Defra minister Lord Benyon on UK farming and nature-based markets

Climate change or the biodiversity crisis – which do you think presents the most significant threat to the planet?

I think it’s important that we always consider how these two issues are linked: as a thriving natural environment underpins a healthy climate. Until recently, across society I think we have not valued the role that biodiversity and habitats play in helping to solve some of the issues of climate change.

The UK has taken a leadership role in tackling the twin climate and biodiversity crises and it’s important we do the right things domestically if we want other countries to join us on this journey.

We have taken important steps as a government in decarbonising our economy and incentivising renewable energy. But rightly our focus increasingly has also moved on how habitats, including peatlands and woodlands, absorb and harbour carbon from the atmosphere thereby restoring and protecting these landscapes. This improves our resilience to climate change.

Indeed, as the Prime Minister said at the Climate Change Conference COP27 there is no solution to climate change without protecting and restoring nature. This is why the UK played a key role in securing the biodiversity framework set out at the CBD COP15 conference in Montreal last year, and has committed to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 and to protect 30% of land and oceans by the same date.

Natural capital and nature-based solutions are creating a huge buzz at the moment. What opportunities have the potential to deliver the biggest benefits, which excite you the most and how much of a difference do you think they can make?

Nature-based solutions are a real opportunity to build resilience to climate change, while creating rich and diverse havens for wildlife. Many of the solutions to climate change are all around us, from the trees which absorb carbon from the air, to the dense peat-rich soils which hold it in the ground.

We need to keep doing more to help nature work to our advantage. Nature-based solutions are both effective and cost effective and lead to improved food and water security, public health and greater prosperity.

We’ve already seen the benefits of investing in natural solutions, including in Doncaster, for example, where rewetting lowland peat has been used to grow plant fibre material to use as padding for clothes. This will generate real cash value from the sale of the carbon units while compensating for biodiversity loss and creating sustainable textiles, so it’s a win-win.

As part of our ongoing work to increase the use of nature-based solutions, we have invested over £750 million into our new Nature for Climate Fund. This will increase woodland cover and restore our peatlands to good health and ensure that these natural resources can make a difference to our climate resilience for future generations.

There have been huge volumes of capital lined up to invest in nature-based solutions for quite some time, but the government only launched its strategy for Nature Markets in March and is still working on the rollout of the Environmental Land Management Scheme. Why did it take so long when the loss of the Basic Payment Scheme is already starting to have an impact on farmers?

There are huge opportunities for farmers and land managers from new nature-based finance initiatives – such as rewards from tree planting and peatland restoration – which provide for farmers who deliver public goods.

We’ve set a target to raise £500 million in private finance to support nature’s recovery by 2027 which will support greater biodiversity and support our farmers to access new revenue streams. We are pleased to be moving away from inefficient and unfair EU subsidies (around half of which went to just the largest 10% of farmers), but its right that we have taken the time to get the new scheme right and we have been working with farmers to make sure what we develop works in the field.

As direct payments are phased out, we are reinvesting the full £2.4 billion into the farming sector each year throughout this parliament, through the Sustainable Farming Incentive, our other environmental land management schemes, and one-off grants.

When they come on stream, these new markets could offer valuable new income streams for farmers to help replace the loss of the Basic Payment Scheme, but they are already price takers when it comes to the food they produce, is there a danger that the same happens with their natural capital?

Some farmers and land managers will opt for payments for activities that involve land use change away from agricultural use. But we have to be realistic, a degree of land use change is essential to meet our environmental and climate change goals.

The stat that I always remember is that 20% of our agricultural land produces just 4% of the calories we eat. So this is where we can do things that enhance nature, with farmers being rewarded for the changes they make, while producing food on the most productive land.

Nature-based investments have already come in for a bad press with allegations of greenwashing and a lack of genuine additionality being commonplace. How will you ensure the markets you hope to encourage in the UK avoid being similarly tainted as there is already a sense that the voluntary carbon market here is becoming a bit of a Wild West?

It’s incredibly important that we get this right and have a market that is trusted and has integrity. We are encouraging fund managers and the City of London to support the transition to Net Zero and get finance moving in the right direction to protect nature.

The Nature Markets Framework sets out principles for how we expect new and developing nature markets to grow, so that they are fair, effective and accessible. This will form the basis of a more robustly managed market, so that farmers and land managers can engage confidently with green finance opportunities and know that they will stand the test of time. Land managers can see the framework on gov.uk.

One of the biggest criticisms of the markets for offsets, whether that is for carbon, biodiversity or nutrient neutrality, is that they continue to allow the pollution of our air and water, as well as habitat destruction. Wouldn’t it be better to just force polluters to stop polluting?

Alongside our work to scale up private investment into nature recovery, we are clear that comprehensive action is needed from all sectors to achieve the cleaner rivers we all want to see.

We are taking robust action which includes setting strict targets on water companies to protect people and the environment. Delivering this will require the largest infrastructure programme in water company history - £56 billion capital investment over 25 years.

