Executive Summary
1. Introduction
There are currently many talented and inspiring people working, and volunteering, for National Park Authorities (NPAs) at all levels. However, their efforts are continually hampered by an outdated legislative framework that constrains diversity and innovation and limits the huge potential for nature recovery and health and well-being benefits that National Parks could be offering.
National Parks need a much stronger mandate to deliver nature recovery, if we are to have any hope of meeting statutory environmental targets and the international commitment to protect 30% of land and water for nature by 2030. The need to modernise National Park governance and purposes is becoming increasingly urgent, as evidenced in several recent reports, including our 2024 Health Check Nature Recovery report. There are also strong social justice arguments for ensuring that those making decisions about National Parks are more representative of the wider population and that these areas truly are for all the nation.
In this new research, we spoke to 33 people with a deep level of knowledge and experience of NPA governance to develop a better understanding of what really needs to change. The proposals in this report are based on what we learnt in the course of those discussions.
Each NPA Board consists of a mix of nationally and locally appointed members. However, the number of members and the way in which they are appointed varies between the NPAs. The specific arrangements are set out in detailed legislation which can only be amended with parliamentary approval. We have focused our recommendations on England where the Government has already committed to introducing relevant legislative change, and where there is now a significant opportunity to address this issue as part of the local government reorganisation process.
When announcing their commitment to legislation the Westminster Government emphasised that change was needed in order to “allow for greater innovation and collaboration to prepare [Protected Landscapes] for the future”. At a time of nature and climate crisis, we need these areas to play a leading role in halting species extinction, bringing an end to damaging practices such as burning of peatland, cleaning up our waterways and creating places which are wilder and more welcoming for everyone. This level of ambition requires even more courageous leadership, made possible with the right governance framework in place.
2. The case for change
Over the last decade or so, various reviews, including the 2019 Glover Landscapes Review, have highlighted the need to update National Park governance to ensure that those making decisions about these areas are more representative of the nation. Analysis by the Guardian in 2024 found that 70% of the members on NPA boards were men, and just 1.7% were from ethnic minorities (across England 18% of the population belong to a minority ethnic group).
The Glover Review also concluded that NPA Boards are “lacking in people who emphasise the purposes of securing nature and connecting people with our special places.” In most NPAs in England, the only members currently selected on the basis of their skills and experience are the ones who are nationally appointed by the Secretary of State (the Broads Authority also includes co-opted members who are selected for their expertise in navigation). Analysis by RSPB in 2022 found that only a small proportion of these national appointees have skills relevant to nature recovery.
Modernising NPA governance also offers the potential for significant cost savings. The existing boards are too big to operate effectively and many are well over double the size of the boards of other organisations with far greater powers and resources.
The creation of fewer, larger unitary authorities as part of the local government reorganisation process provides an opportunity to reassess the way in which local authorities are represented on NPA Boards. Furthermore, failing to reduce the number of local authority members when a new unitary is created risks creating a situation where a single organisation has a very dominant role on the NPA.
The case for change can be summarised as a need for reforms that support and enable NPA Boards to become even more:
- Diverse – to ensure representation and relevance to the nation
- Ambitious – for nature, climate and communities
- Effective – so that the significant time invested has the biggest impact
- Balanced – strengthening local and national voices
- Transformational in their leadership, as they evolve from bodies that were tasked with conserving the landscape, to those that are responsible for negotiating and leading significant change.
3. Our research
The research included 33 semi-structured interviews with people with a good knowledge of how NPA governance currently works, including NPA chief executives, chairs, other current and former Board members, from a total of 13 National Parks (nine in England, two in Wales and two in Scotland). We also gathered views from National Park Societies and through a workshop with young people and supplemented this with desk research.
We defined governance in its broadest form to include culture, ways of working, committee structures and the statutory purposes as well as the legislative framework. The overall aim was to develop a better understanding of what is, and isn’t, working well in terms of current arrangements and to identify potential options for reform.
4. Research findings: What currently works well
Well-run Boards
Many interviewees stressed that there is much that works well about the current system, and that there are many highly dedicated and experienced people on the Boards, including ones who have been appointed as Parish, local and national members. Some referred to how much they enjoyed being an NPA member too: “I love being on the Board – it brings me so much joy” (Current Board Member). Even some of those who were quick to identify the need for change had positive things to say about the current arrangements. There were also several comments on the positive working relationship between Board members and the staff team.
