, and you can sign up to their mailing lists for developments and information on events. BES Publications The BES publishes seven ecology journals, which members have free access to, as well as Guides to Better Science and the Niche, a quarterly members’ magazine. Getting involved You can sign up to the English/Scottish/Welsh Policy Groups’ mailing lists for updates on their activities and future events. If you have any questions about the above or would like to get involved with the BES, feel free to contact the BES Policy Team at india@britishecologicalsociety.org. You can follow policy updates here and wider British Ecological Society on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and podcasts on SoundCloud.

We've been speaking to colleagues across the government in the lead-up to the Civil Service Climate and Environment Conference 2023 to discover the brilliant work they are doing to improve climate, environment and social justice policies in the UK and beyond. While we are unable to feature everybody on the day, you can follow this blog for regular insights on what we've learned. Air pollution: Addressing the top two environmental threats to human health - Cerise Reynolds, DEFRA's Noise and Statutory Nuisance Policy Team You probably have a fairly good idea that air pollution is harmful. It’s recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as the biggest environmental threat to human health, and is associated with 7 million premature deaths worldwide every year. But did you know WHO classes noise as the next biggest environmental threat to our health in Europe? Even more surprisingly, noise is associated with many of the same health effects caused by air pollution. All too often, it’s the same communities which are affected by both, and in some cases, the solutions, can be the same. Here in Defra, we’re employing some of the same methods to manage both problems. There is overwhelming evidence of the debilitating effects of exposure to air pollution, with reduced life expectancy from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and lung cancer. The government has estimated that the reduction in healthy life expectancy caused by air pollution is equivalent to 29,000 to 43,000 deaths a year in the UK, and exposure over just a few hours or days can have similar effects to long-term exposure. You might associate noise with sleep disturbance and annoyance, potentially leading to mental ill health – and you’d be right. However, there is compelling evidence linking long-term exposure to noise, like air pollution, with cardiovascular disease including heart attacks and strokes. Evidence also shows a link with metabolic disease, including another of national concern – diabetes. All told, the government estimates that the annual social cost in England of urban road noise alone is £7-£10 billion. Crucially, communities living close to busy roads are routinely exposed to high levels of noise as well as high levels of air pollution in the form of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and Particulate Matter.5. This inevitably compounds other long term health inequalities, as these communities are often the ones most likely to be disadvantaged by a range of additional economic and social factors. In Defra, we are using cutting edge technology to address these challenges. The first step in addressing the problem is to identify and locate it. In the case of both air pollution and noise, Defra is using state of the art computer modelling to calculate from high quality source data the nature and extent of the problem. This then enables the relevant authorities to see where people are exposed to the highest noise and air pollution levels, and to prioritise their efforts accordingly. DEFRA's new noise model shows daytime noise exposure levels along with modelling objects, such as buildings. Our noise model in particular is an exciting breakthrough, modelling noise levels for every road and railway in England. We are aiming to make this model available to other government departments, public sector bodies and local authorities, to be used for scenario planning and improving national and local decision making around the cumulative impacts of noise. In the case of air quality, our modelling helps us target national funding to address the problem and measure the results. The Air Quality Grant Scheme provides access to funding for councils to deliver bespoke local projects to tackle specific local pollution sources. We have paid out over £10.7 million to 44 local authorities this financial year. We are also tackling NO2 hotspots by funding councils with £883 million to implement local NO2 reduction plans, including the introduction of Clean Air Zones (CAZs) in towns and cities across the country. And our public awareness campaign to encourage the cleanest and most efficient domestic burning practices is also ongoing. Of course, both these issues are cross-cutting ones, with decisions made in departments other than Defra having a significant potential impact across the country. If you’re interested in the links between your work and ours, contact us at noise@defra.gov.uk and air.quality@defra.gov.uk. Finding purpose in climate change work in government - Chris Paterson, Actuary at the Government Actuary's Department I am very much looking forward to meeting civil servants from across government at the Civil Service Climate and Environment Conference. Over the past few years, the Civil Service Environment