When Planning Means Values: How Ecology, Animal Welfare and Land-Use Shape Our Future

Often, planning permission is regarded as a technical process: assessing traffic flows, engineering design, noise and environmental impact. But planning is also about values. It decides not only what will be built, but what society we want to build.


A recent landmark case in the UK, Animal Equality UK v North East Lincolnshire Council & ASL New Clee Ltd [2025] EWHC 1331 (Admin), illustrates this shift. Although the claim against the UK’s first on-land salmon farm proposal was dismissed, the judgment confirmed something significant: animal welfare can be a material factor in planning decisions.

Planning, Ecology and Values

At its core, land-use planning determines how we allocate space, energy, water and natural resources. It shapes infrastructure, housing, transport and industrial development. Traditionally the focus is on feasibility, cost and environmental assessments. But behind every plan are deeper questions: How much do we value biodiversity? What do we owe to non-human life? What kind of natural world do we want for future generations?

Ecology teaches us that everything is interconnected: species, habitats, air, water and human society. When a planning decision ignores ecological values or animal welfare, it risks building a society divorced from nature rather than integrated with it.

The Legal Breakthrough: Animal Welfare as Material Consideration

The 2025 High Court decision in the Animal Equality case marked a turning point. The court held that: All parties agree that animal welfare concerns are capable of constituting a material consideration as a matter of law.”  That means while planning authorities are not required to treat animal welfare as mandatory, they must acknowledge the possibility and cannot categorically dismiss it without reason.

In that case, the plaintiff challenged the decision of North East Lincolnshire Council to grant permission to ASL New Clee Ltd for a land-based salmon farm in Cleethorpes. The issues raised included water/energy use, effluent discharge, fish welfare, disease risk and mass mortality potential. The court found the officer’s advice did not misdirect the committee in law, but the recognition of welfare as possible material is what matters.

Why Ecology and Animal Welfare Matter in Planning

  • Natural capital and ecosystem services: Biodiversity and healthy ecosystems provide flood protection, water purification, climate regulation and recreation. Poor planning can degrade those services.
  • Ethical obligations: Recognising animals as sentient beings with welfare interests is increasingly accepted, ethically and scientifically.
  • Legal risk and good governance: Councils that ignore welfare considerations may face judicial review if the omission is irrational. 
  • Public trust and legitimacy: Planning that is seen to disregard nature or animal life risks losing social licence and community support.

From Technical to Transformative: Planning as a Value-based Process

Consider a proposed development: beyond traffic modelling and noise assessments, good planning asks: Will this development preserve or degrade habitats? Will it respect animal life? Will it contribute to a resilient, sustainable ecosystem? These are not afterthoughts — they are central to the values we choose.

For example, an industrial salmon farm on land — while engineered — brings high risks: energy usage comparable to thousands of homes, huge volumes of effluent, dependency on wild fish to feed farmed fish, and documented mass mortality events in similar systems. If these welfare and ecological risks are ignored, the project may pass on hidden costs to nature and society.

Implications for Ecology, Planning and Our Future

This development has broad implications:

  1. Policy and statutory frameworks: Planning authorities should review policies to explicitly include ecology and welfare considerations as material wherever relevant.
  2. Training and guidance: Officers and members must understand that welfare and ecological issues can matter — accurate advice is critical.
  3. Public engagement: Communities increasingly expect nature, animals and ecosystems to be part of planning conversations — not sidelined.
  4. Sustainable development practice: Developers, planners and regulators must adopt an integrated approach: engineering + ecology + ethics.

What You Can Do — As a Concerned Citizen

If you care about ecology, animals, and the future of our landscapes, you can:

  • Engage early in local plan consultations and planning applications — ask whether ecology and welfare have been assessed.
  • Support campaigns or NGOs that push for animal welfare to be recognised in planning (for example, Animal Equality UK). 
  • Promote land-use which restores nature, reduces impact, enhances biodiversity and treats animals not as collateral but as living interests.
  • Share this article and help build awareness that planning is not just about roads and buildings — it’s about life, nature and values.

Conclusion

In our fast-changing world the process of planning cannot remain purely technical. It must embrace the ecological realities of our time — climate change, biodiversity collapse, resource scarcity and animal welfare. By recognising that planning decisions reflect values, we can help shape a future where nature and society flourish together.

As the 2025 court decision shows, the legal door is open for ecology and animal welfare to be legitimately part of planning. Now is the time for planners, communities and individuals to walk through that door and insist on planning that respects life in all its forms.

References:

  • “Animal Equality secures landmark legal victory for animal welfare in planning law”, Animal Equality UK, 16-June-2025. 
  • “Animal Equality UK v North East Lincolnshire Council & ASL New Clee Ltd [2025] EWHC 1331 (Admin)”, Advocates for Animals Blog. 

Comments

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

10 Amazing Space Events of the Past Year

The Hidden Threat Beneath the Waves: Exploring the Environmental Impact of Shipwrecks

The Ethical Dilemma of Mirror Neurons: Why Scientists Are Calling for Their Regulation