The duty to ‘seek to further the purpose of designation’ (the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty) - the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act (2023) is a significant change for how National Landscapes must be treated by all those bodies who influence policy and practice here. This management plan provides measures that help to identify what constitutes 'seeking to further the purpose.'
Continued uncertainty about the future of farming
Despite the roll-out of elements of ELM, this is still a time of great uncertainty for the farming community. There was an unrivalled opportunity to rethink agricultural support towards a focus on public money for public goods, with results-based payments directed in the main towards outcomes rather than prescriptions. Only in Landscape Recovery, which needs to expand over the lifetime of this plan, has this outcomes-focused approach been realised. There has been some progress in supporting the farming community to deliver for people and nature, not least through the creation of the Farming in Protected Landscapes programme and the Higher Tier scheme, but not enough. If society is going to change the social contract with farmers, to create more nature-friendly farmed landscapes, farmers must have the tools to do it, supported by access to good quality advice which is focused on providing public goods alongside boosting farm incomes.
The continued decline in our biodiversity — locally, nationally and globally
There is an ever more urgent need to arrest and reverse the well-documented declines in nature. There must be action, at the biggest scale possible, to conserve, enhance, restore, expand and connect habitats like never before, and to support species recovery with the same urgency. In the North Pennines there are 47 of the NERC Section 41 priority species. Many species need further research, some can be sustained by conserving, expanding and connecting habitats and bringing areas with good connectivity into better management. Some species are likely to need specific intervention, including specialist habitat management or preventing persecution.
Adapting to a changing climate
The need to adapt to a rapidly changing climate has been highlighted in successive Government reports (and those of many other bodies around the world) and is never far from the news. The unpredictability of how it manifests itself can make the impacts of a changing climate hard to plan for. In our Protected Landscapes, the drive must be for nature-based solutions. In 2018, the Climate Change Committee report, ‘Land Use: Reducing Emissions and Preparing for Climate Change’ highlighted the need for new landuse policy that promotes ‘transformational landuses’. In particular this meant a focus on the multiple benefits that can be accrued from ‘afforestation and forestry management; restoration of peatlands; low-carbon farming practices; improving soil and water quality; reducing flood risks and improving the condition of semi-natural habitats.’ This is still relevant, and all of these land-based ways of adapting to climate change whilst bringing multiple other benefits feature in the plan (rather than a push for large-scale renewables technology in this sensitive landscape) – delivering these nature-based solutions at the required scale is a challenge to which everyone must rise and is the best way in which our beautiful Protected Landscapes can contribute to addressing climate change.
A disconnect between people and nature
For very many people in our society, there is a great inequality in people’s ability to confidently and readily access beautiful, nature-rich green spaces, and all that such experiences could do for people’s health and well-being. These landscapes are for everyone, and everyone should feel welcome in them and be able to explore and enjoy them. Everyone’s experience is not the same, and there are genuine barriers to overcome.
Changes to the Planning system, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, and the push for economic growth – In every management plan cycle there are changes to the planning system. The 2024 amendments to the NPPF require a ‘strong’ reason (rather the previous ‘clear’ reason) to refuse development, whilst there is more encouragement for renewable energy generation projects. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill has an accompanying Nature Restoration Fund, and this may bring opportunities for conservation locally, but the legislation itself may bring reduced protections for nature. But a May 2025 report from the government’s Environmental Audit Committee confirmed that nature is not a ‘blocker’ on development and nature cannot reasonably be framed as a threat to growth; without thriving nature, there can be no thriving economy. Threats to the mitigation hierarchy and the precautionary principle will be come clearer as this plan moves from draft to final version.
Biodiversity Net Gain is now mandatory for new development
Whilst this may not directly affect the North Pennines as much as some other Protected Landscapes, there will be opportunities to use BNG to further conservation in the National Landscape. This management plan provides measures that should be incorporated into BNG proposals locally.
Protected Landscapes Targets and Outcomes Framework (PLTOF)
This is aimed at helping protected landscapes (the places, not just the National Park/Landscapes teams) to contribute more fully to the goals in the Government’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment. The PLTOF has provided targets for National Landscapes at local and national level, which are augmented by locally derived measures of success for aspects of the plan not covered by the new framework.
30 x 30 and how it is interpreted
Initial mapping from Natural England suggests that 68.8% (136,664 ha) of the North Pennines is capable of meeting the 30x30 criteria now (2025); this can be used to set realistic targets for the North Pennines’ contribution to 30x30 over the lifetime of this plan. It is important that the drive for 30x30 does not take nature conservation and recovery back to a site-focused approach, potentially valuing ‘protected’ fragments of land over work to conserve, enhance, expand and connect habitats which may not count as ‘protected’ but may in combination be even more valuable for nature.
Green finance aspirations
There is an ever-increasing emphasis on generating private sector finance to bring benefits for nature. The current reality is that markets for carbon and nature are immature, and there is a wealth of buyers but a dearth of sellers (for example in the peatland world). Biodiversity Net Gain is new and relatively unproven (and though involving private finance it is associated with development and not a carbon or nature market per se. The biodiversity credits market has not taken off. There are opportunities for funding through environmental and social governance commitments from business, but these too take capacity and expertise to bring them to fruition; such funding is also at the whim of the economy and there are examples of changing fortunes in businesses derailing their investment in nature. In short, there is no ‘green finance silver-bullet’ at this point. There has been more progress on green finance in the North Pennines than almost any other UK protected landscape, but there is a long way to go.
Likely continued stringent financial constraints in the public sector
This will likely limit public investment in nature. It remains to be seen whether the decades-old under-resourcing of Protected Landscapes continues. In 1998, the Countryside Agency advised the incoming Labour Government that £18m was needed to fund what are now called National Landscapes; this is £36m in 2025’s money. The National Landscapes collectively receive government core funding of approximately 33% of this figure. Whilst this is not just a management plan for the North Pennines National Landscape team, general constraints on public investment in nature, farming and access to the landscape will inevitably impact on the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty.