Ghosted by government? Responses to the OEP reports

Contact

Joseph Lewis

Key messages from the Government’s response to the OEP

Every year, the OEP publishes a progress report on the Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP), assessing whether England is making sufficient progress towards the EIP’s objectives. It gives a snapshot of whether policy is aligned with the country’s commitments, as well as where we might be falling behind.

The latest report covers the period from 2023-2024, so it concerns action under the previous government. The picture is also complicated by the new Government’s intention to revise the EIP and publish its own, with updated interim targets and a different strategic approach. Nonetheless, the report provides an important perspective on where we are currently and where further action might be needed.

After each report is published, the Government reviews it and publishes a formal response to the report and any recommendations. The latest response covers 44 recommendations from the OEP report, as well as analysis that spans each of the EIP’s goals. In doing so, it provides insight into the Government’s current thinking across many areas of environmental policy, providing a rare update on the progress of policy behind the scenes.

As a summary overview, our top six key messages from the Government’s response are:

The Government agrees with most of the recommendations, at least in principle, though specifics around delivery remain uncertain.
An ongoing commitment to local authorities as key delivery partners: the response recognises the OEP’s framing of local authorities as delivery partners for nature and commits to working with local authorities to support capacity, in line with proposals in the Devolution Bill.
The Water White Paper is coming, but it may be later in the year. It was originally expected in the Autumn, but the Government’s response implies it may not arrive until late November or December.
No more Chemicals Strategy. In response to an OEP recommendation that references the long-promised Chemicals Strategy, the Government said its “approach to chemicals management will be set out in the revised EIP”, confirming rumours earlier in the year that a Chemicals Strategy will no longer be published.
Air quality targets will not align with WHO guidelines, perhaps unsurprisingly. The Government rejected the OEP’s recommendation for a review of air quality standards to bring them more in line with WHO Guidelines and EU legal standards, even though it subsequently states it will “consider WHO guidelines and other countries targets as part of an evidence led process when considering future long-term targets.”
Lots of responses have been deferred, particularly to key policy instruments such as the Land Use Framework, so effective scrutiny will depend on environmental professionals to return to these questions as policy develops.

Read the full response for more information.

When the Government’s response was published in October, Denise Adaoyibo Okpala, Member of IES Council and the Marine & Coastal Science Community Steering Group, said “The important insights from the government’s response remind us of our collective responsibility towards nurturing our planet. The report highlights a pivotal moment in our journey—where environmental sustainability is not just a goal but a guiding principle shaping our policies and actions.

The emphasis on integrating climate considerations into every facet of governance echoes the urgent call for a unified approach to global challenges. The commitment to achieving Good Environmental Status in our marine waters and enhancing biodiversity reflects the dedication needed to safeguard our natural heritage for future generations.

The Institution of Environmental Sciences plays a crucial role in championing these ideals, bridging the gap between scientific research and policy implementation. Our expertise and commitment are vital as we advocate for a future where economic growth and environmental stewardship coexist harmoniously.”

How did the Government respond to the LNRS report?

Back in June, the OEP published ‘a review of Local Nature Recovery Strategies and their role in contributing to nature recovery commitments in England’. The report set out evidence from an assessment of a subset of the strategies and made seven recommendations to improve the contribution that LNRS make to nature recovery commitments.

Key points from the October response include:

The Government welcomed the review by the OEP and recognised the importance of LNRS to nature recovery, locally and nationally.
It agreed in principle with most of the OEP’s recommendations, highlighting some associated actions that have taken place since the report was published.
Despite agreeing on the strategic level, many of the responses to recommendations referred to future policy documents as the means for acting on the OEP’s suggestions. In particular, several of the answers defer to the revised EIP and the Land Use Framework as solutions, so efforts to raise the contribution of LNRS to nature recovery will rely on whether those key policies line up with the OEP’s recommendations. Both were due earlier in 2025.
In some cases, action to improve the effectiveness of LNRS will also depend on delivery, particularly through the planning system, so the effective implementation of existing policy will be critical. Between controversy around the Planning & Infrastructure Bill and the prospect of another Bill on planning and nature at the end of 2025, nature’s role in the planning system is uncertain at best, so meeting these commitments will be challenging.
One of the key concerns in the OEP’s report was about the resources available for delivering nature recovery at the local level, so the future of local authorities under the new devolution settlement will be an important consideration. Last month’s article on the Devolution Bill provides more details.

Read the full response for more information.

Overall, the Government’s response to the LNRS review is positive, accepting the importance of local nature recovery and the role of LNRS in achieving it. As ever, the challenge is delivering against that ambition.

Ellie Savage, IES Policy Officer and Coordinator for our Environmental Policy Implementation Community (EPIC), said: “Nature is local: it's the wildlife that lives in an area, and the ecosystems that run through it. It only makes sense to look to local leadership on nature recovery, as long as Local Nature Recovery Strategies join up to form a bigger, connected, resilient Nature Recovery Network.”

Many of the policies needed to action the OEP’s recommendations have not yet surfaced, so ongoing scrutiny will be an important step towards achieving a better contribution to nature recovery at a local level.

What does it mean for you?

For most environmental professionals, these high-level reports are one step removed from the reality of delivering environmental improvement ‘in the field’. Governance and strategy play an important role in setting the direction of travel, but it comes down to professionals to make environmental policy a reality.

The biggest implication of the responses from the Government is uncertainty: in many instances, both responses deferred to future publications as the solutions to current challenges. The details of those policies are not yet clear, so professionals need to be poised to respond as soon as they are and prepared to handle uncertainty in the meantime.

This latest exchange between the OEP and the Government also gives us reason to reflect on the state of environmental governance, and whether it is achieving its purpose.

The OEP’s report on progress against the EIP was addressing the period from 2023 to 2024. It was published in January. The Government’s response was published in October 2025 and in a response to the response, the OEP confirmed that it is already finalising its next progress report. If the new response raises any issues, the OEP won’t have time to meaningfully consider and address them until January 2027, nearly four years after the period to which they relate.

If it takes our system of governance multiple years to pick up issues on the state of progress, it seems difficult to imagine that we can meet the scale and urgency of the environmental challenges ahead of us, many of which are moving rapidly and demand equally rapid solutions.

How is the IES managing the uncertainty?

These two government responses have set the scene for the coming months, which are expected to produce several crucial policy documents, including the revised Environmental Improvement Plan, the Water White Paper, the Land Use Framework, and a new Bill on nature and planning.

Where the prospect of future change has created uncertainty, the IES is keeping our members updated with the latest developments. Make sure you are following Essential Environment so you can catch our responses to the responses (and the responses to the responses!) as policy happens in real time.

Get involved: if you want to support the work of the IES to stand up for science and nature, become an affiliate, or if you’re an environmental professional, join the IES.

Find out more about the Environmental Policy Implementation Community (EPIC) and how you can join the IES
Learn more about the OEP’s progress report and the Government’s response
Read EPIC’s analysis on ensuring Local Nature Recovery Strategies drive delivery and the government response to the OEP
Read more articles from Essential Environment to stay ahead of policy developments across the environment

If you want to find out more about environmental policy or the training we offer for members, please contact Joseph Lewis, Head of Policy (joseph@the-ies.org), or our local environmental policy expert, Ellie Savage (ellie@the-ies.org).

Key messages from the Government’s response to the OEP

How did the Government respond to the LNRS report?

What does it mean for you?

How is the IES managing the uncertainty?

Bibliography and further information