Network (CSEN) has helped me align my advocacy for climate change action with my role as an actuary. At the conference, I hope to meet other people who have also tried to align their viewpoint on climate change to the work they do in the Civil Service. I’m also looking forward to meeting those who take a different viewpoint as that always makes for an interesting and sometimes mind-changing discussion. Finding my purpose I joined the Government Actuary’s Department (GAD) in 2018 looking for more purpose in my work as an actuary. I found this purpose through my work on disaster risk finance where I work with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, Centre for Disaster Protection and the World Bank. Some like-minded colleagues and I also formed an informal group to look at what actuaries in government could do to help tackle climate change. At that time, while there was lots of good work happening in this area in government, it felt harder for us to get involved at GAD. As actuaries, making assumptions about a very uncertain long-term future is challenging to do in a way that encompasses all potential risks and possibilities, including those which could be the result of climate change. We highlighted the right risks but didn’t always have the tools or knowledge to go further in a way that would help our clients in government as much as we wanted to. Skills and capacity Since starting the group over four years ago it has grown and developed and is now the area in GAD which has the most success in engaging other departments. Some of the colleagues I started the group with have left GAD to tackle the climate crisis in their own ways. However, as the group has evolved, we have built skills and capacity for us to advise in new areas of work. Collaborative working We have also been working collaboratively with other professions to develop areas in which our skills can help. As an example, one of my colleagues went to COP26 as part of an HMT team looking at private finance’s contribution to Net Zero goals. A growing area of activity for us is helping organisations to report on their climate risks and opportunities, as recommended by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). The published roadmap sets out the expectation for TCFD reporting to be embedded across the UK economy by 2025. To do this effectively organisations need to estimate their future experience under a range of climate scenarios. As professionals specialising in long-term risk, actuaries are well-placed to advise here, and indeed at GAD we have already been helping public sector organisations with these issues. Roles and challenges You may come to the CSEN conference in a similar place to where I was five years ago. You may consider this an area you are passionate about but are trying to find out how you can make best use of your skills. Or perhaps you are a seasoned professional who has been on the front line of this for some time. Either way, this is a great opportunity for us to help each other on that journey, learning from each other about our different roles and challenges. To find out more about how GAD’s climate risk expertise can help your organisation contact us at climate.change@gad.gov.uk. The team improving our soil health - Eleanor Palmer, Grame Duggan and Rachel Boulderstone of DEFRA's Soil Team Healthy, functioning soil is the foundation of our natural capital resources. Soil underpins vital ecosystem service benefits and outcomes such as increasing biodiversity, carbon storage, and helping to mitigate climate change impacts such as flooding and drought. Improving and protecting agricultural soil promotes crop growth, crop quality and resilience to pest and disease, which overall increases crop yields and builds resilience for farmers and supply chains. Healthy soil also provides resilience to impacts from climate change by allowing water to infiltrate, thereby reducing run-off which helps prevent flooding, and storing water which increases resilience to drought, allowing aquifers to remain viable during prolonged dry seasons. Appropriate soil management, such as increasing soil organic matter (SOM), introducing cover crops and herbal leys, preventing soil compaction, and preventing contamination with chemicals and pesticides can all help to maintain good soil health. Protecting soil health in urban areas is also important as it underpins good quality green spaces, access to which improves health and wellbeing, while also providing biodiverse habitats. Ensuring soil is managed sustainably during construction can support soil-reuse and protect soil health. Tackling land affected by contamination also supports brownfield development, bringing it back to beneficial use and making our soil and water cleaner and safer. Key Soil Challenges Poor soil management and/or inappropriate land use has degraded much of England’s soil and reduced its ability to perform vital ecosystem services and functions. Soil degradation is estimated to cost up to £1.7 billion (Graves et al., 2015. Adjusted to 2022 prices) annually in England and Wales. This is mainly linked to loss of organic content of soils (47% of total cost), as well as compaction (39%) and erosion (12%). In England and Wales: · Almost 4 million hectares of soil are at risk of compaction · Over 2 million hectares of soil are at risk of erosion · Approximately 300,000 hectares of land are contaminated in the UK · Microplastics in soil are widespread, with unknown consequences Soil