The government has set itself some very ambitious targets when it comes to climate change, nature recovery and tree planting. However, a number of reports from Parliament’s own select committees indicate they are unlikely to be achieved. Is that fair and will you need to scale back your ambitions? If not, how will you get things back on track?

We have full confidence in our Environment Act targets, which were established through intensive consultation with businesses, land managers and environmental organisations. Planting more trees is critical to achieving net zero, providing more habitat and growing our future domestic timber resource.

In the 25 Year Environment Plan we recognised this and committed to increasing woodland cover in England to 12% by 2060. We have since gone further than this and under the Environmental Improvement Plan, we have set a target of 16.5% of England to be trees and woodland by 2050.

The final suite of targets – including our commitment to restore or create more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitats by 2042 – are stretching. This is a big societal challenge. My sense is that farmers and land managers are up for it. Through the Environment Act we have ensured a robust legal framework to hold current and future governments to account on these targets, protecting nature for generations to come.

The war in Ukraine has hiked the cost of living and focused attention on food security with many saying we should be increasing food production not encouraging rewilding or less intensive farming practices. Does the government have its land use priorities right?

There’s always going to be a debate about how we use land which is a creative tension between what’s set aside for nature recovery and food production – but we are very clear that sustainable food production and caring for the environment not only can, but must, go hand in hand.

Our farmers are at the heart of our vision to improve the state of nature in our country, and we are putting new farming schemes and resources in place to ensure that farmers can produce the food we need while protecting our environment and delivering for public good.

Later this year, we will also be producing a Land Use Framework which will set out clearly how working with farmers and land managers we can have healthy soil, abundant wildlife and produce the food we need.

Government energy policy also seems a bit contradictory. On the one hand politicians say the country needs to be less reliant on fossil fuels, especially imported Russian oil and gas, but planning policy, not to mention a lack of infrastructure, makes it very hard to bring new on-shore solar and wind schemes online. Why can’t government departments become more joined up?

We work across government to ensure that our policies – whether that’s bus services, schools or internet connectivity – really work for those in our most remote areas, as well as towns and cities. This work is known as Rural Proofing and is part of the cross-government commitment to not only “level up” but “level out” – out of the towns to the villages and even to the remotest of places up a valley.

You should be able to run a financial services business in remote North Yorkshire as well as they could in central York. We have just published a new delivery document for rural areas - called Unleashing Rural Opportunity and it includes new cross government ambition for rural areas, and confirmed the work we are doing across government and the ongoing work to scale up investment and innovation to improve digital connectivity and transport links, secure energy supplies and increase the availability of affordable housing.

On energy, the government has provided help for rural low-income households to move to cheaper heating. Up to £378 million is being made available in grants, ring-fenced for rural areas, to fund energy efficiency and clean heating upgrades for low-income households living off the gas grid in England.

The Dimbleby Food Strategy paper was widely recognised as offering some innovative solutions that would help make the British public, gorged on a diet of processed food, healthier, but its findings seem to have been largely ignored allegedly because the then Prime Minister was afraid of accusations of nanny state-ism. Would you have liked to see it taken more seriously?

In the UK we are spoilt for choice when it comes to fresh, locally sourced produce – from seafood to strawberries. We want everyone to be able to have access to healthy and delicious foods which are produced in an environmentally sustainable way. The Government Food Strategy is our blueprint for this, it sets out how we will maintain domestic food production to get everyone the food they need, while meeting our net zero target and other commitments.

This included a commitment to scale up research and innovation for the food sector, supported by a £120 million investment into research across the sector which will improve the resilience of our food security.

And finally - The countryside has traditionally voted Conservative, but surveys suggest that rural communities and food producers no longer feel valued by this government. With a general election on the horizon, what plans do you have to reassure them that you do care?

This government is committed to delivering for rural communities, which is why we have set new measures to grow the economy and see more skilled and better paid jobs - bringing new opportunities for even the most remote communities. This includes government plans to make it easier for farmers to change agricultural buildings into family homes or business units.

We want to see planning rules changed to provide a more supportive system for farmers to diversity their businesses, whilst providing local authorities with new powers to safeguard against second homes and holiday lets.

In addition, a new £7 million fund will test out new ways to bring together satellite, wireless and fixed line internet connectivity, helping support farmers and tourism businesses to access lightning fast, reliable connectivity in remote areas for the first time. I’m pleased that this will help rural businesses in trial areas make the most of agricultural technologies and improve connectivity on their land to monitor crops and livestock in real time.

Richard Benyon fact file 

Richard Benyon last appeared in The Rural Report in 2012 when he was an MP and Defra Minister for the Natural Environment and Fisheries. He left the Commons during Boris Johnson’s tenure as Prime Minister but was subsequently elevated to the House of Lords by Mr Johnson in 2020.

As Lord Benyon, he was brought back into Defra in 2021 and is currently Minister for Biosecurity, Marine and Rural Affairs. He lives on the 20,000-acre Englefield Estate in Berkshire.

This interview is part of The Rural Report 2023/24, giving rural property owners and businesses the latest news, guidance, advice and key insights in rural markets.

Download The Rural Report 2023/24