Issue Centre
Political issues at Rock the Vote

The study, led by British ecologist John Lawton, states that wildlife habitats are too small and isolated to protect many species from increased strains in coming decades.

Just 6.1% of England's total land is given over to 3,174 sites that provide the strongest protection – sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) – compared with the 10% recommended by the UN. Moreover, these protected habitats are increasingly under pressure from new housing and climate change, the report warns, and in many cases have been lost already. Of a list of 182 such sites published in 1916 by banker and naturalist Charles Rothschild, 89.6% had experienced a loss by 1997, with 21 being lost entirely.

To help improve the quality of England's wild areas for conservation and stem the loss of two species per year to extinction, the authors recommend the creation of 12 huge "ecological restoration zones" to improve key habitats and foster better connections which would rack up a bill between 600 million pounds and 1.1 billion pounds each year.

The costs would oversee managing protected sites, important habitats, water resources and carbon stores such as peat bogs as well as increasing woodland and improving public access to nature.

At a time of big public spending cuts, the study urged the government to resist taking money away from the environment.

"It is easy to say we cannot afford it. We fundamentally disagree," it said. "We are ... despite current difficulties, a wealthy nation."

The report, which was commissioned by the then environment secretary Hilary Benn last September, described as a "repair manual" for nature, calls for improved protection and management of wildlife sites and creation of new large-scale zones which focus on restoring the natural environment.

It urges investment in measures that deliver benefits for people at the same time as improving habitats - for example by creating salt marshes and wetlands which can prevent flooding.

It also recommended that new large-scale "ecological restoration zones" are put in place by coalitions of councils, landowners, communities and businesses, to improve existing wildlife sites and the connections between them and to restore natural habitats.

The report also says wildlife sites are not close enough to urban areas, with just 240,514 hectares (about 600,000 acres) overlapping with the 2,677,620 hectares (about 6.6 million acres) of urban areas across England.

The only quality measure met by the sites is their ability to support the full-range of England's wildlife and habitats.

Wildlife experts are adamant that the situation can be reversed, writing that "given resources, determination and skill, we know what to do, and how to do it".

Of the 12 ecological restoration zones suggested by the report, Lawton said: "There will be some places where the bang for your buck is so big, it's worth going big-scale."

The benefits to wildlife would be huge, he added, and also create opportunities for tourism such as bird watching and walking. Lawton sees such zones as being paid for by businesses and individual philanthropists as well as government, and would be protected by existing UK and EU wildlife protection legislation. The coalition government has already proposed a much greater role for private funding in British conservation.

The report also acknowledges that in the current financial climate, money is unlikely to be forthcoming in the next few years and that not all the costs should be met by the Government.