NPPF REFORMS, DECEMBER 2025: DISCUSSION
- R S
- Mar 10
- 3 min read
In December 2025 the UK Government published a major consultation on a proposed rewrite of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other changes to the planning system — marking one of the most significant potential shifts in planning policy in over a decade. This draft framework has wide‑ranging implications for how planning decisions are made, how landscapes are assessed, and how environmental and design outcomes are delivered.
This framework represents a strategic recalibration of planning policy with a stronger emphasis on economic growth, housing delivery, infrastructure and, critically for our profession, how environmental and landscape considerations feature in development decisions.
What’s New in the 2025 Draft NPPF
The December 2025 draft NPPF builds on earlier planning reforms and introduces substantial changes, many of which intersect directly with landscape and environmental policy, most notably:
Economic and Growth Focus
The draft places a renewed emphasis on supporting economic growth and facilitating more homes and infrastructure across England. Planning policy language is being repositioned to encourage development that meets modern economic and housing needs, with a view to reducing barriers and accelerating approvals.
2. Housing Targets and Land Supply
The proposed reforms look to restore mandatory housing targets which can directly affect land use pressures and the strategic assessment of sites, including greenfield and landscapes on the urban edge.
3. Strategic Plan‑Making Reform
The reform is intended to simplify plan‑making and delivery which potentially may affect how plans integrate with local environmental priorities.
Grey Belt and Growth Areas
Proposed language around identifying ‘grey belt’ land may change the perception and value atributed to rural and peri‑urban landscapes in planning decisions.
Landscape, Ecology and Environmental Implications
The draft NPPF consultation emphasises growth and deliver. It does still include commitments to environmental protection. However, this presents both opportunities and challenges:
1. Balancing Growth with Landscape Character and Biodiversity
This dual objective means that professionals will need to be more proactive in demonstrating how proposals and enhance character, ecological networks and biodiversity outcomes alongside growth objectives.
2. Environmental Protections Under Scrutiny
The current draft may weaken protections for nationally important landscapes by reducing the weight given to environmental assets in planning decisions compared againast economic benefits.
3. Integration with Biodiversity Net Gain and Nature Recovery
The draft NPPF will influence how BNG and other environmental outcomes are weighted in planning applications. The challenge is that Landscape architects must ensure that biodiversity and green infrastructure still deliver measurable, landscape‑scale ecological value to align with the broader policy.
4. Local Plan Timelines and Stakeholder Input
Reduced time allowances emphasise the importance for landscape input to be embedded earlier to assist with smooth and efficient processes.
Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM)
CIEEM has broadly welcomed the draft NPPF’s references to environmental goals, but it has also expressed concerns about the balance of priorities:
Risk of weakening environmental protection: CIEEM has warned that a strong growth‑first focus may inadvertently reduce the policy weight given to biodiversity and habitat protection.
Capacity and enforcement concerns: It has highlighted that many local authorities lack sufficient ecological expertise, meaning that even robust policy language will struggle to be implemented effectively without additional skills and enforcement.
It emphasises that Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) and nature recovery outcomes must remain central to ensure ecological integrity.
The Landscape Institute (LI)
The Landscape Institute acknowledged both potential benefits and risks:
Positive reflections:
LI supports elements that embed design quality and green infrastructure expectations into policy language, signalling that high‑quality places and multifunctional landscapes should form part of planning outcomes.
Clearer design standards are welcomed.
Concerns:
Faster plan‑making targets may undermine assessments and outcomes.
Faster decision-making may undermine landscape inputs.
Environmental safeguards and landscape protections should not be weakened.
Practical Implications for Landscape Professionals
These reforms could reshape practice in several ways:
Stronger evidence — design and landscape statements will need sharper articulation of policy alignment, showing how proposals deliver benefits across economic, environmental and social objectives.
Strategic thinking — landscape character, ecological networks, flood risk and climate adaptation need to be part of strategic decision-making early on, not just site design.
Collaborative plan‑making — early collaboration will help shape to embed nature recovery and well-designed places into development frameworks.
Conclusion
The December 2025 proposed reforms to the NPPF signal a planning policy reset to drive growth and accelerate delivery of developments. Landscape professionals must stay engaged and ensure that landscape character, ecology and design quality remain central to the
Reference:
conversation.
Comments