The planet has a nature problem. In the UK, ours is particularly acute, the worst in the G7. The abundance of UK species has declined* by an average of 19% since 1970. Some 1,500 species are now threatened with national extinction.
That's tragic. It is also self-perpetuating because we fall into a mindset known as 'Shifting Baseline Syndrome' where each generation has a lower expectation of 'normal'. A bird watcher in Stamford in 1950 would not believe what we consider to be an 'acceptable' level of, for example, farmland birds.
This decline has, of course, taken place in conjunction with rising levels of carbon in our atmosphere and a growing population living and working in new places, neither of which are exclusive to Stamford.
It's easy to make an apparently logical conclusion from this and trace the construction and concreting of our green spaces in a straight line through to the destruction of our natural habitats.
Easy, but wrong. Yes, nature is crucial to our planet and our lives. It is in decline. We must do something about it fast. But if urbanisation is responsible for all the ills in our environment, the decline in species and natural habitats would have begun some two hundred years ago. Yet positive levels of biodiversity in the UK are estimated to have peaked over a century after the industrial revolution.
In fact, over this period, the proportion of the UK that is 'built on' has risen from just 4% to 5%.
The proportion containing utilised arable farmland, over the same period, has risen from 55.7% to 68%. It has replaced lowland meadow and pasture, roughly 90% of which has been lost since 1930**. There is a clear correlation between the decline of nature in the UK and the changing use of 'green space', specifically our farming practices. The biggest (and most solvable) problem lies not in our homes and buildings, but in our soil.
Arable farming – the use of land to grow crops – is approximately 11,000 years old. For most of that time, a similar process was followed, where fields would alternately be farmed and left fallow, enabling them to rest and recover.
In England, as agriculture developed through the Middle Ages, fields were divided by hedges, trees and streams, forming the edge of parish boundaries. Animals were a critical part of this rotation, grazing and manuring, and each field would sustain not only its crop but also a huge eco-system of insects, worms, birds and larger animals.
As late as 1900, with cities growing and heavy industry pumping carbon into the atmosphere, biodiversity continued to flourish. There is good evidence to suggest that peak biodiversity in the English countryside occurred at a similar point that the cities were industrializing and beginning to sprawl.
And then, coinciding with food poverty in the country during and after both World Wars, there began a farming revolution with drastic side-effects. Bigger machinery demanded straighter boundaries, fewer obstructions and easier access. Hedgerows were removed, streams blocked or diverted, trees cut down. Fields were extended right up to the farmhouse, leaving no space for many species to exist. Then came fertiliser.
Fertiliser was developed with good intentions, providing essential nutrients that help plants grow, leading to better crop yields.
Whilst fertilisers have enabled an enormous expansion in crop yields, fuelling our expanding appetites and tolerance for food waste, they have come at an enormous cost. By seeking ever greater yields, farmers have allowed fertilisers to cause nutrient imbalances, harm or kill beneficial microorganisms, and pollute water by allowing fertiliser to run-off fields in rainwater. Fields have become rested less, ploughed more deeply, compacted by ever-heavier machinery. Consequently, decade by decade, the topsoil, once so rich in animal life, is dying.
It's important to stress that this is more than a biodiversity problem. It's a carbon issue too. At its fruitful best, topsoil captures carbon through a number of natural mechanisms, some of which are only just revealing themselves to scientists today. The world's soils contain approximately 1,500 billion tons of carbon in the form of organic material. Increasing the quantity of carbon contained in soils by just 0.4% a year – through restoring and improving degraded agricultural lands – would halt the annual increase of CO2 in the atmosphere.
This is deeply worrying and information that is clearly worth sharing, yet you may be wondering why it's something for a Master Developer to focus on. The answer is that large scale property developments, far from adding to the problem, can act as a positive counterweight.
- We understand that areas of mowed grass are not a solution to nature recovery. Stamford North will benefit from the right green spaces that encourage nature to flourish.
- Our designs focus on enhancing habitats through the growth of trees and hedgerows. Our code can ensure that housebuilders plant the 'right' kind of green sward, native shrubs and woodland trees.
- We implement sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) – central to our plans for the Nature Corridor at the very heart of Stamford North - to manage rainfall naturally, reduce flood risk and prevent water pollution. These allow water to filter into the ground, helping recharge groundwater and support nature recovery.
- We can ensure that Stamford North is free from curb-side insecticides (which, despite their ability to kill anything in their path, are still often used to reduce weeds on verges).
- Through our relationship with neighbouring communities, we can invest in additional wetland and woodland. This is central to our strategy and can be seen in our designs for Stamford North.
As a Master Developer we need to ensure that space is created for houses to be built. However, a deep understanding of – and passion for – nature means we can use the opportunity to do real good, not just for residents in and around the new place, but for the air we all breathe.
That's why we have set ourselves the very highest of benchmarks. The Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) measures the biodiversity levels of a place before and after development. Developers are asked to create a 10% net gain in biodiversity through habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement. At GummerLeathes, we don't think that's enough. This piece began by referencing 'Shifting Baseline Syndrome' and 10% of not much is still very small.
So we have set ourselves a more considerable challenge for all our places, including Stamford North. We will not measure ourselves against the biodiversity levels of today, but of the peak that co-existed with industrialising and urbanising towns and cities across the UK.
That's a real aim. We have put it into our plans for Stamford North, where biodiversity is 50% lower than a century ago. So, if we are successful, we will be recovering nature to levels not seen since the great poet-naturalist John Clare walked those meadows and recorded the natural beauty all around.
Building brings with it an enormous responsibility as it replaces productive land. Nature should never be about 'mitigation'. It is neither a box to tick nor a hurdle to bypass. Any future-facing business that seeks to build thriving communities needs to include it in the very heart of their values and their plans. For us, that's a given.
* State of Nature Report, 2023
**Research from University of Northumbria, 2023