Land Journal: October-November 2019

October/November 2019

8 Nature’s engineers Could beavers be allowed to stay in Devon beyond a five-year trial?

10 Land for land Why global standards are not a panacea for lost land in Uganda

16 Food chain How will the UK sustain its agricultural trade after Brexit?

rics.org/journals

Land

Given to the wild 6

What benefits can rewilding offer to rural areas?

Do you know the value of placemaking?

This will soon be on everyone’s agenda in real estate. Get up to speed at the StreetDots website.

• Follow StreetDots on LinkedIn and get daily insights, news and trends regarding placemaking and site activation.

• The world’s first placemaking booking platform • StreetDots breathes life in to new and existing developments

• Working with every sector in real estate

www.streetdots.co.uk RICS-Ad.indd 1

05/08/2019 07:05

Land

Contents

The Land Journal is the journal of the RICS Environment, Geomatics, Minerals and Waste, Planning and Development and Rural Professional Groups Editor: Sian Morgan T: +44 (0)24 7686 8560 E: sianmorgan@rics.org Advisory group: Tim Andrews (Stephenson Harwood LLP), Kevin Biggs (consultant), Michael Birnie (Ernest Cook Trust), James Kavanagh (RICS), Philip Leverton (University College of Estate Management), Fiona Mannix (RICS), Duncan Moss (Ordnance Survey), Tony Mulhall (RICS), Marion Payne-Bird (Consultant),

4

From the chairs

Frances Plimmer (FIG – the International Federation of Surveyors), Michael Rocks (David J Powell Surveys Limited), Timothy Woodward (rural chartered surveyor), Rob

5

Briefing

Yorke (rural chartered surveyor)

16

Future trading With globalisation and environmental pressure affecting agricultural output, the UK will have to work hard to make up for lost trade after Brexit

6 All RICS journals are available on annual subscription. Enquiries should be directed to licensing manager Louise Weale E: lweale@rics.org

Back to nature How can we define the process of rewilding, and what benefits can it bring to the rural environment?

Published by: The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, Parliament Square, London SW1P 3AD

20

In need of replenishment Mineral planning authorities need the government to instigate a forward-looking aggregate supply system 22

T: + 44 (0)24 7678 8555 W: rics.org

Stopping mink in their tracks

ISSN 1754-9094 (print)

The Scottish Invasive Species Initiative has its sights on controlling the non-native American mink

ISSN 1754-9108 (online) Editorial & production manager: Toni Gill Sub-editor: Matthew Griffiths Advertising: Jonny King T: +44 (0)20 7101 2777 E: jonny@wearesunday.com Design & production: We Are Sunday Printer: Geoff Neal Group

24 8

Beavering away If Eurasian beavers are allowed to stay in the River Otter beyond a trial period, they could breathe new life into the landscape

The green governance gap With most UK environmental law being based on EU legislation, the draft Environment Bill comes at a critical time 26

While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of all content in the journal, RICS will have no responsibility for any errors or omissions in the content. The views expressed in the journal are not necessarily those of RICS. RICS cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage suffered by

10

Compensating land loss A Ugandan case study shows that international standards alone do not always guarantee appropriate compensation for lost land

any person as a result of the content and the opinions expressed in the journal, or by any person acting or refraining to act as a result of the material included in the journal. All rights in the journal, including full copyright or publishing right, content and design, are

IMAGE © DAVID WHITE

owned by RICS, except where otherwise described. Any dispute arising out of the journal is subject to the law and jurisdiction of England and Wales. Crown copyright material is reproduced under the Open Government Licence v.3.0 for public sector information: nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/version/3/

13

A solid grounding Ghana is overhauling legislation to strengthen land rights in the country

Local colour A new open platform is designed to collect, visualise and disseminate data on London’s building stock 28

Remembrance of things past Reinstatement of a former Tarmac sand and gravel quarry laid the ground for the National Memorial Arboretum 30

14

Conflict comprehension

Transferable development rights have helped prevent development of key sites in the USA. Can they be adopted elsewhere?

Members are clear about the importance of managing conflicts of interest – but understand the term in different ways, RICS has found

Send and receive

rics.org/journals 3

Land

From the chairs Rural

Geomatics

Environment & resources

Planning & development

Gerard Smith FRICS

Gordon Johnston FRICS

Stephen McKenna MRICS

Paul Collins MRICS

I was delighted to chair our flagship Rural Conference in Cirencester on 19 June. It was a varied day, with presentations on what lies ahead for the agricultural sector as the UK withdraws from the EU, and on the opportunities and challenges that public payment for public goods may bring.

Among the essential updates on topics such as tax and Electronic Communications Code cases, we had an entertaining presentation on beavers that elicited questions galore. A talk on shooting was also particularly timely, with an update on the general licences to shoot wild birds in England.

On that note, this issue’s article on rewilding (see p.6) will be of interest to many of you with a passion for the environment.

On the standards front, RICS has recently published the Valuation of rural property guidance note, third edition, which has been updated to reflect the current Red Book, and now includes some property observation checklists among other revisions.

I encourage those of you who have not yet signed up to receive our quarterly rural update to do so; please email Fiona Mannix for the link (fmannix@rics.org).

It has been 50 years since humans first landed on the moon. So much has happened in that time – so many changes and so much more technology.

Change can be good and provide a timely opportunity to reassess and evaluate.

With that in mind, there is just one more geomatics board meeting before the Standards Transformation Project, formerly PG2020, is complete on 31 December.

The board’s functions will then be transferred to the land and resources global steering group, continuing in a more consolidated environment.

Meanwhile, September saw the OceanObs conference in Hawaii kick off the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development that starts next year. It is timely that RICS should be developing policy on water, its impact onshore and as a critical resource. Look out for news of the next RICS water event.

Work also has started on the next editions of the guidance notes Global navigation satellite systems and Vertical aerial photography and digital imagery, and I encourage you all to offer your input – we cannot do it without your valuable contributions.

The ongoing reforms of our organisation, and the need for adaptation in an era of change, mean we must remain fleet of foot as a profession, looking after our members’ interests and the wider public interest.

We are moving into a period where traditional business models need to be more flexible and embrace wider skill sets. Disseminating our knowledge is ever more critical and I encourage our members to support those starting out through active coaching and mentoring, apprenticeships and networking.

Local authorities are considering in-house academies for staff learning and I see no reason why the private sector should not do the same. We will help underpin our standards, competencies and ultimately succession strategies if we work together to achieve progress in these areas.

At a time when the environmental regulatory regime in the UK is undergoing significant change, it is critical that we have the capabilities to implement this change.

Capacity building is required to ensure that there are enough skilled practitioners to implement emerging measures.

The annual Planning and Development Conference took place in London in June and attracted more than 160 delegates. A range of speakers gave their views on whether the new National Planning Policy Framework has had a positive impact on housing supply, but the floor thought that we need to be more radical in solving the housing crisis.

There is ongoing discussion about whether RICS’ annual requirement for ten hours each of informal and formal CPD is sufficient – it is notable that RIBA requires 35 hours, including mandatory topics.

Mandatory for all planning and development surveyors carrying out viability appraisals is compliance with the Financial viability in planning: conduct and reporting professional statement.

Effective from 1 September, this sets out clear, unequivocal requirements for appraisals.

Meanwhile, consultation on the Measurement of land for development and planning purposes guidance note (see Land Journal July/August, pp.26–7) closed in September.

As ever, I welcome any comments, questions or ideas on planning and development issues (paul.collins@ntu.ac.uk).

4 Journal October/November 2019

Briefing Labour land report urges reform

Land & resources global board Barney Pilgrim FRICS

I am delighted that the UN-Habitat Global Land Tool Network has made the International Land Measurement Standard (ILMS) available on its site. This is a huge step, underlining that it has been developed with relevant standards such as the Valuation of Unregistered Land in mind. The ILMS also works in the global due diligence framework of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and its recent publication on due diligence for lawyers in land acquisition.

The ILMS was introduced at the LANDac conference in July, where its emphasis on robust due diligence processes was well received. There are plans to present the ILMS at a number of events in the coming months, after its formal launch in Istanbul in September. It will also be translated into a number of languages.

Meanwhile, the Standards Transformation Project – formerly PG2020 – continues apace and we expect all the constituent professional group boards to make the transition to the new system by 31 December. Alongside this will be the further development of leaders’ forums and a new digital community system.

Subsidence and drilling guidance issued The Coal Authority has issued a technical guidance note following review of a major instance of subsidence in the North East of England. The government body, which manages the impacts of historic coal mining across Britain, said the note comes after successful completion of the engineering works and a sustained period of monitoring at the site.

The authority has also updated guidance on the management of hazardous gases when drilling or piling through coal, reminding the geotechnical profession that work in coal measures should take mine gases into account as part of a suitable and sufficient risk assessment. bit.ly/CoalSub19 bit.ly/safedrill

Journal takes sustainable step forward You may have noticed the new packaging for your journal, a change we have made as part of RICS’ commitment to sustainability. Manufactured from potato starch, the packaging will biodegrade naturally and can be disposed of in your food waste bin or compost heap.

Since 1995 land values in the UK have risen by 412 per cent, according to Land for the Many, a report commissioned by the Labour Party from land experts and edited by journalist George Monbiot. Land now accounts for 51 per cent of the UK’s net worth, and the report recommends that reforming landownership laws could be a way to tackle inequality. bit.ly/landforthemany

Vote in the Governing Council Elections Elections are coming up for the RICS Governing Council’s 15 geographic market seats, and it’s crucial that you have your say. Voting is your chance to choose who sits on the profession’s highest decision-making body.

Please make sure you take part and encourage other members of the profession to do so. You can vote between 17 October and 21 November. rics.org/elections

rics.org/journals 5

Land

Rewilding

Grow wild In response to critical rates of extinction worldwide, rewilding has been proposed as a way to restore habitats and wildlife populations. Projects on various scales give a sense of the benefits it can bring – and the obstacles it must overcome Dr Mark Everard

Rewilding is an attractive but elusive concept: if what is wild is generally defined by the absence of human intervention, what does this mean in a densely populated world, where even our most extensive nature reserves – particularly across Africa and North America – are created by humans, and are far from free of human pressures? And, if we struggle to know what is genuinely wild, defining rewilding presents even greater conceptual challenges.

