Timber demand globally is set to more than double by 2050. We’re already importing 81% of our timber requirement in the UK and are the second-largest net importer of timber in the world, so we must maximize the commercial opportunity of our woodlands while balancing other needs like conservation and public access. The government’s role is to maintain those guidelines.
A strategic land use framework has been discussed to better prioritize how we use land, as currently things like agriculture, biodiversity, forestry, and development are not always optimally allocated. Do you think that could help?
David: There’s certainly land being used for biodiversity that could be productive forestry while still achieving biodiversity aims. Converting farmland into non-timber producing uses is sometimes the worst outcome. Wherever possible, if land can produce timber, the government should prioritize that. But that’s not always the case currently—timber production is not always the top priority.
The planning system tries to balance different priorities. But you’re right that a strategic land use framework should clearly lay out those top priorities for the country. Then the planning process can focus on delivering them. Without that, we’re not really prioritizing anything effectively, are we?
David: Exactly. Another key is that investment in sawmills is very expensive. We have to keep up with health, safety, and environmental standards while also staying competitive with Europe. That requires major ongoing investment.
But that investment relies on a continued, steady wood supply. While planting new trees is good, it’s critical that we maintain the productivity of our existing woodland. If those decline in output, the whole system gets less efficient, and we lose available timber supply. There’s a very real risk of that happening.
The current 25-year timeframe is making investors nervous about further investment in sawmilling. If you knew oil was running out, you’d stop investing in diesel vehicles. The dynamics are the same here—without supply certainty of enough of the right material, investment inevitably will shift elsewhere in Europe or further afield.
Let’s end on an optimistic note. Paint me a picture of what a thriving UK timber industry looks like if the government gets that land use balance right. What would the industry’s contribution be to Britain’s productivity?
David: There’s great potential for a circular economy with timber. Trees grow, you harvest them to store the carbon in products, then replant. At the end of life, you reuse and recycle the wood. Throughout that process, you’re reducing manufacturing and labour costs.
As a country importing more than 80% of its timber, there’s a big opportunity to source more locally and reduce transport miles and costs, producing and selling timber as locally as possible, and making products that are more efficient and longer-lasting in their applications.
