• UK environmental legislation is falling behind the EU’s: Since Brexit, the UK has ‘diverged by default’ as the EU has introduced stronger laws across a number of key policy areas including air, biodiversity, and climate. Though the UK has not significantly weakened its environmental protections, it has largely stood still.
• Mixed use of post-Brexit powers: There have been examples of progressive divergence, such as the UK’s sandeel fishing ban, but this contrasts with risks of regression like those posed by the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.
• Opportunity for strategic alignment: The UK should align with higher EU standards in key areas such as ecodesign, chemicals, and deforestation – which would remove trade barriers and aid economic growth, whilst increasing its environmental ambition.
• IEEP UK calls for a ‘race to the top’: Alignment is only a start – the UK should be prepared to exceed EU standards and use its independence to deliver stronger and future-proof protections for people and nature.

The Institute for European Environmental Policy UK (IEEP UK) [1] has today published its 2025 State of Play report on regulatory divergence in environmental policy since the UK’s departure from the EU [2]. The findings point to a widening gap in ambition and action, with the UK falling behind the EU in several critical policy areas. The assessment covers nine thematic areas, looking at a wide variety of legislation in the EU and across the four nations, and for the first time rates the level of divergence in environmental policy between the EU and the four UK nations [3].

The report finds that while the UK has not significantly weakened its environmental standards since Brexit, it has failed to keep pace with the EU’s ambitious agenda. The divergence is largely passive – or “divergence by default” – as the EU moves ahead with new laws on issues ranging from air pollution and chemicals to nature restoration and circular economy.

Bright Spots and Warning Signs

The report highlights notable examples of progressive divergence, including the UK and Scottish Governments’ decision to close sandeel fisheries – a move praised as a strong use of post-Brexit policy autonomy to protect biodiversity.

However, this contrasts starkly with ongoing threats of environmental regression. The UK Government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill is cited as a major concern, potentially undermining hard-won nature protections. If passed in its current form, this would mark a shift towards “divergence by design” – a deliberate weakening of environmental standards.

A Moment of Opportunity

With UK–EU relations improving and momentum building to reduce trade barriers, the report argues that this is a critical juncture for the UK to reset its environmental trajectory. Rather than continuing to drift away from EU standards, the UK has an opportunity to shape a coherent environmental agenda that serves both domestic priorities and shared international goals.

The report calls for renewed scientific and technical cooperation, including rejoining the European Environment Agency, as well as greater collaboration on international environmental issues. It also emphasises the potential for mutual learning, noting that the UK’s innovations in areas like biodiversity net gain and marine conservation could inform EU policy. Alignment should be pragmatic, not automatic – but where the EU leads, the UK should be prepared to match or exceed that ambition, using its independence to deliver stronger, bespoke and future-proof protections for people and nature.

Quotes

On the state of divergence

Michael Nicholson, Head of Policy, IEEP UK, said:

“Five years on from Brexit we can now see that the UK has chosen not to keep pace with the EU in strengthening its environmental laws and policies.

“The UK have made some progressive environmental policy decisions over recent years such as protecting sandeels, a foundational species in our marine ecosystem. But generally speaking, the UK has not used its post-Brexit independent policy making powers to their full potential”.

“The EU is no nirvana for environmental protection, but the UK is falling behind and should be looking to use its post Brexit independent policy making powers to go above and beyond what the EU is doing. Sadly, it is losing this race to the top and has ceded leadership to the EU”. 

Mr Toby Perkins, MP for Chesterfield, and Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, said:

“Five years after Brexit, there are several areas where the UK has taken advantage of its independence in policy-making to raise environmental standards, protecting sandeels in the North Sea and introducing Biodiversity Net Gain.

In other areas, such as toxic chemicals like PFAS, this opportunity has yet to be seized and the UK is falling behind. This timely report makes an important contribution to identify those areas ripe for innovative and ambitious policy-making to protect and improve the UK environment and economy.”

Caroline Lucas, Co-President of the European Movement and Former MP, MEP and Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, said:

“Five years after Brexit, it’s shamefully clear that the UK is being left behind on environment policy.  With just a few notable exceptions, the Government has deliberately chosen not to keep up with the standards of our European neighbours, on everything from deforestation to industrial emissions.  Moreover, there’s a very real risk that further divergence will occur, as Ministers pursue economic growth at all costs.  The current version of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a case in point, which would drive a coach and horses through existing nature protection laws.  It’s more important than ever that both parties resist the temptation to cast environmental policy as a break on competitiveness.  Instead they should build on the successful UK-EU reset and go further and faster towards protecting and restoring the natural world, which is the bedrock upon which all economic activity depends.”

On the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, if passed:

Michael Nicholson, Head of Policy, IEEP UK, said:

“It is one thing deciding not to keep pace with the EU in actively strengthening our environmental laws but quite another to actively go backwards and remove environmental protections that we inherited from our EU membership”. 

On the UK-EU Reset:

Ben Reynolds, Executive Director, IEEP UK, said:

“The UK-EU ‘Reset’ talks on 19 May 2025 were a positive signal of intent. Though the immediate challenge will be delivery on the various policy initiatives included in the Reset such as the veterinary agreement, this should not stop both parties from exploring further cooperation. With the UK seeking to remove trade barriers to aid economic growth through the Reset, there is an opportunity for higher UK environmental standards, through alignment in those areas that fall within scope – most notably alignment on products standards, chemicals, circular economy and deforestation regulations”

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

1. The Institute for European Environmental Policy, UK (IEEP UK) is a not-for-profit environmental sustainability think tank, with over 40 years of experience, based in the UK. As part of the broader IEEP family, we are dedicated to working with stakeholders, international bodies, academia, civil society organisations and industry to produce evidence-based research for impact-driven environmental policy solutions. Our work covers both short-term and long-term environmental strategic issues in the UK and its constituent nations (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), as well as their interaction with policy in Europe and globally. 
2. The full report, “Divergence in UK/EU Environmental Policy: State of Play 2025”, is available at this link. The report will feature in a webinar on 15 September – read more on how to register here.
3. As most aspects of environmental policy are devolved, the four nations have in many cases taken different approaches, which has led to intra-UK divergence compared to the EU. The table below shows the levels of divergence alongside the key. The full assessment approach is available here. Please note these ratings are relative and do not mean the current policies in any of the jurisdictions are necessarily adequate or inadequate. Rather, this is to distinguish between the relative trajectories of the UK, or four nation approaches compared to EU policy.
4. IEEP UK’s work on tracking divergence is supported by Esmee Fairbairn Foundation, Waterloo Foundation and Impact on Urban Health.

Photo by Scott Blake on Unsplash