More Than Human – Asking rivers, trees and birds how we should use the land

Imagine a world where decisions aren’t just made with humans in mind — but also informed by the living world. Where important choices about the land are made in dialogue with rivers, trees, birds, and soil…

That’s the vision I held earlier this year at Foodrise, as we prepared our response to the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs’s (Defra) long-awaited Land Use Framework for England ahead of setting its vision and strategy. 

When Defra finally invited contributions to its new framework, we welcomed the opportunity. But while there was much to welcome in the framework, I was struck – though not surprised – by its deeply human-centred lens. It was all about producing food for humans, providing housing for humans, protecting ecosystems for humans. 

For whom? Always, and only, for humans. 

At a time when ecosystems are collapsing and species are disappearing, I was dismayed that the government department responsible for the environment and rural life wasn’t putting the needs of other species front and centre. 

The living world was framed as a service provider – a backdrop and resource. But when policy only reflects human interests and economic needs, the results are catastrophic to the ecological systems we rely on. 

If Defra isn’t for the curlew, the barn owl, the river, the ash and the oak — who in government is? 

That is why we partnered with Moral Imaginations and wyrd futures to host an Interspecies Council. This process, developed by Moral Imaginations, invites more-than-human voices into the policy-making conversation. It recognises the simple truth: humans are not separate from nature, but deeply embedded within it. Our health, food systems, futures and stories are bound to the lands, waters, and beings we live alongside. 

So in April, 35 beings — from oak to river, earthworm to pig, mayfly to moss — gathered in London. Represented by human participants in deep listening and embodied storytelling, each species shared what it needed from the land, and from us. 

What emerged was a strong cry for help. Frustration. Outrage. 

The species called for a transformation in how Defra understands and governs land. They urged a shift from viewing land as a resource to recognising it as a relationship. They called for a move away from notions of land ownership to responsibility; from short to longer term and multiple time scales; and from governing and stewarding to being in partnership with the living world. For many of us in the room, the process was extremely moving. 

From that council, we crafted a formal response to the Land Use Framework drawn entirely from the voices of the species and submitted it to Defra. In June, I had the privilege of sharing this work at the British Ecological Symposium on Nature, Farming and Food, where it sparked curiosity and conversation.

Will Defra listen to the voice of earthworm? Of river? Of oak? 

The answer is we don’t yet know. The final Land Use Framework is expected this Autumn. But we’ve already heard on the grapevine that our response stood out and sparked conversations among civil servants working on this. 

But I hope the government takes heed of earthworm’s wisdom, before it’s too late. As the proverb goes: “The cut worm forgives the plough, but is increasingly running out of the capacity to forgive.” Meaning even the most forgiving of entities has its limits.  

Below, you’ll find our case study and a participant video which offers a broader reflection on what we heard, what we felt, and what we now carry forward. My hope is that it inspires others to try similar approaches and demonstrates that governance can centre not just human life, but all life. 

— Carina, Executive Director, Foodrise

Click here to read the Case Study.