By Ruth Lamont, Principal Officer in Research Ethics, Knowledge into Practice, Chief Scientist’s Directorate, Natural England
Started in 2022, the RENEW project, led by the University of Exeter and funded by the Natural Environment Research Council, is a five-year programme of research to develop solutions to one of the major environmental challenges for humankind: the renewal of biodiversity.
The wealth of plants and animals that are threatened with global extinction is a major concern. Biodiversity underpins human existence and RENEW is working to find ways that we can use the power of people—whether organisations, communities or individuals—to renew this essential life support system.
Understanding how exposure to natural spaces and biodiversity renewal impacts people—their interactions with and attitudes towards nature, as well as their health and well-being—is an important part of this programme of work.
Natural England have partnered with the RENEW programme to develop the ‘Renewing Biodiversity Longitudinal Survey’ (ReBLS for short). This will be the UK’s largest longitudinal study, allowing us to investigate how exposure to natural spaces and biodiversity renewal affects environmental attitudes, behaviours, health, and wellbeing over time. The protocol paper has just been published in People and Nature.
ReBLS has begun to capture the experiences of ~18,000 people across England using the same questions around environmental attitudes, behaviours, health and well-being every year for three years.
People’s responses will be linked to spatial information allowing us to explore the influence of their local environments, time in nature and exposure to known biodiversity renewal activities, ranging from planting street trees in towns and cities to ‘(re-)wilding’ entire landscapes.
"One of our immediate priorities is to explore the level of support for biodiversity renewal efforts and how and why this varies. This will provide evidence to help decision makers understand what kind of interventions and policies might be acceptable.
Later, we will use the data to focus on how exposure to biodiversity renewal efforts, or other interactions with nature, might relate to how people feel about nature, and to health and well-being over time.
Co-funding from Natural England has meant we can explore these issues with a very large robust sample of the English population and investigate the usefulness of longitudinal data in addressing national priorities in the Environment Improvement Plan.”
- Dr Jo Garrett, Research Fellow at the European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter.
This longitudinal research aims to inform the government’s work and national indicators under its environmental improvement plans. By developing methodologies that can understand how changes in nature relate to outcomes for people over time, this can inform our understanding of the impacts of environmental change.
ReBLS builds on existing cross-sectional surveys like the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (MENE) and People and Nature Surveys (PANS) which have been providing key statistics around people and nature for many years.
This survey has undergone an extensive 18-month development process, led by Dr Ben Phillips at the University of Exeter and in collaboration with Natural England. ReBLS is administered by YouGov.
By partnering in projects such as this, we aim to increase NE’s research capacity and draw upon the extensive expertise of our partners to ensure we are gathering the best possible evidence to inform biodiversity renewal.
For more information about the project, contact: renew@exeter.ac.uk
16 comments
Comment by Unhappy with Labour posted on
This won't count for anything with a Government determined to bulldoze nature out the way for developers who seem to be the only sector of our community that the Government care about.
Comment by Apart From Nature posted on
It might be better to research how to reconnect politicians with the natural world.
Comment by Claire Maxted posted on
Well said
Comment by Trina posted on
Completely agree with ghd previou comment. Nature is considered an inconvenience by this government who want to sweep it & those who care about it, away
Comment by Joel Bhatt posted on
The establishment of the Nature Recovery Fund in the latest Planning & Infrastructure Bill implies otherwise. The current system of environmental protections is failing at its goals.
Comment by Caroline White posted on
The local community and Friends of Middlewick have a strong connection with the biodiversity at Middlewick Ranges. The mental health and wellbeing of those concerned about the group is constantly being negatively impacted by threats ti the site.
These threats include the downgrading of habitats and exclusion of species in ecological reports, the threat of development, the destruction of skylark nesting habitat and nests/chicks, the denial of the presence of species including skylarks, the destruction of 1 hectare of woodland edging which was nightingale habitat and potential dormice territory, failure to manage habitats and the destruction of 14 hectares of acid grassland habitat with grassland fungi that passes the SSSI threshold, foraging habitat for nightingales, Barbastelle Bats and inverts.
Natural England have been involved throughout these actions and still have not used their power to protect the site.
Campaigners and members of the community should not have to live in high alert and with high levels of anxiety fighting current and emerging threats while waiting for the next threat to this site.
Comment by Caroline Defford posted on
But surely with the new planning bill going through parliament there will be less and less biodiversity and wildlife as developers will be allowed to kill everything in their path as long as they pay a fee to do so. Abysmal failure of our natural environment by Labour. Disappointed is an understatement
Comment by R Jones posted on
This won't matter to the government, who are very clearly trying to out- Tory the actual Tories. And we all know what that lot thought about the environment.
Comment by S Brown posted on
Maybe Rachel Reeves and the rest of the current government should mandatorily take part in this survey. Then we can figure out if it's just blind ignorance or Developer funding that's made them dispise nature so much?
Comment by Charlie posted on
We know all this stuff - there have been endless studies on how nature impacts people. At a very base level we die without it - but it’s clear how it positively impacts health and mental health - it’s an absolute no brainer. We don’t need more research to check if policies are acceptable. Spend this research money on doing something to prevent natures destruction or making it clearer to the current nature-illiterate government how much money can be saved by allowing nature to thrive as that seems the only thing that matters these days. There’s no point building a million homes if the people living in them can’t breathe decent air, or walk by and drink unpolluted water - if we can’t grow crops because there are no longer worms and bees and everyone is in mental health crisis because their connection to nature is obliterated. The collapse of ecosystems through the removal of species may make Labour think again about whether amphibians and bats are an inconvenience but sadly it will be too late by then…
Comment by J Leigh posted on
So disappointed with Labour. I regret my vote every day. “Building our economy” , you won’t have one ! Read the UN.org,
‘Biodiversity forms the web of life that we depend on for so many things – food, water, medicine, a stable climate, economic growth, among others. Over half of global GDP is dependent on nature. More than 1 billion people rely on forests for their livelihoods. And land and the ocean absorb more than half of all carbon emissions.
Comment by Hily posted on
DEFRA did a big piece of research in 2017 and recommended Green Care as a strategy to support well being. This included access to nature and social farms and community gardens. However, no funding followed so people like myself who are creating community gardens have to scrounge around to make it happen. Time for funding action not more research that proves the obvious once again.
Comment by Tim posted on
What wildlife needs is real action (money) and support so that species can recover and thrive in one of the most nature depleted countries worldwide. Money spent on wildlife brings huge benefits in health and mental wellbeing. What we do not need are yet more surveys and reports telling us what we already know.
Comment by Mark Bullen posted on
Has the Government ever thought about nature being the priority before people?
Pictures of “nature reserves” with loads of people suggests they are only classified to entertain the public, not nature
Comment by Claire Maxted posted on
I agree with one of the comments above - how to connect politicians with nature would be a better starting point. Attitudes come from the top down. We urgently need to prioritise the protection of nature and value it in everyone’s lives.
Comment by Dave Woodcock posted on
Any study or consultation should have to emphasise the views of those who actually live and work in the countryside. We often seem to ignore the rural population because the vast majority of people live in towns and cities.
We would not expect developments in cities to be approved or disapproved by those who do not live there. The same should be true for rural areas.