Natural England

FAQs

Isn't it dangerously reductionist - doesn't breaking down and separating benefits risk missing the holistic value of complete areas or environments?

Not if the process is done properly. If the combination of different qualities and values in one place has value or importance (distinct from and greater than each of them separately) then this should be identified as a benefit or service in its own right, and go through the decision process just like any other benefit. If it is substitutable, a management aim can be set to get it substituted. If it cannot be substituted (and more rich and complex environmental and social qualities often cannot) this would justify a management aim of resisting any change than would lose the holistic benefit (even if all the separate benefits could be substituted for).