There are many examples of inadvertent rewilding. The demilitarised no-go zone between North and South Korea is home to rare animals such as the red-crowned and white-naped cranes, the Amur goral, Asiatic black bear, musk deer and other species that prosper through human neglect. As another example, a silver lining to the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster has been the resurgence of animals, including lynx and European bison, in the exclusion zone.

However, rewilding is largely a deliberate and active process of intervention in populated landscapes, intended to support the recovery of natural species and ecosystem processes including the regeneration of soil and water systems.

We live in an era of unprecedented global monitoring and environmental literacy, with an unparalleled body of legislation and protocols relating to protection of biodiversity and the wider environment. Yet in May, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) issued 6 Journal October/November 2019

Domestic grazing animals such as longhorn cattle have been introduced to the Knepp Estate, which has allowed natural landscape processes to recover and enabled habitat diversification

a global assessment report on the status and trends in natural systems that makes sobering reading (bit.ly/IPBESrep). It documents an unprecedented, dangerous decline and an accelerating rate of species extinction, between tens and hundreds of times greater than natural extinction rates, putting at risk about 1m of the estimated 8m species on earth.

Evidence in the report raises significant concerns for the viability of nature, but also for the unavoidably conjoined continuity of humanity’s well-being. To quote IPBES, ‘We are eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life worldwide’. Biodiversity loss is the direct result of human activities, and current responses are wholly inadequate.

It is not too late to challenge vested interests and transform the prognosis, although, in the absence of profound socio-economic change, global aspirations for human progress – as defined by the UN Sustainable Development Goals – cannot be met. Given that around 75 per cent of the terrestrial and 66 per cent of the marine environment have been ‘severely altered’ by human actions, rewilding is one of the solutions posited by IPBES.

IMAGES © CHARLIE BURRELL

The Knepp Estate is a pioneering example of managed rewilding in the constrained, densely populated context of lowland Britain.

The estate, around 8km south of Horsham in West Sussex, covers 1,400ha and has been in the same family since 1802. The landscape sits on a 320m-deep bed of Wealden clay, making for difficult farming. Furthermore, in the face of increasing intensification and chemical inputs in agriculture since the 1980s, arable and dairy farming at Knepp were becoming increasingly uncompetitive. At the same time, these input-intensive practices were contributing to precipitous declines in wildlife across all taxonomic groups. In the mid-1990s, the owners took a considered decision to pursue extensive ranching, more akin to systems in Africa.

Since 2001, the landscape has been devoted to a rewilding project emulating fully natural systems. With the introduction of domestic grazing animals such as longhorn cattle, Tamworth pigs and Exmoor ponies as surrogates for their wild forebears, along with native deer, natural landscape processes have been allowed to recover. The grazing patterns of migrating herds of animals, free to move across the unfenced estate, have been significant factors in habitat diversification. They have stimulated formation of distinct vegetated zones, varying from dense woodlands to savannah-like glades, also enabling the natural regeneration of watercourses.

Along with the cessation of pesticide use, this has resulted in rapid recovery of insect and bird populations. Some of the successes include increased numbers of scarce species such as turtle doves, nightingales, peregrine falcons and purple emperor butterflies, as well as booming populations of more common species.

The conservation ethos at what is now the Knepp Wildland Project differs radically from conventional nature conservation.

Traditional conservation approaches are generally predicated on preservation of habitats, often artificially maintained in a mid-successional state, to support particular goals and target species. However, efforts on Knepp Estate are process-led, driven by the re-establishment of a functioning ecosystem that grants nature as much freedom as possible.

Clearly, re-establishment of large predatory species lost from the British landscape, potentially feasible in remote landscapes, would not be permissible in this densely populated region of the South East of England. Consequently, managed culling of stock at Knepp is both a necessity to avoid overgrazing but also a source of revenue from meat sales. This otherwise largely hands-off approach to ecological restoration is low in cost yet still productive, applicable to many more marginal or failing areas of farmland and potentially building on and connecting networks of established nature reserves.

As Knepp is privately owned, the economics have to stack up. The culling of grazing animals supports a market in organic, pasture-fed, free-range meat, and the government’s Farm Business Survey has found that economic returns for lowland grazing livestock at Knepp are significantly higher than the national average. Farm support payments, including the Basic Payment Scheme and supplementary Environmental Stewardship payments, make significant contributions. Farm labour and building needs have been substantially reduced, freeing housing and office space for rent. In addition, the estate has opened up wildlife safari,

Rewilding efforts are driven by the re-establishment of a function ecosystem that grants nature as much freedom as possible

touring and camping operations. The overall result, as Savills’ Rural Estate Benchmarking Survey for 2017/18 shows, is that like-for-like agricultural income at Knepp Home Farm outperforms the national average, excluding additional rental, tourism and other income.

Other rewilding endeavours around the world include the American Prairie Reserve’s plan to rebuild one of the largest wildlife reserves in the continental USA through a combination of land acquisition and public land integration, including reintroduction of bison on private land in the Missouri Breaks. The plains are natural grassland, chiefly formed by the grazing activities of large herbivores. However, they were disastrously degraded by deep and extensive tillage driven by subsidised agricultural development during the Great Depression, inadvertently leading to the massive erosion behind the Dust Bowl that drove 3.5m people from the plains states in the 1930s and 1940s. There are similar rewilding initiatives in Europe, using reintroductions of top predator and other species, including proxy domestic strains. Other parts of the UK are also restoring ecosystem processes, giving rise to improved biodiversity, hydrology and water quality.

Rewilding can pose challenges to the established frameworks of established conservation work, which is generally predicated on individual scarce species rather than promoting dynamic ecosystem process with outcomes that are less predictable but overall more beneficial. Furthermore, an inherently ragged and dynamic rewilded landscape may not easily meet established criteria for land maintained in the good condition that is a prerequisite for farm subsidy payments. There is a pressing need for a more intelligent policy and financial environment to reward rewilding, in part or in full, recognising the multiple benefits that it can realise.

Dr Mark Everard is associate professor of ecosystem services at the University of the West of England, Bristol mark.everard@uwe.ac.uk Related competencies include: Environmental management, Land use and diversification, Management of the natural environment and landscape rics.org/journals 7

Land

Water management

Beavers return to Devon A five-year trial to reintroduce beavers in Devon’s River Otter is showing how, with management, beavers and people can live alongside one another

Mark Elliott

The Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) is a large, semi-aquatic rodent that once thrived in watercourses throughout Britain. Its extensive engineering activities had a dramatic impact on the landscape, and wetland and aquatic species would have evolved in the beaver’s ecosystems.

It is unclear exactly when and how it disappeared from Britain, but a church ledger from Bolton Percy in North Yorkshire records a bounty being paid for a beaver head in 1780 – the last written record of its presence. The removal of this keystone species and the subsequent drainage and engineering of our waterways and wetlands transformed the countryside into a more productive landscape, but one where water and wildlife often now have to compete for space. The potential for beavers to restore more naturally functioning wetland ecosystems is the reason many people are so enthusiastic about their return.

8 Journal October/November 2019

After discovery of a breeding family on the River Otter in East Devon in February 2015, Devon Wildlife Trust was given a licence to release beavers into the wild as part of a five-year trial reintroduction. At the end of the trial in 2020, the government will determine their future.

They seem to be thriving. Initially, there were around nine beavers in two family groups, but the most recent survey in March suggested there are now at least seven breeding families. There are also up to 13 territories, some of which could be occupied by single animals or young pairs.

When beavers are recolonising a sparsely populated catchment such as the River Otter, they will travel great distances in search of other beavers and resources. In one instance a tagged one-year-old swam roughly 50km upstream and settled in a lake, successfully attracting a mate and giving birth to a kit in 2018.

Every winter, the trust surveys the watercourses in the catchment area covering much of the main river and tributaries.

During this season, surveyors can easily see signs of activity such as trees and branches that beavers have fed on, feeding stations, dams, lodges, footprints and scent mounds.

All beaver field signs are spatially recorded and a heat map is produced from these.

The survey suggests that the river’s beavers are occupying deeper areas of water first and have now colonised much of the lower part of the small catchment. In these areas, they do not need to build dams to impound water because there are deeper stretches that allow them to construct the underwater burrow entrances they prefer.

As these optimal territories become occupied, beavers start to disperse into less-ideal habitats in smaller streams and ditches, and it is here that they tend to build dams to create the deeper water they

IMAGE © MARK ELLIOTT

need. Beavers feel safe in deep water where they can easily move around and escape predators. Their dams can create ponds and wetlands, and potentially have a huge role in reducing peak flows and associated flooding and low flows downstream – but potentially also bring them into conflict with existing land uses. After all, that water must be stored somewhere.

The University of Exeter has published data from a separate enclosed beaver site in West Devon that clearly shows how a sequence of 13 beaver dams built along 183m of small headwater stream has reduced peak flows after heavy rainfall. Flows are measured upstream and downstream, and after a flood has passed through the sequence of dams and pools the lag time is increased and peak flows reduced.

An expert steering group and working group have finalised and adopted the Beaver Management Strategy Framework for the River Otter– which contains recommendations from the trial on future management of the animal – that will apply after 2020. But as well as awaiting a timely decision from the government about the future of the beavers and clarity about their legal status, this framework will also need funding for a beaver management group for the catchment that includes financial support for landowners.

Central government funding is imperative for land and property owners to allow more space for rivers and associated wetlands to develop, and to manage any conflicts with existing land use, through a bespoke environmental land management scheme for instance. Strategic support for rural businesses and land-based enterprises is also vital, allowing new business opportunities, such as local tourism, to respond to the beavers’ presence.

