further layer of protection by identifying special protection areas (SPA’s) for migratory birds and special areas of conservation (SPC’s) for habitats other than for wild birds. Determining a site as a SPA or SPC results in further constraints through the requirement that, prior to any development, there must be an environmental impact assessment. However, by Brexit removing this layer of safeguarding, independent nations will be able to subjectively determine which sites are of particular interest for conservation, potentially risking the endangerment of a number of sites previously recognised as a SPC or SPA.
Furthermore, devolution also presents Britain with the critical issue of capacity. Whilst each nation may in fact have authority to manage their own environmental matters, the capacity of each nation alone to develop independent policy and law in all matters of environmental protection lacks in terms of scientific expertise and civil service resources. Currently, the EU actively promotes and facilitates cooperation between nations on environmental research and development. Access to the EU’s funding and dynamic web of research undoubtedly supports the advancement of environmental law in the UK; without this, Britain could potentially fall behind. Therefore, upon negotiating the terms for withdrawal from the EU, it is vital that the UK prioritises active participation in both the Horizon 2020 programme – the biggest EU research and innovation programme to date – and in the work of vital European agencies, such as the European Chemicals AgencyECHA and the European Economic Area. Access to invaluable expertise and research in these key areas may aid the UK in mitigating the gaps which are likely to appear in domestic capacity post-Brexit.

Trade Barriers

Contrary to the view that Brexit will empower the Government by granting freedom to achieve their desired ambitions, divergent environmental standards risk constituting trade barriers between nations. In order to maintain such a strong and imperative trade relationship with the EU, the UK may be forced to align any new regulatory standards with EU provisions. As Macrory argues, Brexit is unlikely to give the UK free rein over environmental law – the UK’s green laws have been developed over time through the ratification of over forty international treaties to which the UK and the EU are both signatories. These agreements comprise of a multitude of vague competences on part of both the UK and the EU. It is therefore likely that, despite leaving the EU, the UK will in fact still be bound by a number of non-EU obligations entangled within these treaties. The argument, therefore, that the UK will be free to set its own bespoke environmental regulations to fulfil its environmental ambitions, seems idealistic.