also acts as a significant terrestrial store of carbon. However, this soil carbon is vulnerable to loss from erosion during extreme weather events and disturbance from both urban and agricultural land management practices. Regaining this loss, soil carbon is a slow process and happens over time when soil is healthy and undisturbed. Without prompt action to improve soil health, England’s soil will continue to degrade through inappropriate management practices that lead to increased compaction, erosion, floods and landslides, loss of organic matter, contamination, and loss of soil biodiversity. Protecting soil health is very context specific depending on soil type, land use, and parameters such as bedrock geology and local climates. Soil is intrinsic to numerous policy areas where a balance of outcomes is required, for example, food production with environment protection. We need more robust data to be able to understand the current state of our soil, and how it is changing. How Defra is meeting these challenges The soil team consists of policy professionals, scientists, and analysts that feed into evidence-based policy advice and analysis on improving and protecting soil health, including remediating contaminated land and encouraging sustainable and cost-effective practices on agricultural land. Using a theory of change model, a strategic vision for improving England’s soil health has been devised. Through innovative workshops, a range of policy measures and outcomes were identified to better soil health, which will be outlined within the Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP). Actions cover all soil types and land uses to improve and protect soil, so that it is valued, and to enable opportunities for unlocking private finance. This includes the Sustainable Farming Incentive that encourages a sustainable approach to farm husbandry and soil management, e.g. rewarding farmers for introducing herbal leys and grass-legume mixtures, or cover crops to help to build levels of SOM, improve soil structure for water and nutrient retention, and prevent soil erosion and compaction. We are also building a robust baseline of soil data from which we can monitor improvements in soil health, identify trends and support informed policy decisions. This includes the development of our healthy soil indicator that aims to help land managers and farmers track the health of their soil, including levels of SOM, and the impact of their management practices over time. This will work in tandem with the Natural Capital Ecosystem Assessment, a new evidence programme to assess the condition and change over time of England’s ecosystems and natural capital. Once a baseline has been established, a potential future target could be considered under the Environment Act 2021. Smaller, better and greener: Our plan for government property - Stuart Burrows, Programme Director for Sustainability and Asset Performance at the Office of Government Property Government Property is on the brink of a huge transformation, and sustainability is right at the top of our agenda. Our teams in the property function aren’t unique in having that focus. Almost every area of government is working hard on making their work and their services more sustainable. What’s often not thought about is just how important property is to this agenda. The built environment is responsible for 40% of all emissions in the UK. Without a dramatic decrease in the emissions from the built environment, it’s impossible for us to achieve wider sustainability goals. Let’s consider some more facts that underline just how important property – and particularly government property – is in this journey towards a sustainable UK. The government manages more than 150,000 individual buildings across the country which – combined – are valued at more than £150bn Add in local government buildings and assets to this and the numbers more than double: over 300,000 buildings, at a value of more than half a trillion pounds The government property function manages, by some considerable distance, the biggest, most diverse and varied, property portfolio in the country. We all know how serious the impact will be if we don’t get this right. In late 2022, we published the new Government Property Strategy, which featured sustainability heavily. A core mission in the strategy (one of three) is creating a smaller, better, and greener public estate. The word ‘and’ is key in this: we don’t get to pick which of smaller, better, or greener we focus on in any particular property, we are committed to all three. The Government Property Sustainability Strategy Building on the property strategy is a dedicated new plan focused exclusively on making government property more sustainable. Our new Government Property Sustainability Strategy – the first coordinated property sustainability strategy the government has developed – sets out what we are going to do to make sure property plays its part in tackling climate change and improving the natural environment. We’re going to focus on four main pillars. Net zero emissions: dramatically reducing our carbon footprint Adaptation: protecting the estate from floods and other extreme weather Natural capital: driving improvements in our natural environment Resource efficiency: minimising waste and making the best use of natural resources. You can read our plan, alongside other helpful tools like our Net Zero Estate Playbook, on the property section of Gov.uk. Playing your part Our