Access to Nature or Access to Land?

Published on 4 August 2025 at 16:16

After being swamped for the past few months, I have recently been catching up on some of the emails that have accumulated in my inbox. One particular email from the British Ecological Society caught my attention as they were addressing a question that has plagued my mind for many years now:

Email article from British Ecological Society

Access to nature or access to land?

Dr Mark Avery – ex conservation director of the RSPB and Wild Justice founder – has been compiling a species list for his house and garden. It has recently topped 700 species, which isn’t bad for a Victorian semi on a suburban street in Northamptonshire. This gives Mark an immense feeling of satisfaction and pleasure. Mark is not only seeking (science) but seeing.

Our last newsletter looked at the extinction of experience, both through a decline in fieldwork but also our general connection to nature. Nature connection requires access, but what does access mean?

Professor Kathy Willis’ new book details decades of research confirming that nature improves our health and wellbeing. In the 1980s, a seminal piece of research found that patients recover more quickly when they can see trees from their hospital bed. More recent research found a link between the death of millions of street trees from emerald ash borer and thousands of additional human deaths from respiratory and cardiovascular disease.

In the UK, the NHS is now using green social prescribing, including activities like walking and community gardening to patients, as part of its long-term plan. So we know nature is good for us. But we also know that more people in nature isn’t necessarily good for nature itself, so how do we balance the two?

Rather than asking, how do we bring people to nature, should the question be, how do we bring nature to people?

Back in 2023, our English Policy Group convened experts at the BES office to explore how we can balance wildlife conservation with public access to nature. Very little land is accessible, especially in England where less than 1% of people own 50% of land. And the little land that is accessible isn’t in a good ecological state. Less than 3% of England’s land is protected – we are a long way off 30 by 30.

There are also issues with who can access the green spaces that are nominally accessible. A wide range of groups, including those from low incomes, older people and those with disabilities all face unique barriers.

At the meeting, Dr Durwyn Liley, Director at Footprint Ecology, shared research where he analysed direct habitat damage from increased access to nature – from contamination from litter, dogs and the spread of non-native species, to indirect effects such as wildlife disturbance. His modelling of beach-nesting ringed plovers in Norfolk found that a complete absence of disturbance would result in a population increase of 85%.

Other research in Ecological Solutions and Evidence found it’s not always people that are damaging nature when they access it, but dogs as well. Another study found that half of the protected areas across Europe face pressures from tourism.

Rather than asking, how do we bring people to nature, should the question be, how do we bring nature to people? The hospital patients above weren’t in nature, they simply had a view of trees. One study found allotment owners experienced significantly improved self-esteem after just one visit to their patch. By bringing more of the living world to where we live, we get the benefits of nature connection on our doorsteps. And these experiences don’t have to be big to make a difference.

Manchester Rambler - Ewan MacColl

I've been over Snowdon, I've slept upon Crowdon
I've camped by the Waynestones as well
I've sunbathed on Kinder, been burned to a cinder
And many more things I can tell
My rucksack has oft been me pillow
The heather has oft been me bed
And sooner than part from the mountains
I think I would rather be dead