These animals have been absent from our waterways for so long that people have forgotten much about their ecology and behaviour, and many myths and misunderstandings have developed. As has been successfully shown on the River Otter, the first step with beaver management is to have readily available pragmatic advice and support for people living and working in the areas that beavers are colonising, because this can resolve many potential conflicts.

Beaver dams have been built in the floodplain ditches in the lower River Otter valley

However, a suite of mitigation measures should also be available to manage any negative impacts.

Beavers are very territorial, and if their effects can be managed without removing them, then they will keep other, potentially more disruptive, beavers out; trapping and removal is another option. In the longer term, when translocation sites that have sufficient food sources and shelter for beavers to live and where they can be released safely are no longer available, lethal control may be necessary in the highestrisk circumstances.

As we approach a final government decision next year, the evidence gathered throughout the trial will be presented and disseminated. In May this year, the Scottish government formally recognised beavers as a resident species once again and gave them legal protection. Whatever we decide in England, it will significantly

influence the way we manage water in the landscape in future.

Mark Elliott is Devon beaver project lead at Devon Wildlife Trust melliott@devonwildlifetrust.org Related competencies include: Environmental management, Management of the natural environment and landscape Further information: The River Otter Beaver Trial is led by Devon Wildlife Trust working in partnership with the University of Exeter, the Derek Gow Consultancy and Clinton Devon Estates. Advice is also provided by the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, beaver expert and consultant Dr Roisin Campbell-Palmer, Prof. John Gurnell of Queen Mary University London, Prof. Alastair Driver of the University of Exeter, and international beaver expert Gerhard Schwab. rics.org/journals 9

Land

Land rights

Redress for land loss Providing proper compensation for compulsory acquisition of land by the state is neither straightforward nor a new challenge, as national and international guidance can pull in different directions

The resettlement village at Kyakaboga, western Uganda, which the affected people believe looks like a refugee camp

10 Journal October/November 2019

IMAGE Š LIZ NEATE

Liz Neate

In many low- and middle-income economies, offering replacement land rather than financial compensation has been recommended to promote the restoration of livelihoods where people depend on the land that is being acquired by compulsion. Consequently, there are a number of standards and guidance documents on the topic that set out best practice in providing resettlement land, including: ••the World Bank operations manual on involuntary resettlement (bit.ly/WBOMinvolres) ••two UN Food and Agriculture Organization documents (bit.ly/FAOLTS10 and bit.ly/faovolguid) ••the Asian Development Bank Safeguard Policy Statement policy paper (bit.ly/ADBSPS09) ••the International Finance Corporation (IFC)’s Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (bit.ly/IFCPSESS), in particular standard 5 on land acquisition and involuntary resettlement (bit.ly/IFC-PS5) ••the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development’s guidance for good practice in resettlement (bit.ly/EBRDRGGP).

What is less clear is the practical application of these principles.

The terminology in these documents – ‘resettlement land’, ‘livelihood restoration’, ‘prior consent’, ‘consultation’ – is widely used, but runs the risk of being a hollow promise if not understood in practice and properly implemented. One of the greatest dangers of a detachment between policy and practice concerns legitimacy: is it adhering to the spirit of land compensation if replacement sites are badly located, of poor quality, or of uncertain tenure?

International standards of any type have to walk a tightrope, being sufficiently generic to be applicable and practicable in a range of circumstances, but nonetheless carrying sufficient weight and detail to enable implementation. In the Buseruka subcounty of Uganda, where land was acquired to develop an oil refinery, the ministry responsible for land acquisition asserted that international standards, specifically those set by the IFC and World Bank, would be followed as best practice. Some 2,900ha had been identified for an oil refinery and related infrastructure, an area that was home to around 1,200 households who held rights and interests in the land.

A resettlement action plan prepared by consultants on behalf of the government acknowledged that international standards for compulsory land acquisition go beyond the requirements of Ugandan law, which only allows for financial compensation at the

Many of those who moved remain dissatisfied with the land provided, and are seeking legal recourse from the government

market value of the site acquired and an allowance for disturbance linked to the length of notice given to vacate. The action plan recommended a flexible approach that would adhere to the standards and guidance prepared by the IFC and World Bank.

Consequently, affected households were offered the choice of financial compensation, in accordance with Ugandan law, or replacement land, as recommended by many international authorities but not explicitly provided for nationally. Although the vast majority of people opted for a financial settlement, after the area was cleared a resettlement village was provided for those opting for land compensation at Kyakaboga, near the city of Hoima, with people wishing to move taking up their new homes in 2017.

Many of those who moved to Kyakaboga remain very dissatisfied with what was provided, however, and with the help of local civil society organisations are seeking legal recourse from the government for failing to honour promises made during the resettlement process. At a meeting in August 2018, community members raised a number of concerns about the land provided, highlighting where commitments in terms of tenure, agricultural potential and physical layout were not properly met.

Many of the households who had formerly lived on the acquired land at Buseruka had customary tenure over their land, a traditional system of governance where rights are typically undocumented and usually vested in a family or community rather than an individual.

Ugandan law treats this as equivalent to freehold land under a title, although provisions for compensation are less straightforward and in need of updating.

Although not yet provided, those households who relocated have been promised freehold titles to their new land. The provision of replacement land under a different tenure system has implications for families and communities, however, as they have always managed their land under family and community rights and responsibilities rather than individual freehold title. This demonstrates that the apparently simple principles of offering land for land are actually incredibly complex.

The community has expressed concerns about the quality of the replacement land for farming and the lack of supporting infrastructure for agriculture, such as boreholes for drawing water.

The replacement site was formerly grazing land, and cannot support the same crops as those the displaced people used to farm on their land. They have not been helped to find alternative crops that are more suitable, and do not consider that their livelihoods have been restored as they struggle to farm the new land.

Giving testimony at the community meeting in 2018, one man said: ‘When I see my replacement land, I do not think it is the same.

In terms of cultivation, I used to have two rain seasons. Now I can only rely on March rains. My old land was far better. Before, I could grow anything; the land was very fertile. This side, the soil is not very good and the yield is not very good. I have tried to plant the same crops I had before, but the soil quality is not enough.’

A woman commented: ‘I am so worried, and not happy with the land I have been given. I used to have everything and lots of space.

I could plant vegetables near the stream so they would grow even if in drought. It is very dry here.’ Another man observed: ‘I find the rics.org/journals 11

Land rights

People affected by the land-for-land arrangements raised concerns about the inadequacies of the site at a community meeting

land here very different. I used to have bananas, sugar cane, fruit trees. The soil here is not good enough for bananas or sugar cane.

I have to plant sesame here or cotton, so am now having to grow things to sell to buy food. I used to have streams nearby, but the nearest stream here is two miles away. There is only one borehole here, so we have to go far if it breaks. It is hard here – even if it rains it is like a drought.’ The community is also concerned about the physical nature of the resettlement village, and considers that it resembles a refugee camp rather than their previous settlements. In particular, the houses are close together and some distance from the replacement land for cultivation, unlike the original site where houses were adjacent to agricultural land. This has led to livestock being stolen, as well as creating tension in the community as they are not used to living in such close proximity with one another.

The community did not realise the impact of these inadequacies until it was too late to choose an alternative option. The application of compensation standards that vary from those accounted for in national law complicates expectations and prospective remedies.

The impact on vulnerable people is exacerbated by a lack of clear recourse: if the provision is more than the national law stipulates, who will answer a complaint that promises have not been upheld?

In principle, there is considerable potential for livelihood restoration through the provision of land rather than financial 12 Journal October/November 2019

compensation, assuming sufficient time and resources are invested in ensuring that the replacement land is appropriate and will actually maintain or improve livelihoods. But the Kyakaboga example makes clear that replacement land should only be offered if land of adequate quality, location and tenure can be promptly secured to the satisfaction of those affected. Merely providing some land should not count as successful resettlement in the terms envisaged by the best practice standards.

In this instance, the Ugandan government claimed that it would adhere to specific international policies and guidelines, which require flexible and innovative approaches when displacement is essential. In reality, those criteria were not fulfilled. Replacement land was undoubtedly provided, thus arguably satisfying the requirements of the standards; but in practice, the necessary generality of international standards can leave a good deal to interpretation. Donors and funders that are looking for standards to be fulfilled must also closely scrutinise any claims that they have been achieved.

Liz Neate MRICS works on a pro bono consultancy basis for the Land and Equity Movement of Uganda, an NGO that seeks to uphold the rights of vulnerable people. She also works in the UK on compulsory purchase instructions for Deloitte Real Estate lizneate@land-in-uganda.org @lizneate Related competencies include: Cadastre and land administration, Compulsory purchase and compensation, Surveying and mapping

IMAGE Š LIZ NEATE

Land

Land

Legislation

Grounded governance Ghana is overhauling its land legislation to meet the challenges posed by illegal mining, environmental degradation and tenure risk James Kavanagh

Many Commonwealth nations in Africa are in the throes of radical governance and legislative change, shaking off the last vestiges of British colonial legislation, and adopting new land administration and culturally relevant ownership laws.

Ghana is one of these, and has been developing a new land law bill for some years. A high-level delegation visited London to discuss these changes and see how UK expertise could help. Ghana is now establishing protocols for land acquisition, staff training and the relationship between the private and public sectors.

RICS has a strong, long-term relationship with the Commonwealth, Ghana, and the Ghanaian Institution of Surveyors (GhIS).

Indeed, RICS was instrumental in helping to found professional surveying institutions in the then British Commonwealth during decolonisation in the 1950s and 60s.

Modelled on RICS, GhIS presently has some 4,000 members covering the three main sectors of land, property and construction.

Accredited professional training such as the land economics courses at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology are based on the University of Cambridge curriculum, and GhIS also runs an APC to ensure its members are properly qualified. All professional surveyors in

Ghana must also have a government licence, for which GhIS membership is mandatory.

RICS has a direct entry agreement with the organisation, and there are more than 100 joint members as well as a few UK expats.

