An independent review of Defra’s regulatory landscape, undertaken by leading economist Dan Corry, was published on the 2nd April 2025. The ‘Corry Review’ was commissioned by the Defra Secretary of State Steve Reed in October 2024 to establish whether the environmental regulatory landscape inherited by the current Government is fit for purpose.
What did it find?
Corry concluded that the environmental regulatory landscape is inefficient, inconsistent and difficult for customers to navigate, and is not fit for purpose in driving economic growth and nature recovery. Regulations have resulted in “risk averse decision-making, heavily influenced by a long entrenched precautionary principle to protect the current landscape”.
The review makes 29 recommendations to government under five strategic themes:
- Focus on outcomes, scale and proportionality, with constrained discretion
- Untangle and tidy ‘green tape’ to ensure process-light and adaptive regulation
- Deploy a fair and consistent ‘thin green line’ on regulatory compliance, with trusted partners earning autonomy
- Unlock the flow of private sector green finance to support nature restoration whilst better targeting public sector finance
- Shift regulators to be more digital, more real-time and more innovative with partners
What has the Government’s response been?
Defra welcomed the findings, and has begun to implement several of the recommendations, largely through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.
This includes:
- Appointing a lead regulator for all major projects
- Creating an ‘Infrastructure Board’ within Defra, convening the Department and arms-length bodies to collaborate on large infrastructure projects
- Reviewing existing environmental guidance to remove “duplication, ambiguity or inconsistency”
- Streamlining environmental permitting regulations, removing the need for permits from some low-risk and temporary projects
- Creating a single planning portal for all agencies as part of a wider digital upgrade
- Launching a Nature Market Accelerator to help unlock private finance for nature
- Updating strategic policy statements for regulators, including a review of statutory duties
- Giving trusted groups greater autonomy to carry out nature restoration projects
What has the response been from the environmental sector?
The review has been praised by green groups for its recommendations on:
- Increasing consistency for environmental offences and tougher penalties for deliberate non-compliance and persistent offenders
- Digitalisation of Defra’s systems and processes
- Ensuring monitoring data is up-to-date and accessible
- Putting procedures in place to reach statutory climate and environmental targets
- Increasing coherence across environmental policy and funding mechanisms
- Empowering the Environment Agency to issue fines for minor offences without going through the court system
Welcoming the Review, many in the sector stressed that a simplified regulatory system can and should mean stronger environmental protections in practice. Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link stated in response that “Defra must find strength with simplicity: all regulators and regulation must contribute to the urgent action needed to halt environmental decline by 2030” and that safeguards are needed to ensure that environmental law is not weakened.
Concerns have been raised over the tone of the review, which conveys a need for speed. The Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) stated that “after such a huge upheaval (EU Exit), where most UK environmental law derived from the EU, a calm and considered programme of regulatory reform is needed now not a supercharged sprint”.
So what?
Overall, the Review represents a call for a more joined-up systems level approach to regulation across Defra’s responsibilities, but not the major institutional reform that some were expecting. It seems that Natural England, the Environment Agency and other environmental bodies have dodged the chainsaw treatment – for now.
The Corry Review does get a lot of things right, with its recognition of systematic issues, strong support for digitalisation, and a balanced emphasis on sustainable growth while protecting nature. Despite positive progress, a more holistic approach to environmental regulation needs to be assessed to properly account for the interconnectedness of environmental concerns across sectors.
The Review suggests greater autonomy for Local Planning Authorities and trusted conservation groups. This would be a welcome development, recognising the professional judgement and local knowledge of environmental professionals.
Taking a step back, this is the sixth review into environmental regulation since 1997.1 Why will this one succeed where so many others have failed? Well, the Corry Review does have a crucial difference from past reviews: it does not necessarily aim to water down or reduce the number of environmental regulations, but to advise on overall barriers to implementing them. This delivery-focused approach, and the backing of a Labour Government with a hefty parliamentary majority, means the Corry Review may yet succeed in delivering a small but mighty system of environmental regulation.
