Climate change impact assessment                                                                                                                                                                                                           


The purpose of this assessment is to help us understand the likely impacts of our decisions on the environment of North Yorkshire and on our aspiration to achieve net carbon neutrality by 2030, or as close to that date as possible. The intention is to mitigate negative effects and identify projects which will have positive effects.


This document should be completed in consultation with the supporting guidance. The final document will be published as part of the decision making process and should be written in Plain English.


If you have any additional queries which are not covered by the guidance please email 

Please note: You may not need to undertake this assessment if your proposal will be subject to any of the following: 
 Planning Permission
 Environmental Impact Assessment
 Strategic Environmental Assessment
 However, you will still need to summarise your findings in in the summary section of the form below.
 Please contact for advice.












Title of proposal

Rural England Prosperity Fund

Brief description of proposal

An addendum to the UK Shared Prosperity Fund in North Yorkshire  to cover the Rural England Prosperity Fund allocation from Government.  The total value of the REPF allocation is £5.4m which is provided by Government as part of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.


Cross Directorate. The Lead Officer is based in BES.

Service area

Growth Planning and Trading Standards

Lead officer

David Caulfield, Assistant Director, Growth Planning and Trading Standards

Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the impact assessment

Andrew Leeming, Head of Strategy, YNY LEP

Liz Small, Growth and Heritage Manager

Mark Kibblewhite, Senior Policy Officer (Growth)


Date impact assessment started



Options appraisal

Were any other options considered in trying to achieve the aim of this project? If so, please give brief details and explain why alternative options were not progressed.


The Rural England Prosperity Fund is a Government fund which is allocated to all local authorities and devolved administrations across the UK.  North Yorkshire has been allocated £5.4m towards supporting key levelling up objectives.  In order to utilise this funding the Council must submit an addendum to the previously submitted Shared Prosperity Fund Investment Plan to DLUHC.  There is no requirement for match funding.  The only alternative option would be to refuse the funding and this has not been considered.


North Yorkshire County Council has been identified by Government, as a Lead Authority for the fund.  The County Council would have the option to not undertake this role or not to submit a bid for funding however these options were not considered in depth in light of the opportunity to bring additional Government Funding to the County.


What impact will this proposal have on council budgets? Will it be cost neutral, have increased cost or reduce costs?


Please explain briefly why this will be the result, detailing estimated savings or costs where this is possible.


The Rural England Prosperity Fund is fully funded by the Government and does not require match funding.  It is therefore cost neutral to the local authority.


To minimise risks to the Council those projects which receive funding through the shared prosperity fund will be subject to back to back contracts which mirror the Government’s funding agreement with the Council.





How will this proposal impact on the environment?

N.B. There may be short term negative impact and longer term positive impact. Please include all potential impacts over the lifetime of a project and provide an explanation.

Positive impact

(Place a X in the box below where relevant)

No impact

(Place a X in the box below where relevant)

Negative impact

(Place a X in the box below where relevant)

Explain why will it have this effect and over what timescale?


Where possible/relevant please include:

·      Changes over and above business as usual

·      Evidence or measurement of effect

·      Figures for CO2e

·      Links to relevant documents

Explain how you plan to mitigate any negative impacts.


Explain how you plan to improve any positive outcomes as far as possible.

Minimise greenhouse gas emissions e.g. reducing emissions from travel, increasing energy efficiencies etc.


Emissions from travel




The Rural England Prosperity Fund Prospectus includes the following guidance:


Investment made under this Fund should demonstrate the extent of contribution to net zero and nature recovery objectives, including the UK’s legal commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050, wider environmental considerations, such as resilience to natural hazards and the 25 Year Environment Plan.

To support green growth, places should also consider how projects can work with the natural environment to achieve project objectives, and – at a minimum – consider the project’s impact on our natural assets and nature


Projects which come forward under the REPF programme will be required to undertake a separate EIA.


Each project that is successful in being awarded funding by MHCLG is required to undertake a detailed evaluation of outcomes and findings.  Following completion of the programme overall NYCC will undertake a programme wide appraisal including an assessment of the positive environmental impacts delivered by the projects.

Emissions from construction





Emissions from running of buildings










Minimise waste: Reduce, reuse, recycle and compost e.g. reducing use of single use plastic





Reduce water consumption





Minimise pollution (including air, land, water, light and noise)






Ensure resilience to the effects of climate change e.g. reducing flood risk, mitigating effects of drier, hotter summers







Enhance conservation and wildlife







Safeguard the distinctive characteristics, features and special qualities of North Yorkshire’s landscape





Projects which come forward under the SPF will be required to demonstrate their environmental impacts and measures taken to mitigate that.  Colleagues with specialist knowledge of climate impact will be asked to assess applications on this basis.



Other (please state below)








Are there any recognised good practice environmental standards in relation to this proposal? If so, please detail how this proposal meets those standards.


Projects submitted as part of the Shared Prosperity Fund will be required to meet the clean growth principle and must not conflict with the UK’s legal commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050.  The North Yorkshire SPF Investment Plan will include programmes aimed at decarbonising communities and business, protecting the environment and supporting bio-diversity.



Summary Summarise the findings of your impact assessment, including impacts, the recommendation in relation to addressing impacts, including any legal advice, and next steps. This summary should be used as part of the report to the decision maker.


The assessment reflects the fact that the Government requires that investment plans submitted as part of the Shared Prosperity Fund to reflect and recognise policies relating to net zero objectives or wider environmental considerations. 


Priorities and programmes identified in the investment plan include the decarbonisation of communities and businesses and the increased sustainability of communities.




Sign off section


This climate change impact assessment was completed by:



Mark Kibblewhite

Job title

Senior Policy Officer (Economic Growth)

Service area

Growth Planning and Trading Standards




Mark Kibblewhite

Completion date



Authorised by relevant Assistant Director (signature): David Caulfield, Assistant Director, Growth, Planning and Trading Standards