Most of the challenges facing Ghana’s policy-makers and private sector are inextricably related to land: illegal gold mining, environmental degradation, ineffective land use, development stymied by tenure risk and mortgage rates at 30 per cent, according to deputy minister of lands and natural resources Benito Owusu-Bio. Lack of affordable credit affects every aspect of urban and rural development and puts tenures at risk. More equitable land tenure can help tackle climate change, rapid urbanisation, food, water and resource scarcity, and reverse structural inequalities between and within countries, creating more inclusive societies and communities.

Strengthening land rights is essential to tackling extreme poverty, creating resilient societies and supporting efficient land markets that in turn help provide infrastructure and services. This offers benefits including food security and enables economic advancement because people can use land as investment security for loans.

Whether privately, institutionally or communally owned, land is a source of

wealth, and like any other investment commodity is subject to transactions and shifting prices. And yet, because of the cultural, emotional and political nature of this commodity, land tenure and tenure security are highly controversial. Demand for land is rising, leading to intensified competition and conflict, preventing access for the most vulnerable people in society, especially women.

Following the delegation’s visit, RICS, GhIS and International Land Measurement Standard (ILMS) coalition partners will be striving to include the standard as part of the land transfer and acquisition process in Ghana. The Ghanaian government is also supporting the RICS Africa Summit 2020, to be held in Accra, as well as the FIG Working Week in the city in 2021.

James Kavanagh MRICS is director of global land standards at RICS jkavanagh@rics.org Related competencies include: Cadastre and land administration, Compulsory purchase and compensation, Surveying and mapping Further information: ILMS: Due diligence for Land and Real Property Surveying supports a sustainable future both for people and for legal entities (ilmsc.org). rics.org/journals 13

Land

Land rights

How far can rights be transferred?

Transferable development rights have been used successfully in the USA to prevent significant sites from being developed.

How easily could they be adopted elsewhere in the world?

Richard Grover, Anna Corsi and Ahmet Kindap

Transferable development rights (TDRs) have been widely used in the USA since the 1960s to conserve historic buildings, landmarks and streetscapes, to protect farmland and rural areas from development, to preserve environmentally sensitive sites, and to improve the quality of urban locales. One study found 239 examples of their use in the USA, with 25 states having adopted legislation that enables TDRs, and another eight with active programmes.

In recent years several emerging economies have experimented with TDRs, including Brazil, India and Turkey. However, their expansion outside the USA raises questions about their potential uses, the necessary economic and governance context, and how effective they are as a spatial planning tool. In particular, there is the question of whether the conditions that have made them attractive in the USA can be replicated elsewhere.

The concept of TDRs is simple: vulnerable land and buildings in a location designated as the sending area can be protected by persuading owners to accept voluntary restrictions on their ability to carry out legal development that would otherwise damage or destroy these sites and premises. In return, the owners receive credits that can be sold to developers seeking to develop in locations designated as receiving areas. Revenue from the TDR sales compensates owners for the consequential reduction in their site’s value, while developers in the receiving areas can use the credits to construct at a higher density than would otherwise be permitted. In this way, they can recoup the costs of acquiring TDRs. Vulnerable properties are protected by covenants or easements that are binding on future owners.

The fundamental feature of the policy is that the objectives are achieved through voluntary acceptance of restrictions, with no penalty on owners who decline them. The USA tends to use a zoning system of spatial planning, under which owners have the right to carry out any development that accords with the plan; owners therefore have to be compensated for not exercising these rights, rather than applying for consent for development that could 14 Journal October/November 2019

be refused. As TDRs do not require public bodies to compensate owners who forgo legitimate rights, they are a financially attractive way of securing public policy objectives. Public bodies do not need to find cash to buy out development rights, but can instead issue TDR credits. Although there are administrative costs, TDR programmes require relatively limited public finance to function.

There is no federal TDR policy in the USA, and the enabling legislation in some states is limited in scope. The result is that TDR schemes vary considerably in aspects such as: ••how sending and receiving areas are defined ••which properties qualify ••the conditions with which owners must comply ••rates of compensation ••whether the policy is supported by a TDR bank – an institution that can create a market in certificates ••whether TDRs form part of a wider portfolio of planning policies.

However, at the heart of any TDR is a series of voluntary acts.

TDRs in action A number of cities have TDR programmes to protect historic buildings and streetscapes. Washington DC for instance has a programme designed to create a balanced mixture of land uses, such as retaining retail, hotel, arts and entertainment uses; preserving historic buildings; strengthening Chinatown; and expanding residential use. There are height restrictions on development in the downtown area of the city, but there are opportunities to use TDRs in receiving areas just outside it, close enough to attract office tenants. Density bonuses, which their owners can sell, have been used as an alternative to grants for restoring historic buildings and expanding desired uses. The consensus is that the programme has been successful.

New York city has a number of TDR schemes, including special district transfers that protect particular areas and uses rather than individual buildings. One example is the South Street Seaport

IMAGE Š RICHARD GROVER

district, which encompasses the historic port area adjacent to Brooklyn Bridge, where the low-rise and low-density buildings mainly date from after the 1835 fire. Their proximity to Wall Street and views across the East River makes the buildings vulnerable to demolition and redevelopment. The sending areas were historic buildings that were in the process of defaulting on their mortgages, but the commercial banks that held these did accept TDRs in partial satisfaction of the debts. The preservation of the streetscapes and buildings has led to the area becoming popular for recreation.

TDR programmes have also protected rural areas from development in Montgomery County, Maryland, and King County, Washington state. Montgomery County adopted a plan in 1969 to concentrate development in growth corridors, but from 1974 had a zoning plan that permitted residential development at a maximum of one unit per 2ha (five acres); TDRs were used to reverse the resulting loss of farmland. Owners who accept easements restricting development could continue to live on their property and work it as a farm, in effect cashing in part of the equity in their property. In 1980, a new masterplan established an agricultural and forestry reserve and raised the zoning for housing to one unit per 10ha (25 acres). This created the problem of how to persuade landowners to give up their rights under the previous policy. TDRs were used to create the incentive to do so.

TDRs are often part of a package of measures to achieve policy objectives, which can include support for agriculture and the use of state and federal parks to protect vulnerable areas. TDR programmes rely on market mechanisms because the certificates only have a monetary value if there is demand from developers, and the cyclical nature of the property market can mean that this dries up. One way to help sustain a market is to restrict the intensity of development in the receiving areas, typically by setting a lower floor-to-area ratio than would be acceptable purely on planning grounds, so developers are thereby compelled to acquire TDRs if they want to build profitable developments.

The objectives of the programme can be undermined if developers can carry out more intensive developments without TDRs – for instance, through density bonuses to support other policies or by securing exemptions. The programmes are not always well targeted, so owners with no realistic prospect of redeveloping their properties can still gain TDRs. TDRs in the UK? The UK has a legal system that enables restrictive covenants to be placed on properties, as in the USA, and the governance structures that can monitor and enforce compliance with TDR rules. But it does not have a plan-led system of zoning that confers development rights on owners; rather, owners have to apply for consent to develop and this can be refused. Consequently, unsuitable developments can be prevented without having to pay compensation, and there is no need to bribe owners to stop them destroying valued buildings and countryside with development.

There may be circumstances in which TDRs could work, however. For instance, owners of land that has to be abandoned to the sea could receive TDRs for use in certain coastal cities; or

South Street Seaport, New York, seen from Brooklyn Bridge with the skyscrapers of Manhattan’s financial district behind

owners of historic commercial properties for which there is little demand in cities such as Liverpool might receive TDRs in return for maintaining them, with developers of neighbouring high-rise schemes having to buy TDRs. The use of TDRs in the UK and elsewhere raises questions about who precisely bears the direct and indirect expenses for them, such as high development costs in receiving areas, and who benefits financially from the resulting transfers. Potentially, TDRs can have redistributive effects that may or may not be desirable.

Richard Grover is a senior lecturer at Oxford Brookes University rgrover@brookes.ac.uk Anna Corsi is senior land administration specialist at the World Bank in Washington DC and Ahmet Kindap is urban development specialist for the bank in Ankara acorsi@worldbank.org akindap@worldbank.org Related competencies include: Development appraisals, Planning and development management Further information: The article is based on a Land Sector Advisory Services and Analytics project led by Anna Corsi for the World Bank. The views expressed in it are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the World Bank. rics.org/journals 15

Land

Food and agriculture

Facing the agricultural export challenge It has been many years since the UK agricultural sector has faced such uncertainty about its long-term future, with much depending on policy direction and trade arrangements after Brexit Brian Revell

Depending on the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, there are a number of possible policy directions for food and agriculture in the UK. Nevertheless, the central question remains whether the sector will be able to meet the challenges of competitive international trade, in or outside the EU. In the range of possible policies, there are also some potentially conflicting objectives: ••improving farming productivity – is it possible to intensify in a sustainable way?

••a new environmental land management system that can ensure public goods for public money ••maximising trading opportunities, with the government making increased exports a priority.

We generally measure productivity in terms of how efficiently an industry or sector transforms inputs into outputs.

The key metric used by economists is called total factor productivity (TFP), which essentially measures the rates of change – ideally growth – in the values of outputs relative to those of inputs. Table 1 shows how agricultural TFP in the UK has changed over the past 17 years.

This period can be split roughly into two halves. Until the 2008 financial crash, aggregate output growth was stagnant, but with a decline in growth of inputs TFP consequently increased by an average of 1.2 per cent a year. Since 2008, output growth has exceeded input growth, leading to a net trend growth rate of 0.5 per cent.

Overall, TFP in agriculture since 2000 has grown at 0.7 per cent a year. The annual trend growth in production and manufacturing as a whole was 0.3 per cent, so in that respect the sector has done better than the rest of the UK economy. However, considered internationally, all is not so rosy.

A study by economist Keith Fuglie looked at TFP in more than 120 countries between 1961 and 2015. While the measurement methodology was slightly different to that of the Office for National Statistics, from whose numbers Table 1 is derived, Fuglie found the UK’s annual growth rate was 1.1 per cent – lower than most major agricultural exporting nations. Brazil, China, France, India, the Netherlands, Thailand and Turkey had TFP trend growth rates two to three times higher than the UK, while

those for the USA and Australia were also marginally higher.