Representation of both local and national interests
Having a mix of locally and nationally appointed members ensures that decision-making takes account of the interests of those who live and work in the National Park as well as the importance of these places for the nation. Some interviewees felt that the balance between local and national interests was not always working well currently but all agreed that it was important to retain it as a principle. The need for local representation in order to ensure democratic accountability was also noted. For the Broads, specifically, the importance of keeping strong connections to the boating community was highlighted.
Role of NPAs as planning authorities
It was noted that NPAs’ planning powers provide them with both influence and leverage over what happens in their area, and in some cases can be important financially if NPAs receive compensation or mitigation to offset the impacts of major developments. The importance of planning in delivering the National Park purposes was also noted. As one interviewee put it: “I used to worry that NPAs spent too much time on planning but, partly because of changes in the planning system, I now believe that there is huge potential for NPAs to use their planning powers to deliver for nature.” (Former Board Member)
Induction, training and performance appraisal
It was clear that there are significant variations between the NPAs in terms of the level of induction, training and performance appraisal that currently takes place and that these processes are more likely to be applied to national appointees than to local ones. “[The NPA was] very good in terms of training, performance appraisal process etc for members.. Member induction included meetings with the CEO and other senior members of staff for all members…. It’s important that good practice like this is retained as part of any changes.” (Former Board Member)
Examples of good practice
Interviewees identified a number of examples of good practice that are currently adopted by some NPAs such as the Member Champion system where champions are appointed for particular areas such as nature recovery, farming, and engagement. Other examples of good practice adopted by some NPAs are Youth Boards and Youth Volunteering Programmes.
5. Research findings: What needs to change
Size and composition of the Boards
There was strong support for reducing the size of Boards but an emphasis on ensuring that we don’t just reduce the size but also think carefully about who is on that board and that this is considered alongside other changes aimed at ensuring that there are enough members of different types to cover the tasks required of them. Concerns were expressed that “even just fitting everyone in a room can be an issue” (Current Board Member) and that large Boards can lead to rambling debates, and “passengers” (non-contributors). One suggestion was for a small focused high-quality strategic board with more people involved in an advisory capacity on particular specialisms.
Some interviewees had significant concerns about the risks involved in not doing anything to address the implications of local government reorganisation, for example: “There is also an imbalance in the [NPA] since [X] Council became a unitary authority, leading to 10 representatives from one authority now sitting on the NPA, where previously there would have been ten district/county reps.” (Current Board Member)
There could be a case for increasing the number of nationally appointed members to counter the reduced input from local authorities.
A few of those interviewed felt that more radical change is needed, and there was a specific suggestion that nature should be given a seat on the Board.
Culture and mindset within NPAs
It was suggested that providing more opportunities for members and officers to work together outside of formal Board meetings could address some of these concerns and the importance of having a strong chair and staff with the appropriate skills to support the Board was also highlighted. Interviewees suggested that there needs to be a change of culture among senior officers, and a greater willingness to do things in a different way including changing the format and content of meetings, where appropriate.
Others expressed concern about the culture and tone of meetings and made suggestions for extensive changes, particularly in order to ensure a more inclusive and welcoming culture: “[There’s a need for] wholesale changes, for example changes in the chair of the board and chairs of committees. The same people tend to stay in these roles for many years, and most of them are older white men who cannot speak for the wider population.” (Former Board Member)
Recruitment and selection process
The only members for which there is currently an open recruitment process are those appointed as national representatives by the Secretary of State, and there has been some significant progress recently in using recruitment to diversify Boards. However, for nine of the English National Parks (the exception is the Broads), open recruitment is for just a quarter of the membership. Some interviewees suggested that the criteria and recruitment process for national appointees should be changed further to ensure that more value is placed on lived experience as opposed to professional expertise. There were also ideas for putting a lot more effort into promoting the opportunities available to ensure a much wider pool of people apply.
Interviewees also identified the need to consider changes to the selection process for local authority members as it was generally felt that the current way of doing this is not working well. One interviewee suggested that “selecting all members on the basis of merit should be the top priority for change.” (Other)
Another suggestion for improvement which should be relatively easy to implement is the introduction of fixed terms for local members as these already exist for national members.
There is already training available for new NPA members but several interviewees raised the need for much better induction and training for all members in all NPAs, including the need for better training for NPA Chairs given the importance of this particular role in ensuring that all members are able to contribute effectively. Others highlighted the need for more support for new members when they first join a Board, and more on an ongoing basis, such as allocating an experienced Board member as a mentor and creating a network for them to share experiences with others in the same situation.