teams across the government property function will be leading on getting this done, but every area of government and every civil servant has a part to play. Consider your role as a civil servant - what opportunities do you have to push for more sustainable choices, whether that’s in procurement, policy or any kind of decision-making? Look out for opportunities to complete carbon literacy training to better understand your carbon footprint and potential areas where you could have the most impact. Be mindful of your daily activities and the choices you make in the workplace (and at home); this could include putting on a jumper to save on heating, cycling or using public transport, recycling your waste correctly, and many many more small interventions. What changes could you make personally to have the greatest impact? Finally, please think about how you can support us in delivery of the Property Sustainability Strategy - reach out to your organisation’s property team, or email us directly at the Office of Government Property. Welsh Net Zero Public Sector 2030: Challenges for social care - Joseph Wilton, Head of Wellbeing and Improvement at the Welsh Government Social Services and Integration Directorate In addition to its wider Net Zero 2030 Public Sector ambition, Welsh Government published a specific route-map for decarbonising social care. Social care has been identified as a "hot spot" for carbon emissions, with the majority of direct provision either being in care homes (which need to be maintained at a healthy temperature for vulnerable adults) or from domiciliary care agencies (which generally ask carers to drive in their own vehicles). Some people will also live in sheltered or supported accommodation, whereby they rent an apartment where care is provided on site. So, while the carbon emissions are relatively low intensity when compared to heavy industry, it is widespread, consistent and the service cannot be substantially changed or interrupted in the way it is provided. There is also much less data captured about social care’s carbon emissions. Local authorities will collect data on their general office use and fleet, it is hard to separate off the social care element from this. This becomes even harder when you consider that most of the care is being provided by private or third sector providers. These providers are commissioned by the local authority to provide care for people. These providers are not covered by the public sector plan, so they don’t need to be net zero by 2030. These providers vary considerable in size and capacity, and also in the physical makeup of any properties and their workforce. A problem is that, by commissioning the care, local authorities are responsible for the emissions being created by these providers. So they will have to either commission care from a carbon-neutral provider, or know what are the associated carbon emissions so that they can offset the emissions. To do this, the provider will have to have a ‘per person’ carbon emission estimate. This is not something they are currently equipped to do. People’s care varies considerably, and so to do the providers. Many care homes are not purpose built, they are potentially old, poorly insulated or using inefficient heating systems. Similarly, many domiciliary care agencies are operating in rural locations, visiting isolated people in a range of locations each day. This begs the question: should care be influenced by the associated carbon emissions? Coupled with this, the social care sector is very fragile. Providers are operating on very thin margins. They do not have the capacity to take on complicated data collection and estimation processes. Similarly, they don’t have the capital to be making significant investments in decarbonising their service. Lastly, with the current economic situation and rapidly rising energy costs, care homes and domiciliary care agencies are facing very real risk of not being able to meet basic running costs. Therefore, the pressure to provide support is more pressing then ever. What Welsh Government is doing is to set up a pilot grant scheme for care homes looking to undertake energy efficient improvements. This will involve care homes undertaking an energy audit and selecting the improvements which will make the biggest impact to their energy efficiency and reduce their energy demands. There is also work to explore innovative models of providing domiciliary care, potentially using fleet electric vehicles. This is all very early stages, and there is a lot more to do. However, the need is very real and urgent, so the pressure is on not just to decarbonise, but to keep the social care sector in Wales stable and able to continue despite the crises they face.

Since taking on the roles of the new CSCEN co-chairs at the start of April 2023, Charley, Chris, and Peter have been welcoming a new and enthusiastic group of colleagues to join our committee of around 40 volunteers, who will be running the Network over the next 12 months alongside their day jobs, to provide all our usual CSCEN content and deliver on our priorities. Please follow this link to meet our new 2023/24 CSCEN committee. Having watched membership increase rapidly in the previous 12 months, rising from roughly 3500 to 7800, this year we want to focus on expanding and refining our offer, in addition to pushing forwards with our mission to break down Government silos and build environmental knowledge and policy capability across the Civil Service.