Furthermore, the annual TFP growth of 0.7 per cent for UK agriculture is above that of the subsectors using its products.

Since 2000, TFP has averaged 0.6 per cent annually for the food manufacturing sector, 0.3 per cent for food retail and –0.2 per cent for catering, with 0.4 per cent being the average rate across these sectors. Given the increasing long-term dependence of agricultural prosperity on the efficiency of food processing and distribution sectors, this is also somewhat worrying.

Trade balance The UK exported more than £21.5bn of food and agricultural products in 2018. However, its net trade balance in the sector – exports

Table 1. UK agricultural TFP, 2000–17 Average annual trend growth rate 2000–07

2008–17

2000–17

Outputs

–0.1%

+1.3%

+0.7%

Inputs

–1.3%

+0.7%

0.0%

TFP

+1.2%

+0.5%

+0.7%

SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS; DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT, FOOD & RURAL AFFAIRS

rics.org/journals 17

Land

Food and agriculture

minus imports – was still in deficit to the tune of £21.3bn. Only two product groups actually saw a net surplus balance: ••beverages, including spirits, earned a £1.6bn surplus on exports of £7.6bn ••processed cereal products had a £40m surplus from £400m of exports.

Figure 1 shows product groups for which exports exceeded £500m.

Even for major exports such as meat, dairy, miscellaneous prepared food and cereal, the values were generally less than half those of comparable imports. Of course these are large product group aggregates, and some individual products may do better than others. While all exports clearly contribute to reducing the trade deficit in food and agricultural products, it will still be a major challenge if future policy requires that an export-led sector significantly reduce the £44bn of UK food and agricultural products that are imported.

Economists measure comparative advantage and whether a sector of the economy is stronger than others in international trade in several ways, the two most common being the Balassa Index (BI)

and the Lafay Index (LI). The BI measures a product’s share of total exports from a country relative to the share of that product in total world trade. Effectively, it measures the relative degree of specialisation a country has in exporting that production on to world markets, with a BI greater than 1 indicating specialisation.

The LI, by contrast, examines the relative importance of a country’s net trade in a specific product or sector relative to the country’s total net trade, thus including imports in evaluating its strength, with an index greater than zero signifying a product’s comparative advantage in total domestic trade. BI just considers comparative advantage and specialisation in exporting, and LI product or sector specialisation in total trade.

Based on 2016 data, beverages, milling products and miscellaneous prepared food were the only UK agricultural and food product groups that both had a comparative domestic trade advantage and were export specialisations. Cereal preparations and dairy products qualified as export specialisations as well, although only just.

Figure 1. Major UK food and agricultural product exports and trade balance, 2017 (£bn)

Other Oils & fats Prepared fruit & veg Animal feed & wastes Meat Dairy Cereal Fish & seafood Misc. prepared food Beverages –14

–12

–10

–8

–6

–4 Net trade

18 Journal October/November 2019

–2

0 Exports

2

4

6

8

Looking at UK export specialisation in relation to similar product groups from other countries, however, the picture is not so positive. The UK’s highest-placed group, beverages, does not rank in the top ten countries exporting these products – it is at 28 – while miscellaneous prepared foods, meats, cereal preparations, dairy products and cereals are ranked 34, 40, 52, 53 and 57 respectively in world trade.

So it is not only export specialisation that is important in gauging a country’s specific product strength in global markets, but the degree of specialisation compared with international competitors. On this count, the UK is at best a modest performer in some specific product areas.

Export potential The potential for export growth, and indeed its prioritisation in UK agricultural policy, will depend on the trade arrangements with the 27 EU member states after Brexit, and how much further the domestic market is exposed to international competition than it has been as a member state itself.

Production may also be constrained if UK policy seeks to de-intensify domestic agriculture; combined with global market conditions, all these factors will affect export opportunities.

What is clear is that, should the UK pursue an export-driven policy on leaving the EU, it will find it difficult to redress the loss of trade with the bloc any time soon; currently, trade with the EU dominates UK agriculture and food exports and imports.

New Zealand is often cited as an example of how to make the transition from a supported agricultural sector with a single dominant market to a global exporter.

Its food and agriculture sector was first prompted to diversify its markets by the UK’s admission to what was then the Common Market in 1973 – the UK was until then its largest export market – and subsequently by the deregulation of subsidies to export sectors such as sheep meat and wool during the late 1980s.

The 1990s and early 2000s were a time of economic growth and trade liberalisation in South East and East Asia, markets on New Zealand’s doorstep, and early trade deals with Australia, Singapore, Thailand,

China and Malaysia from 1983 to 2009 were each concluded in no more than four years.

But a deal with Hong Kong took nine years, and negotiations on the upgrade to the China free trade agreement are into a fourth year, with the Pacific Alliance into a sixth, and with negotiations with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan currently more than eight.

From a strategic perspective, the UK will need to make up for any lost trade with the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit or ungenerous trade agreement with the bloc.

Non-EU countries that have a relatively large share of the world’s imports of a specific product will be important but difficult targets. Countries with smaller import shares but a growing proportion of the market could also present opportunities, but making the most of these will be a different matter. Winning a share of some larger markets with declining imports might still be beneficial.

Clear patterns have emerged for some major agriculture and food product groups in non-EU import markets over the past five years. For meat, dairy and cereals, it is mainly the 15 western EU members that have taken the largest shares of our exports, but their import growth rates have mostly declined and the UK has lost ground in many of them.

Outside the EU, there is growth potential in Hong Kong, China, the USA and the Philippines for meat, but opportunities for dairy and cereals are relatively fragmented.

For cereal products, the UK has been losing market share in China, the USA and the Gulf states, countries that have been expanding their imports.

Beverages, the star performer of UK food and agriculture exports, have probably the most diversified market, especially outside the EU; however, they have been losing market share in import growth markets such as China, the USA, Hong Kong and Taipei, and also in those with declining import markets such as Singapore and Japan. The USA dominates UK exports, taking 20 per cent by value.

In conclusion, there are no easy trade deals to be struck with major economies or large countries. The shift to greater protectionism by the USA and its dispute with China have ensured that world trade

has become less open. The UK will also face serious difficulties in terms of its future exports to the EU27 if, in granting access to US agricultural and food industries, it has to compromise on current EU food hygiene, safety and welfare standards – held to be sacrosanct, domestically, after Brexit.

There is also a strong possibility that environmental pressures and policies may lead to reductions in UK agricultural output, although there may be policy-promoted productivity gains with lower output from even fewer inputs in both food production and processing.

Increasing public goods such as biodiversity, environment and landscape may not offer the greatest public benefit all the same if the economic output of food and agriculture as a whole diminishes,

because public benefits depend as much on the numbers of people who can access them as they do on the provision of natural capital and ecosystem services. Balancing potentially conflicting policy objectives will therefore be a challenge, not least for a sector where most product groups have not distinguished themselves in terms of export performance and underlying determinants such as productivity, market diversification and innovation over a number of years.

Brian Revell is professor emeritus of agricultural and food economics at Harper Adams University bjrevell@harper-adams.ac.uk Related competencies include: Agriculture rics.org/journals 19

Land

Construction minerals

In need of replenishment Mark North

20 Journal October/November 2019

IMAGE Š DAVID HILL

An annual survey of the British minerals sector argues that planning authorities need a clear plan from the government if they are to ensure an adequate supply of aggregates

IMAGE © MINERAL PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION

Sales of sand and gravel continue to outstrip the amount of new reserves being permitted, according to the Mineral Products Association (MPA)’s 7th Annual Mineral Planning Survey Report 2018 (bit.ly/AMPS7thed). The data is derived from confidential information provided by MPA members around Britain and the annual aggregate working party (AWP) reports, and it found that aggregates demand was broadly flat in 2017 compared to 2016. The survey’s objective is to see how efficient the mineral planning system is by assessing the interface between mineral operators and the mineral land use planning system.

The latest survey has been produced in the context of a revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and confirms that the ten-year average replenishment rate decreased to 53 per cent. In other words, for every 100 tonnes of sand gravel sold in Britain, only 53 tonnes is replaced by new consents. During 2017, new sand and gravel consents were even lower than this decade-long average, making up just 24 per cent of the year’s sales. The ten-year average for crushed rock fell to 69 per cent, with new reserves permitted representing just three per cent of 2017 sales.

Other findings include the following.

••Sales: total sales of land-won sand and gravel, not including marine-dredged material, decreased by 1.4 per cent in 2017, while sales of crushed rock increased by 0.5 per cent. On balance, demand for land-won aggregates was stagnant during 2017.

••Numbers of planning applications: there has been a slight increase in submissions for sand and gravel in 2017 at a total of 15 sites, compared to 13 in 2016; the majority are to extend existing operations. The number of crushed rock applications decreased by one, while 19 applications were made for time extensions and similar arrangements, compared to 23 in 2016.

••Appeals: for the first time in several years, MPA members recorded two appeals against applications for planning permission for new working refused by mineral planning authorities in 2017.

••Number of planning decisions: the number of determinations for mineral applications continues to be relatively low – a total of ten approvals and five refusals

across sand, gravel, and crushed rock sites, compared to the heights of 2008–09 when determinations were made on more than 30.

The highest number of refusals since 2003 were also made in 2017.

••Time taken to obtain permission: it takes 29.4 months to secure permission for sand and gravel reserves and 29.9 months for crushed rock reserves, based on a ten-year average. The data for 2017 suggests that sand and gravel determinations were four months shorter than those in 2016.

••Numbers of core strategies or development plans adopted: the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 required full plan coverage to be in place within three years. However, as of August 2018, only 80 per cent of English and 88 per cent of Welsh local planning authorities had an adopted core strategy or local plan.

••Plan allocations: in the ten years to 2017, 44 per cent of all new permissions issued were for sites that had not been allocated in mineral plans.

While the revision of the NPPF reinforced the essential role of minerals supply in meeting the government’s housing and infrastructure policy ambitions, the long-term downward trends in replenishment rates identified by MPA underline the fact that the supply of critical minerals cannot be assumed.

It is increasingly evident that the managed aggregate supply system (MASS), which is meant to ensure steady and adequate supply, is struggling to perform.

A key factor is the continued failure of the government to update guidelines so as to provide a clear and strategic statement of future need or construction aggregates.

Without this, there is greater risk of underprovision thanks to subjective local interpretation of what constitutes need.

The local aggregates assessment process, while intended to forecast future mineral needs, is actually backwards-looking, most often based only on past, recessionary sales figures. This may result in a spiral of declining planned provision and site allocations, fewer applications and permissions, and diminishing sales. A clear national statement of need is therefore required for construction aggregates in England and Wales.

In the absence of government forecasts, the MPA has produced Long-term aggregates demand & supply scenarios, 2016–30, which indicates that between 3bn and 4bn tonnes of construction aggregates are likely to be required by 2030 to support economic growth and development across Britain, the majority of which will be primary sand, gravel and rock (bit.ly/MPA2016-30).

Securing the supply of these materials will require positive planning and active management, supported by data to monitor supply and demand and ensure the proper resources are made available in the right place and at the right time.

AWPs play a critical role in coordinating MASS but have no long-term basis for their operation, which significantly reduces their effectiveness. Because of cuts at the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, the working parties’ funding is uncertain, as is the future of key surveys such as the Aggregate Mineral Survey for England & Wales.

Despite these challenges, there are some grounds for optimism. The recent publication of the government’s Industrial Strategy: Construction Sector Deal explicitly acknowledges the importance of mineral products in the wider supply chain for housing and infrastructure development.

This is reinforced by the minerals and mineral products industry’s UK Minerals Strategy, which sets out the steps needed to ensure that society’s demands can be met sustainably over the next 25 years.

The government’s response to the NPPF consultation suggests there is a growing awareness that supply of aggregates needs to be planned, monitored and managed, all of which require strong direction. A well-supported, forward-looking MASS is vital if mineral planning authorities are to plan in good time for mineral demand and to give the industry the confidence to invest and meet that demand.

Mark North is director of planning – aggregates and production at the MPA mark.north@mineralproducts.org Related competencies include: Minerals management, Planning and development management rics.org/journals 21

Land

Invasive species

Stopping mink in their tracks Mink has become a widespread invasive species across Scotland, but a new, large-scale initiative is successfully controlling the animal’s population Callum Sinclair

The invasive American mink was brought to Scotland for fur-farming in 1938 and, as a consequence of escapes and deliberate releases alike, became established in the wild in Aberdeenshire in the 1960s. From there, the animals have spread almost unabated across the majority of mainland Scotland – other than the mountainous Highlands and the far north – as well as many of the Scottish islands.

Mink are opportunistic and ferocious hunters, taking whatever prey is available –

and they often kill more than they require for food. They have had a devastating effect on native Scottish wildlife, particularly on ground-nesting bird species and water vole populations, but they will also happily prey on rabbits, rats, eggs and domestic fowl.

One female mink hunting a 4km stretch of river can take 100 water voles over the three- or four-month period when she is feeding her young. This is the equivalent of ten water vole colonies, often an entire local population, being wiped out.

The march of the mink across Scotland since the 1960s has shown they are extremely effective colonisers

22 Journal October/November 2019

The march of the mink across Scotland since the 1960s has shown they are extremely effective colonisers. Subsequent research has shown that, in periods of dispersal before and after breeding, they will travel significant distances in search of new territories. Around 90 per cent of mink emigrate after initial rearing, and while the mean natal dispersal distance is around 20km, some 20 per cent of mink will migrate more than 80km to find new locations to establish and breed.

This means the control measures that were taken across many estates and holdings over many years had little impact in all but local situations; more often than not, any mink removed were quickly replaced from nearby breeding populations.

Their ability to colonise confirms that any effective mink control programme must have sufficient coverage to reduce numbers locally and also operate at a strategic scale to limit repopulation from elsewhere.

A number of mink control and water vole conservation projects across northern

IMAGE © SCOTTISH INVASIVE SPECIES INITIATIVE

Scotland between 2004 and 2014 significantly reduced numbers of mink and supported the recovery of water vole and ground-nesting bird populations. Starting from local control in the Ythan catchment, the operation expanded in each phase as success was demonstrated. Analysis of these schemes and their outcomes led to the establishment of the four-year Scottish Invasive Species Initiative in 2017.

The initiative covers an area of northern Scotland one and a half times the size of Wales, close to three million hectares, focusing on northern Perthshire, Angus, Aberdeenshire, Moray, and Highland as part of one of the largest mainland eradication programmes in the world.

Very much a partnership, the scheme is led by Scottish Natural Heritage working with ten fishery boards and trusts, and with the University of Aberdeen as academic partner and adviser. In addition, it is raising awareness at community level, recruiting and training volunteers in community organisations, groups and landowners who will continue the long-term work of mink control after the initiative ends. The aim is that when funding runs out the control of mink will still continue.

Mink control centres around the quick detection, trapping and removal of the animals. This is no easy task when dealing with mink, which are such effective colonisers of new areas and are so mobile.

Surveillance and control needs to be carried out on a large scale and protect cleared areas from re-colonisation.

This is where a simple, ingenious device known as a mink raft comes in. Using established scientific methodology from the University of Aberdeen, this low-tech piece of monitoring equipment reliably indicates whether the animals are present. It consists of a floating platform with an attached tunnel that conceals a clay pad, anchored to the bank of a waterway. Inquisitive mink will investigate, walking through the tunnel and leaving behind their footprints in the clay, which is kept wet by a layer of horticultural foam below. Once the raft is set up, it can be checked for footprints every week or two.

Monitoring is easy and requires no previous experience, so is ideal for

The mink raft, a low-tech piece of monitoring equipment, with its floating platform and attached tunnel concealing a clay pad, is a reliable indicator of whether the animal is present

volunteers. Once footprints are detected, the trap is inserted and it is checked every 24 hours. Should any mink be detected, a live-capture trap is put on the raft and they are caught before being humanely dispatched. The project uses monitoring devices that send a signal to a mobile phone when a trap is triggered – indispensable technology for traps in remote areas.

At the end of the first year of the initiative in December 2018, good progress had been made. Some 385 mink rafts and traps in the surveillance network were being looked after by nearly 200 volunteers, and 71 mink had been removed. More volunteers were recruited early this year to increase monitoring and trapping before the mink breeding season in spring. By the end of June, 509 rafts and traps were in operation and 109 mink had been removed.

At the time of writing, further work was being done to expand the raft-and-trap network for the next mink dispersal period in late summer and early autumn. Surveyors and land managers can help by passing on

SISI’s details (see below) to anyone wishing to support or get involved in the project.

But it doesn’t stop there. The initiative is also targeting five non-native invasive plants across the project area, with giant hogweed, Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam, American skunk cabbage and white butterbur being systematically controlled along river catchments. Again, the strategy is to develop a network of partners and volunteers, trained and equipped to carry out plant control, such as spraying, now and in the future.

Callum Sinclair is project manager, Scottish Invasive Species Initiative callum.sinclair@nature.scot Related competencies include: Environmental management, Management of the natural environment and landscape Further information: To find out more about the Scottish Invasive Species Initiative, visit www.invasivespecies.scot or follow it on twitter.com/sisi_project rics.org/journals 23

Land

Environmental legislation

Managing the environment after Brexit Government proposals for new environmental legislation after Brexit must be more ambitious than simply re-creating the status quo Martin Baxter

Growing public concern about the environment provides an important backdrop to the UK government’s current draft Environment Bill. Poor air quality, declining biodiversity, plastic waste and climate change are significant challenges that will require concerted effort and investment over the long term. Politicians are in the headlights as the public demands immediate, effective action on what are deep-rooted systemic problems – a difficult position made harder by declining levels of trust in politics.

For 45 years, environmental policy in the UK has been driven by the EU. The Environment Bill comes at a critical time, as it can establish a legal framework to help replenish nature and natural capital and provide the basis for using the country’s resources sustainably. Given the scale of the environmental challenge, replicating the structures and frameworks provided by EU legislation after Brexit won’t be sufficient; maintaining the status quo isn’t an appropriate policy or political response.

The draft Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill, published by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) last year, includes: ••environmental principles and provisions for a policy statement ••measures relating to environmental improvement plans (EIPs) ••the creation of a new Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), whose remit will be to monitor the implementation of environmental law and, where public authorities fail to comply, take appropriate action including through the courts.

The timing of publication, and to a large extent the content, was driven by environmental requirements included in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which were introduced by amendment following stakeholder pressure. Section 16(1) required the environment secretary to publish a draft bill within six months of the 2018 Act receiving Royal Assent, a bill that would include requirements for environmental principles and the establishment of a new green watchdog.

24 Journal October/November 2019

Important questions on the draft bill and other government proposals, such as improvements to air quality and restoration and enhancement of nature, include: ••whether proposals for environmental principles and the OEP will fill the environmental governance gap when the UK leaves the EU ••what the relationship between UK and devolved governments will be in terms of their respective competences for environmental policy and regulation ••whether a framework of cross-cutting targets can provide long-term certainty for investment in environmental protection and improvement ••how to make any new environmental measures as strong as existing standards and protections ••how to ensure overall cohesion and ambition.

Environmental principles are set out in article 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU and are binding on the way environmental policy is developed. The treaty requires that EU policy on the environment ‘shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay’.

The draft bill frames the application of environmental principles in a broader way. Rather than focusing solely on the development of environmental policy, which is DEFRA’s responsibility, it is proposed that all ministers will, whatever the policy, ‘have regard to the policy statement on environmental principles when making, developing or revising policies’.

Much of the pre-legislative scrutiny regarding the principles has been on whether the term ‘have regard’ is sufficiently strong. Giving the policy statement more weight – for example by requiring that ministers have special regard or act in accordance with the principles – is an active issue, and will no doubt be keenly debated as the bill passes through Parliament.