NPA influence over appointments to their Boards
A number of interviewees expressed a view that NPAs currently have too little say over who is appointed to the Board: “We as an organisation select none of our Members. I think that is wrong and is not ‘good governance’.” (CEO). Others cited examples in the recent past where NPA preferences had been ignored in the final decisions on national appointees and noted that they have even less of a role in the appointment of Local Authority and Parish members. One suggestion for giving NPAs more influence over appointments to their Boards is to change the regulations allowing for new members to be co-opted on to Boards.
Supporting a diverse range of people to join Boards
It was suggested that we should also consider the development of alternative mechanisms for ensuring a diverse range of voices are included in decision-making, all of which should involve appropriate remuneration. Suggestions included apprenticeships and the establishment of a Social Justice or similarly titled committee/forum chaired by a member of the Board and whose members are people with lived experience in order to ensure their views were being included in the Board’s decision-making.
Parish Councillors
Parish members often bring both local knowledge and a clear commitment to the National Park having chosen to specifically put themselves forward for the role. However, there was concern about the Parish Member selection process and the suggestion that all local residents should be eligible to apply for these posts in open recruitment. This would allow people who may not necessarily want to be Parish Councillors to put themselves forward for the NPA.
Statutory purposes
The majority of participants agreed that strengthening the statutory purposes of National Parks is essential. Suggested changes included making stronger references to nature recovery and climate action in the first purpose and introducing a reference to mental and physical well-being in the second purpose. It was noted that any changes to the purposes need to take account of the fact that the Broads has a third purpose focused on navigation.
Several interviewees highlighted the close links between governance and the purposes with one arguing that “strengthening the purposes must go hand in hand with governance reform if we are to achieve maximum long term impact…. this would not only make National Parks better equipped and more focused to tackle the biggest challenges ahead, but it would also attract exactly the sort of people who would want to join NPA Boards and make this happen.” (CEO)
It was suggested that all members should be required to sign up to a commitment to support National Park purposes.
A more strategic focus for Board meetings
Some interviewees felt that one of the most effective ways of improving governance would be to reduce the amount of Board meeting time spent on planning decisions. It was suggested that more NPAs could adopt the South Downs model and delegate more decision-making to constituent local authorities allowing the NPA to focus only on development of the Local Plan and the more significant planning decisions.
Another way of ensuring a more strategic focus for Board meetings would be to remove some of the unnecessary bureaucratic burdens which currently apply because NPAs are “special purpose” local authorities and are considered to be part of local government.
Workload, time commitment and remuneration
Interviewees had differing views about the levels of allowances paid to NPA members, with some expressing concerns that these were too high, particularly as some Members only attend a handful of meetings each year. One issue appears to be the lack of clarity about what Members are expected to do in return for the remuneration they receive.
However, both young people themselves and other interviewees highlighted that proper remuneration is needed to enable more younger people to join NPA Boards. Several interviewees commented on the time commitment required to do the role properly and the fact that even combining NPA membership with a full-time job can be a challenge.
The need for increased funding
Several interviewees made reference to the financial constraints that NPAs are currently experiencing, with some suggesting that this is a far greater constraint than governance.
More radical reforms
It was clear from the views of some of our interviewees that we should also be considering a complete overhaul involving drastic and far-reaching changes including, for example, a National Protected Landscape Service responsible for governing all the National Parks and National Landscapes – similar to the National Landscapes Service proposed in the Glover Review.
There were mixed views about NPAs status as “special purpose” local authorities but some interviewees suggested creating something more akin to Non-Departmental Public Bodies or NGOs.
6. Recommendations for change
Our research identified a wide range of options for delivering governance reforms, some of which could be implemented quickly and some of which will require legislative change. We are proposing changes to the way in which Board members are appointed which will ensure that all members are appointed on merit, while also strengthening the balance of local and national knowledge, which is so vitally important in decision-making about National Parks. This model would strengthen local expertise and experience on the Boards by enabling a greater range of people to apply.
Quick wins
- Clearer direction from Government: A Ministerial direction setting out the expectations and duties which apply to Board members and clarifying any issues where further guidance may be required such as how the statutory purposes should be interpreted.
