Conservation covenant: what it is and who holds it
Conservation covenants bind successors in title without needing a planning permission behind them. For habitat banks and off-site gain they are now a standard tool.
A conservation covenant is a voluntary agreement between a landowner and a designated responsible body that ties the land to conservation obligations and binds everyone who owns it afterwards. Part 7 of the Environment Act 2021 created the tool in England, and the thing that makes it useful is that it needs no planning permission behind it. For habitat banks, off-site biodiversity units and land that nobody is developing, that is the difference between a workable arrangement and a legal knot.
Before the 2021 Act, securing long-term management of land for nature usually meant a section 106 obligation, which has to be connected to a planning application, or a private contract, which does not bind the next owner.
What a conservation covenant creates
The agreement contains obligations on the landowner, and may contain obligations on the responsible body. It must appear from the agreement that the parties intend to create a conservation covenant, and it must be for a conservation purpose and for the public good.
Conservation purpose is defined broadly. It covers conserving the natural environment of land or the natural resources of land, conserving land as a place of archaeological, architectural, artistic, cultural or historic interest, and conserving the setting of such land.
The obligations themselves are usually positive as well as restrictive. A covenant might require a landowner to manage grassland by a specified regime, to keep grazing within stated densities, to allow monitoring access, and not to plough, drain or build on the land.
Duration is set by the agreement, subject to default rules where it is silent. For biodiversity net gain purposes the relevant period is at least 30 years, so covenants drafted for that purpose state it expressly.
Responsible bodies and designation
A covenant can only exist where one party is a responsible body designated by the Secretary of State. Local authorities are eligible, as are public bodies and charities whose purposes include conservation, along with other organisations that apply and meet the criteria.
Check the published list. An agreement drafted with an organisation that is not designated, however well intentioned, does not create a conservation covenant. It creates a contract that binds the parties and not their successors, which is precisely the problem the covenant was designed to fix.
The responsible body takes on real duties. Monitoring the land, enforcing the obligations, and holding the arrangement for decades. Landowners considering a covenant should ask how the body is funded to do that over 30 years, because a body that folds leaves the covenant in an awkward position.
Binding successors in title
The mechanism is what gives the tool its value. The obligations run with the land, and a purchaser takes subject to them.
Registration is as a local land charge, so the covenant appears on a standard search. A buyer's solicitor will raise it, and the answer needs to be a copy of the agreement and a clear statement of what the remaining obligations are and how long they run. Our note on how obligations appear on title covers where these things turn up in conveyancing.
The practical consequence for land value is real. Agricultural land carrying a 30-year covenant restricting management is not worth what the same field next door is worth, and lenders price it accordingly. That is not a reason to avoid covenants, but it is a reason to take proper advice before signing one.
Use in biodiversity net gain
The mandatory net gain regime, introduced through Schedule 7A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 by the Environment Act 2021, requires habitat enhancement to be maintained for at least 30 years. Two legal mechanisms secure that. A planning obligation under section 106, or a conservation covenant.
| Feature | Section 106 obligation | Conservation covenant |
|---|---|---|
| Counterparty | Local planning authority | Designated responsible body |
| Needs a planning application | Normally yes | No |
| Binds successors | Yes | Yes |
| Registered as | Local land charge | Local land charge |
| Typical use | On-site gain with the permission | Off-site units and habitat banks |
Off-site units are where covenants have found their place. A landowner with 40 hectares of arable land creates a habitat bank, enters a covenant with a responsible body committing to the management regime for 30 years, and sells units to developers who need them. There is no development, so there is no permission and nothing for a section 106 obligation to attach to.
The units are recorded on the biodiversity gain sites register, and the covenant is the legal spine that makes the register entry meaningful. A Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment is a report type where a competent person is legally required under the Environment Act 2021 regime, and an AI-assisted draft is a starting point for that person rather than a substitute for the metric work.
Comparison with a planning obligation
Beyond the counterparty, three differences matter in practice.
Section 106 obligations can be modified or discharged by application to the local planning authority after five years, with an appeal to the Secretary of State. Conservation covenants have no equivalent five-year route, and the Upper Tribunal is the forum where agreement fails.
Section 106 obligations are enforced by the authority, which has planning enforcement powers alongside contractual remedies. A responsible body enforces a covenant through the remedies in the 2021 Act, including specific performance and injunctions.
And section 106 obligations have to satisfy the statutory tests for planning obligations. Covenants do not, because they are not tied to a permission at all.
Where covenants are already being used
Three situations account for most agreements so far. Habitat banks assembled by landowners and brokers to sell biodiversity units. Land held by charities and trusts where the organisation wants the management secured beyond its own ownership. And nutrient mitigation land in catchments where development is constrained, where the mitigation has to be demonstrably permanent.
A fourth is emerging on estate land, where owners use covenants to lock in woodland or wetland creation ahead of a sale, so the buyer takes the land with the commitment already in place and the income stream attached to it.
Modification, discharge and registration
The agreement itself should anticipate change. Habitat management over 30 years runs into changing climate, changed grant regimes, disease, and land that stops responding to the original prescription. Drafting that names an outcome and allows the management to adapt works better than drafting that specifies a fixed regime for three decades.
Where modification is needed and the parties agree, they can vary the covenant. Where they do not, an application to the Upper Tribunal is the route, and the grounds are specific. Build a review mechanism into the agreement instead.
Registration should be checked rather than assumed. Ask for confirmation that the local land charge entry has been made, and keep a copy with the title documents.
A Planning Statement on a scheme relying on off-site units should explain the securing mechanism plainly, naming the responsible body, the duration and the register entry, because case officers now ask for exactly that. Understanding the development plan policies that apply to the receptor site matters too, particularly where it sits in a designated landscape.
You can enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which documents a scheme with off-site biodiversity units is likely to need.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.
PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Frequently asked questions
Who can hold a conservation covenant?
Only a responsible body designated by the Secretary of State. The category covers local authorities, public bodies, charities whose purposes include conservation, and certain other organisations that have applied and been designated. The list is published and updated, so confirm that the intended holder appears on it before drafting, because an agreement with a body that is not designated does not create a covenant.
How is a conservation covenant different from a section 106 agreement?
A planning obligation under section 106 is entered into with the local planning authority and is normally tied to a planning permission. A conservation covenant is a private agreement with a responsible body that does not need a planning application behind it. That makes it useful for habitat banks and off-site land where there is no development and therefore no permission to hang an obligation on.
Does a covenant bind a future owner?
Yes. That is the point of it. The obligations run with the land and bind successors in title for the duration specified, which for biodiversity net gain purposes is at least 30 years. The covenant is registered as a local land charge, so it shows on a search and a purchaser's solicitor will find it during conveyancing.
Can a conservation covenant be removed?
It can be modified or discharged by agreement between the landowner and the responsible body. Where the parties cannot agree, either can apply to the Upper Tribunal, which can modify or discharge the covenant on specified grounds. That route exists for genuine changes of circumstance rather than as an easy exit, and applications are not straightforward.
Is a covenant needed for every biodiversity net gain scheme?
No. On-site gain is usually secured through the planning permission itself, with conditions and often a section 106 obligation covering the 30-year management and monitoring. A covenant becomes the natural tool for off-site units, particularly where the habitat land is owned by someone other than the developer and is not the subject of any application.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.