A key governance issue is the loss of the European Commission’s oversight of the implementation of EU environmental law by member states, and its role in dealing with complaints from citizens. The proposed OEP is intended to replicate the commission’s functions in a national context, but there are two main concerns about this: ••how independent the OEP will be, given that the environment secretary will appoint the chair and allocate resources ••the nature and extent of the OEP’s enforcement powers.

On the latter point, escalation of enforcement action from notices through to judicial review would probably benefit from cases being heard in First or Upper-Tier Tribunals; the inclusion of climate change enforcement, currently outside the scope of the independent Committee on Climate Change, would also close a potential loophole.

Much of the UK’s environmental policy and law is the responsibility of the devolved nations. But the devolution settlement adds a further layer of complexity, particularly as England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are each at different stages of formulating or implementing their own environmental policies and legislation. For example, the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 already cover some of the environmental principles in the EU treaties, whereas other parts of the UK have a more sizeable legislative gap to fill.

The draft Environment Bill applies to UK reserved matters and England; given the current absence of a government in Northern Ireland, officials from its Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs have requested that the bill extend the OEP’s remit and the application of environmental principles to the province as well. The Scottish and Welsh governments are meanwhile consulting separately on environmental principles and ways to hold public authorities to account for failure to implement environmental law.

This raises important points about the consistency of approach given that river catchments, for example, follow geographical rather than national boundaries, with roughly half of those in Wales being shared with England. We need to avoid differences in policy and standards for shared natural assets to maintain high levels of protection and coherence in environmental management.

Environmental targets Fulfilling the government’s commitment to leave the environment in a better state over the next generation will depend to a large extent on private-sector activity and innovation. However, for all sectors to contribute fully in a way that is also consistent with business success, there must be a coherent and predicable legal framework. The draft bill seeks to make the government’s 25-year-environment plan statutory. Yet the plan’s five-year review mechanism means that in effect, substantial changes can be made over that time frame, which reduces certainty for investment.

Given the speed with which the bill is being developed, it is unlikely that specific environmental targets will be included in primary legislation, so it is more likely to set out the process by

which long-term environmental targets will be established in regulation. In a statement to Parliament on 6 March, business secretary Greg Clark said: ‘The government will also legislate to ensure that[,] where future bills could affect environmental protections, a minister of the crown will make a statement of compatibility to Parliament and provide explanatory information.

We will also create a new statutory duty on the government to monitor any strengthening of environmental protections and regulations by the EU, and to report regularly to Parliament about the government’s intended course of action in those areas. That will give Parliament the information it needs to consider whether or not domestic protections need to be strengthened accordingly.’

The bill is likewise expected to be the legislative route for the government to implement new environmental protections that are aligned with existing standards, and as strong.

To manage the environment in the most cost-effective way, the government needs to set a clear and credible policy direction that enables all involved to plan, invest and collaborate across sectors to achieve multiple goals coherently, beyond the life of single parliaments. There is a strong case to include overarching objectives in the final environment act, which will help to: ••provide a common purpose and coherence for the governance and principles chapter, that is the application of the environmental principles in policy-making; the development of targets and EIPs; and the role and function of the OEP ••focus policies on a core purpose ••hold responsible parties to account for progress ••anticipate at an early stage where changes in direction are necessary, rather than wait until problems are embedded.

Such national objectives become more critical as the UK leaves the EU and could be framed, for example, in the following way: ••continual improvement of environmental outcomes to achieve a healthy natural environment and support quality of life ••sustainable use of the environment to achieve society’s needs ••achieving a high level of environmental protection.

In summary, the bill is being seen as an environmental constitution. It will be a substantial piece of legislation and include important aspects of environmental principle and governance, as well as covering areas of significant public concern such as air quality and plastic waste. Parliamentary arithmetic suggests that the passage of the bill will offer plenty of opportunities for amendment, not just from the opposition but also from the government, given that only part of it has been subjected to scrutiny ahead of legislation. Close attention will be welcomed if it leads to a better outcome, as a progressive environment act that provides the legal framework to enhance the natural environment over a generation is one that everyone should want.

Martin Baxter is chief policy adviser at the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) m.baxter@iema.net Related competencies include: Legal/regulatory compliance Further information: IEMA is the worldwide professional body for those working in the environment and sustainability. rics.org/journals 25

Land

Geodata

Local colour The UK lags behind when it comes to making available the open-source data critical to the sustainable use of buildings, but a new software platform aims to crowdsource and share expertise on London’s stock Polly Hudson

What type of buildings make up our cities?

What size and shape are they? How old are they and how are they used? How are they built? How energy-efficient are they?

How long are they likely to last? Are some building types likely to be more resilient or vulnerable than others, and if so why?

Answering questions such as these is increasingly important in the development of strategies to maximise cities’ efficiency and sustainability, and measure and monitor their long-term performance. At the same time, there is now an opportunity to exploit advances in computing to model potential planning and energy scenarios much more accurately. However, in the UK, the statistical data sets that are necessary to build such models and deal with basic questions on the stock continue to be highly fragmented, and in many cases restricted, unverified and incomplete.

Building stock is the principal physical component of cities, with the value of land intrinsically linked to the quality of the built environment. It is also where the greatest potential for energy reduction lies, with buildings and the construction sector 26 Journal October/November 2019

responsible for 36 per cent of global energy consumption and nearly 40 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Energy Agency.

Since the 1990s, the energy agenda has prompted a shift in the European construction industry from focusing on new buildings to building re-use, leading to an urgent demand for granular data on older buildings and urban stock as a whole.

It has also shown how little is currently known by urban scientists about these slow-moving systems and their operation, and highlighted the need for investment in relevant analysis and data.

Outside the UK, governments are increasingly releasing comprehensive, open-source building attribute data for cities. The Dutch agency Kadaster, for example, publishes building attribute data including age and function. Any user can link this to detailed building geometry data to produce high-quality, colour-coded building attribute maps for any Dutch city or town. In the USA, many cities have also published open-source property tax data sets and building footprints since 2013.

However, despite growing pressure, the release of comprehensive open data on the UK’s building stock has been painfully slow.

Although the Treasury has now announced plans to open up Ordnance Survey’s MasterMap footprint data, the country’s most comprehensive building attribute database, the property tax database run by the Valuation Office Agency remains heavily restricted. Unless something is done soon, the UK will fall behind those countries releasing open building attribute data in many areas of urban research.

The Bartlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA) at University College London has therefore partnered with Ordnance Survey, the Greater London Authority and Historic England to develop an open-data platform called Colouring London. This is designed to collect, collate, visualise and disseminate statistical attribute data on every building in the city and, by 2021, to become the first port of call for open data on London’s building stock.

The platform code is also open and available to any city to use.

Key to the success of the project will be the ability of CASA’s online system to support high-quality data flows, both as uploads to the database and downloads from it for use in multiple applications.

To do this, the platform not only needs to source, secure and visualise large-scale, fragmented data sets, but also to tap into the vast body of specialist knowledge held by the so-called crowd of residents, community-led planning groups, amenity societies, conservation bodies and built environment professionals.

As part of this process, CASA is currently working with RICS and other professional bodies on subcategories, standards and metrics, as well as ideas for additions and improvements. Subject specialists are key to the success of crowdsourcing platforms, so CASA is looking at ways to encourage and acknowledge the involvement of individuals. A network of contributors interested in extracting information on the dates of construction and demolition of buildings is also being developed.

Colouring London is collecting more than 50 types of data for each building in London, grouped into 12 core categories:

Colouring London platform here shows the age of buildings in the Bloomsbury and Fitzrovia areas of London

••location ••use ••type ••age and history ••size and shape ••construction ••team ••sustainability ••street block and environment ••community ••planning ••‘Like me?’ – that is, whether users think the building benefits the city.

Data can be uploaded in bulk, by local authorities for example, or added manually building by building. In some cases, CASA will pre-populate subcategories – for example, by extracting height information for every building using open LiDAR data from the Environment Agency, which can then be verified by the crowd.

Each core category is accompanied by a brief explanation of why the data is needed, along with tips on sources for those wishing to help colour in the maps.

A key question for CASA is what other subcategories should be added: should we,

for example, consider a repairability rating or an embodied carbon measure? Another of the project’s challenges is how to help users assess the data’s reliability. For this we are working to add a range of support features, including edit histories, sources and verification tools.

When a user edits a building’s entry and adds data, the colour of the building footprint changes; for example, under the age category, a building constructed between 1980 and 2000 will be yellow, while under size and shape a building of ten to 19 storeys high is orange.

Colour is fundamental to the project, not only in terms of the visualisation of data categories but also as a way to acknowledge each contribution. The idea is to stimulate users’ curiosity to reveal, and update, the form of the city alongside other volunteers, using a simple gamification approach.

As well as collecting building attribute data, Colouring London aims to increase transparency in the planning system and to help boost building standards and support performance monitoring. The ‘Like me?’ category is designed to help London’s

planning departments to collect important information on building performance that would otherwise be difficult to access, and to identify buildings that may be key, local socio-economic assets in future.

Furthermore, it enables the platform to harness the predictive ability of heritage and community planning groups that, in the 1960s and 70s, foresaw the socio-economic potential of now iconic, high-value areas of London, such as Covent Garden, Shoreditch, Whitehall and Bloomsbury and sought to preserve them. In turn, this will allow the city to promote high-quality construction and design.

Polly Hudson is a doctoral researcher at CASA j.denholm@ucl.ac.uk Related competencies include: GIS (geographical information systems), Spatial planning policy and infrastructure, Surveying and mapping Further information: Colouring London launches in October. To see maps, add data or contribute to discussion threads, please visit colouringlondon.org rics.org/journals 27

Land

Site remediation

Centre of remembrance Reinstatement of a former Tarmac quarry laid the ground for the National Memorial Arboretum Emma Smith

Set in 60ha of woodland in the National Forest in Staffordshire, the National Memorial Arboretum is the UK’s centre of remembrance for fallen servicepeople. The arboretum was conceived by the retired Commander David Childs during a visit to Arlington Cemetery and the National Arboretum in Washington DC, believing that something similar could be established in the UK. This led to an appeal that launched in November 1994; initial development of the arboretum was funded by the National Lottery Millennium Commission, along with thousands of donations from a variety of military and non-military organisations and private individuals.