- Recruitment: Ensuring that the selection criteria for nationally appointed members are inclusive and reflect the purposes of National Parks together with a focus on encouraging more people from a diverse range of backgrounds to apply and measures to support all newly appointed members, such as a buddy or mentoring system. This should build on the positive progress made in the recruitment of national members in 2025.
- A stronger focus on increasing diversity including a specific emphasis on developing alternative routes to becoming a Board member such as via shadowing and apprenticeship opportunities and the establishment of social justice committees.
- A stronger focus on widening expertise and making more use of advisory panels as a way of ensuring NPA decisions are informed by a wider range of experience, and strengthening the governance between NPA Boards and management plan partnership, including the statutory bodies who have a duty to seek to further National Park purposes.
- Induction and training to be compulsory for all members and to include additional training for NPA Chairs to cover issues such as how to ensure meetings are inclusive.
- Improved appraisal and performance accompanied by measures to make it easier to remove under-performing members.
- Making attendance at meetings easier including through the removal of requirements to attend all meetings in-person and greater use of online and hybrid meetings.
- Delegate more decision-making by making full use of the powers available to NPAs to delegate planning decisions to officers, thus ensuring that the time members spend on planning is focused on the most strategic cases.
- Better remuneration: A standard approach to member allowances and time commitments accompanied by clear expectations of what members are expected to do in return.
- Sharing good practice and experiences such as Youth Forums and Member Champions across the Parks.
Use legislative change to optimise the current model
- Reduce the size of the Boards to a maximum of 12-15 members.
- Strengthen democratic accountability by ensuring that NPAs have a clear role in the decision-making of Strategic Authorities thus strengthening the links between local government and National Park Authorities.
- Strengthen local and national representation by increasing the proportion of openly recruited members through the introduction of a new model where:
- One third are recruited on the basis of having local experience related to the statutory purposes. This would replace parish council representatives (although parish councillors could still apply).
- One third are recruited on the basis of having national experience related to the purposes.
- One-third are appointed by constituent local authorities on the basis of merit, taking account of the need for political balance, and a geographical spread as well as appropriate skills and expertise in relation to the purposes.
- Open recruitment decisions would be made by a panel which includes the Secretary of State, the NPA Chair and an independent member.
- This model would allow people with deep local knowledge of the area to join the Board without needing to become a Parish Councillor. Increasing the proportion of openly recruited members would increase relevant experience and diversity.
- Strengthen the purposes by placing a much stronger emphasis on nature recovery, climate action and equitable and inclusive access.
- The introduction of fixed terms for all Board Members.
- Make it easier to co-opt members by removing the restrictions on co-opting members to the full Board.
- Reduce unnecessary bureaucratic burdens by reducing NPA auditing requirements to a scale that is in line with their budget and staff resources.
- Giving nature a seat on the Board: appointing a recruited member to represent the interests of nature.
- Giving future generations a seat on the Board: appointing a recruited member to represent the interests of future generations, both residents and visitors.
7. What needs to happen next
We have written this report with the intention of helping NPAs perform their important role even more effectively and we hope that Board members will work with their staff teams to explore which of the quick wins they can adopt. However, we recognise that much of what we are proposing will require action from Defra. We are aware that they have already commissioned research to inform the development of the legislation that Westminster Government committed to in December 2024, and we hope that our own research will help inform this and other related pieces of research.
We would also like Defra to work with us and NPAs to develop relevant legislative proposals and secure a Bill to enable the necessary changes to be implemented and we will be working with others to push for this legislation to be introduced at the earliest possible opportunity. We are already working with a group of young people campaigning to reshape National Park governance and we will continue to support and amplify their work until we have secured the changes needed.
We have also recently secured National Lottery Heritage Funding for the development phase of the National Parks Reimagined project which aims to aid transformation in the decisions made for National Parks in England and Wales. One of the key objectives of this project is to increase diversity in National Parks by supporting the development of skills and capacity and by creating equitable opportunities for 500 young leaders to be at the heart of Protected Landscapes leadership.
We are also considering what more we can do to implement some of the ideas we have considered in this report as part of our own governance arrangements. Our Trustees are considering options for giving nature and future generations each a seat on our Board in future.
We believe that the National Park Authority model has delivered much in the last 30 years. Now, there is significant potential to build on this, including by optimising the current model of governance in order to better meet our current and future needs. The Government should use the opportunity of reforms to the purposes and governance to encourage a wider discussion on this important issue.