A2. Taking action for nature: volunteer time spent in conservation

Figure A2i. Index of volunteer time spent on conservation activities with selected environmental organisations in the UK, 2000 to 2019.

Assessment of change in volunteer time spent in conservation

Note: Long- and short-term assessments are based on a 3% rule of thumb. Where possible, the base years for these assessments use a three-year average. See Assessing Indicators.

Table A2i. Organisations contributing data to the indicator

Some organisations were able to provide accurate figures for the number of hours worked; others provided estimates based on the number of volunteers and an estimate of average days worked by their volunteers each year.

Data are not available for all organisations in all years. For the current indicator, missing values have been estimated by Defra statisticians. In the historical dataset estimates have been used in the index calculations for the Canal & River Trust (formerly British Waterways) (2000 to 2009), Butterfly Conservation (2000 to 2002), The Conservation Volunteers (2000 to 2005), Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority (2000, 2001 and 2003), National Parks England (2000 to 2008), Natural England (2000 and 2002), Plantlife (2000 to 2006), The Wildlife Trusts (2000 to 2003 and 2006), and the Woodland Trust (2000 and 2001). The estimates were based on (a) the trend in the data provided by the organisation, and (b) the trend in the data provided by other organisations for the missing years. The number of volunteer hours has been converted to an index (set to 2000 = 100).

The methodology used by conservation charities can change from year to year. This can cause fluctuations in the data, particularly where there are revised methods used by charities that have previously recorded large amounts for total volunteer hours. In 2014, The Wildlife Trusts improved their methodology to more accurately record volunteer hours and to only report activities undertaken by registered volunteers, rather than those undertaken by registered and casual volunteers. This resulted in a 40% drop in recorded hours for that year. As The Wildlife Trusts accounted for 20% of the total number of volunteer hours in 2014, this change had a noticeable effect on the overall trend and it was largely responsible for the significant fall in the indicator from 2013 to 2014 that has been reported in previous publications. It also had a negative impact on the short-term assessments of this indicator reported in 2016 and 2017. Rather than continuing to allow this methodological change to adversely affect the results, when the actual fall in volunteer hours was much smaller than that previously reported, Defra statisticians obtained additional information from The Wildlife Trusts. This information has been used to scale the data from 2000 to 2013 in such a way that it now provides estimates for volunteering that are broadly equivalent to those provided under the new methodology. While the chart, values and accompanying datasheet are therefore not comparable to those in previous publications, they do present a clearer trend for conservation volunteering in the UK since 2000. In addition, Butterfly Conservation are working to improve their methodology for calculating hours spent on survey work due to a shift over the past 5+ years in how volunteers record butterflies (largely driven by the introduction of recording apps). The number of volunteers recording butterflies has continued to increase but the calculation of hours needs revision, which will likely result in a decrease in total volunteer hours.

In broad terms, the type of work undertaken by volunteers falls into four categories:

• Countryside management & advisory support;
• Surveys, data input & analysis;
• Administrative or office support; and
• ‘Other conservation work’, which includes activities such as fundraising, training and educational events.

Not every organisation provides the breakdown of volunteering hours shown in Figure A2ii, and therefore the trends shown in this figure are different from the overall assessment in Figure A2i.

Volunteer hours relating to three out of the four work categories listed above have all decreased in 2019 – the survey, data input and analysis category is the only one to have increased (Figure A2ii). The 2011 to 2013 peak in ‘countryside management & advisory support’ was driven by several organisations, most notably the RSPB and the Woodland Trust reporting a higher than average number of volunteer hours for this category. The sharp rise in hours relating to ‘other conservation work’ in 2010 was driven by the RSPB and the sharp fall in hours relating to ‘administrative or office support’ by the British Trust for Ornithology, the latter reporting an end to the ‘Bird Atlas Project’ as a reason for the decrease. Historically, organisations have reported that changes are due to shifts in strategic focus that result in significant adjustments to projects such as tree planting. They have also cited the need to consider changes to volunteer numbers in order to comply with health and safety regulations.

Figure A2ii. Index of volunteer time spent on conservation activities with selected environmental organisations in the UK, by category of work, 2000 to 2019.

Aichi Targets for which this is a primary indicator

Strategic Goal A. Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society.

Target 1: By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably.

Aichi Targets for which this is a relevant indicator

Strategic Goal A. Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society.

Target 2: By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated into national and local development and poverty reduction strategies and planning processes and are being incorporated into national accounting, as appropriate, and reporting systems.

Target 4: By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use of natural resources well within safe ecological limits.