28 Journal October/November 2019

It seemed appropriate for the arboretum to sit in the area covered by the emerging National Forest, and the search for suitable land centred on Staffordshire. Tarmac, which was then Lafarge Aggregates Limited, was approached about using some of its land, and it offered the area to the east of its processing plant at Alrewas Quarry, which was leased by the National Memorial Arboretum from the firm on a peppercorn rent.

Tarmac is the custodian of more than 40,000ha of land across the UK, actively managing a mixture of agriculture, woodlands, grasslands and habitat-rich wetlands. Alrewas Quarry lies off the

Land

Site remediation

Above: The Armed Forces Memorial is a 43m-diameter stone structure, which sits on a 100m mound. The sculpture has two curved and two straight walls, on which more than 16,000 names are honoured

IMAGES © NATIONAL MEMORIAL ARBORETUM

Left: The arboretum is home to around 30,000 trees, providing visitors with a space for reflection and remembrance

A38, midway between Burton upon Trent and Lichfield west of the River Tame. The land east of the processing area was worked progressively for sand and gravel from the late 1970s to the early 1990s, with reinstatement achieved by importing and placing inert materials in the quarried area, and the replacement of soils to restore pre-development ground levels. Regeneration of this part of the site was completed in the mid 1990s with the establishment of agricultural grassland managed through sheep grazing.

‘Mineral extraction is essential in maintaining and developing local, regional and national infrastructure and supporting the national economy,’ says Tarmac’s director of land and natural resources Stuart Wykes. ‘However, we are passionate about site restoration and creating something of lasting benefit once extraction has been completed. At many of our sites we work with partner agencies to create nature reserves and priority habitats for endangered wildlife. After being approached by the National Memorial Arboretum, we decided to work together to create something different that would give back to the community, and wider country, in a unique way.’

In 1997, the first trees were planted at the site of the arboretum.

Tarmac provided expertise on land forming and drainage as well as setting out the main avenues for planting. Significant volumes of materials were provided, and the company also supported grant funding applications. The arboretum was officially opened in May 2001, and Tarmac remains a trustee and strategic partner, taking an active interest in its running.

It was agreed that the site would also house the Armed Forces Memorial. Designed by Liam O’Connor, the memorial was inspired by the ancient landscapes of prehistoric Britain, including the Alrewas site’s own Bronze Age burial mound, as well as the classical forms of Rome. The memorial is a stunning piece of

architecture comprising a 43m-diameter stone structure with two curved walls and two straight walls, and records the names of 16,000 servicepeople killed on duty since 1948. The memorial is particularly important to families and friends who have no grave to visit or who cannot travel easily to where the fallen are buried.

The memorial, which was completed in 2007, was dedicated by the Queen in October 2007.

Across the site, the main avenues have been planted and smaller areas or gardens have been created commemorating individual groups or military organisations. The tree species planted are often chosen in the context of the specific garden, as for example in the following cases.

••The Beat is an avenue lined by young chestnuts, funded by every police force in the UK: chestnut was chosen because the first police truncheons were made of its timber, and some of the trees were grown from conkers collected from Drayton Manor, home of Metropolitan Police founder Sir Robert Peel.

••The wood dedicated to the Merchant Navy contains oak trees, which have a long history of use in shipbuilding.

••Himalayan birch, Bhutan pine and Kashmir rowan are included in the plots to commemorate Indian forces.

••The construction of the Millennium Chapel started in 1999 – the 200th anniversary of the birth of Scottish plant collector David Douglas – and 12 pillars of Douglas fir are included in its design.

Altogether the arboretum is home to around 30,000 trees and in excess of 370 dedicated memorials, with more than 150 groups represented. Head of visitor experience Mark Ellis says: ‘The National Memorial Arboretum has evolved from a former quarry into the nation’s year-round centre of remembrance; a magnificent living and enduring tribute to all who serve our country. Hundreds of thousands of visitors each year explore the stunning woodland landscape, learning about the stories behind the memorials nestled among the trees, and enjoying the wide range of events, exhibitions and other activities that are hosted across the site.’

The arboretum contains a rich diversity of habitats, including lakes, ponds, wetland, reedbeds and grassland, which are populated by a variety of wildlife including brown hares, skylarks, lapwings, otters, tits and finches, green woodpeckers, buntings and the occasional black redstart. The site is managed with the conservation of these habitats and species in mind.

More than 100 volunteers help with everything from visitor management and general maintenance to guided walks and education. Stuart Wykes concludes: ‘We’re immensely proud of our work at Alrewas and of our long-term partnership with the arboretum. It’s extremely rewarding for us to see this former quarry site restored as a fantastic home for wildlife, as well as a lasting tribute to those who have served our country.’

Emma Smith is community engagement manager at Tarmac emma.smith1@tarmac.com Related competencies include: Land use and diversification, Management of the natural environment and landscape, Minerals management rics.org/journals 29

Land

Conflicts of interest

Conflict comprehension RICS’ first review of a professional statement shows the importance members place on managing conflicts of interest – but there is divergence over how these are understood

Sean Agass and Ellie Scott

The effective identification and management of conflicts of interest is essential to professionalism. The RICS Rules of Conduct state that members and firms must ‘act with integrity and avoid conflicts of interest and avoid any actions or situations that are inconsistent with its professional obligations’. The global RICS professional statement Conflicts of interest came into effect on 1 January 2018 and underpins the rules by setting mandatory requirements and providing supporting guidance in this challenging area.

A recent review of the professional statement, entitled Conflicts of interest: implementation and impact, presents the findings from two phases of research. Phase one surveyed all 10,051 RICS-regulated firms with email addresses, 40 per cent of which responded. A large majority of respondents – 94 per cent – were small firms with fewer than ten staff, most of which are based in the UK. For phase two of the research, RICS interviewed contact officers or specialist staff representing 31 firms, this time focusing on a greater proportion of large firms and those operating internationally.

Following this work, the review: ••sets out how the professional statement has been received by the market ••identifies how well conflicts of interest are understood, identified, managed, recorded and communicated 30 Journal October/November 2019

••details the specific actions RICS will take or has already taken to mitigate any risks that have been identified.

The review was carried out with the aim of measuring levels of recognition and usage of the professional statement and identifying common themes, areas of weakness, risk and good practice. The findings are already being used to inform the future development of professional statements, policies and guidance.

The review is accompanied by materials that are designed to strengthen implementation of the professional statement, although these documents do not constitute formal RICS guidance.

The following are some of the key points identified in the review.

••Almost all RICS members and firms consider managing conflicts of interest to be important, with a combined 93 per cent believing this is either critically important or very important.

••The vast majority – 87 per cent – of firms believe staff are quite familiar with the professional statement.

••The process for identifying, managing and informing clients about conflicts of interest varies significantly from firm to firm. Some have a less formal approach in place, which may lead to inadequate record-keeping or management of conflicts of interest.

••Identifying and managing conflicts of interest comprehensively can be complex

and challenging for professional services firms and, as a result, they stressed the need for maximum clarity and more supporting material to be provided.

••When representatives were asked to explain what they understand a conflict of interest to be, both from their reading of the professional statement and their broader knowledge and experience, about half their responses demonstrated the lack of a clear and accurate comprehension of the term.

RICS continually monitors feedback from the profession on its standards. The organisation has already made a number of changes to its publication and consultation process. This includes a greater focus on plain English, enhanced design and accessible layout, as well as detailed user questionnaires to engage with the right stakeholders as early as possible.

In light of the review findings, RICS will assist members in the following ways.

••Support on standards: professional statements will be supported with guidance and good practice case studies where possible, to illustrate practically how they should be applied.

••Provide training: training will be delivered on all aspects of the professional statement through means such as online modules and webinars.

••Focus on smaller firms: additional assistance will be offered to smaller firms to ensure they meet the obligations of the professional statements.

••Raise awareness: new developments with professional statements will be highlighted to smaller firms, which may not have the resources available to monitor changes in the regulatory environment.

Sean Agass is a standards and guidance editor and Ellie Scott is a senior project manager at RICS escott@rics.org Related competencies include: Ethics, Rules of Conduct and professionalism Further information: Conflicts of interest: implementation and impact and supporting materials are available for download at rics.org/coireview. The e-learning course on conflicts of interest can be found at rics.org/conflicttraining.

Advance your career and remain at the forefront of your profession with RICS Discover the latest CPD seminars • • • • •

North east rural conference (Hexham) Water conference (Midlands) North west rural conference (Preston) Rural mid-session conference, Scotland Rural conference, Wales

Take your career to the next level with RICS Training • Contaminated land – fundamentals • Rural – impact of national planning policy framework (NPPF) • Introduction to flood resilience

Stay on top of your day job Have you heard about isurv? Access all RICS information, sector insight and professional support surrounding standards in one easy-to-find place.

Visit our website to find out more: rics.org/landoffering

MetroVista™ 3D Cities MetroVista™ from Bluesky is focused on urban areas and targeted at professionals involved in the management, design, build, security and administration of our cities. Using a cutting-edge aerial survey sensor, several datasets are collected simultaneously during one mission. This allows the acqusition of consistent, and entirely congruent datasets that can be fused to create highly detailed and visually stunning 3D urban mesh models.

During each survey three high resolution datasets are collected; vertical aerial photography, full 360 degree oblique aerial photography, and high-density LiDAR. This combination provides aesthetics, precision and accuracy, all the ingredients that make MetroVista™ 3D mesh models the new geospatial paradigm for urban management.

This data can be used to help a range of sectors including urban planning, smart cities, architecture, defence and security, utilities, insurance and telecoms.

To find out more, please visit: www.bluesky-world.com/metrovista Or call us on 01530 518518 And find out how you can work smarter with MetroVista™.

www.bluesky-world.com/metrovista

www.bluesky-world.com +44 (0)1530 518518 info@bluesky-world.com

Mapping the future...