Aipedia: Ecologists and environmental consultants

CIEEM, ISEP and the Planning Inspectorate on AI: what applies to ecologists

Aipedia, by the Apex broking team · Last reviewed 2026-10-30

CIEEM has no AI practice guidance, so ecologists rely on its Code of Professional Conduct, ISEP’s advice note on AI in EIA and the Planning Inspectorate’s AI declaration. Together they decide what a competent ecologist is expected to do when AI touches survey, assessment or evidence work.

Part of: AI in Ecologists and environmental consultants

In short

As at October 2026 there is no statutory regulator of ecologists and CIEEM has not published AI guidance for practice. The CIEEM Code still applies: clause 3 limits you to work within your competence, clause 4 requires accuracy and regard to published guidance, clause 6 covers supervision and clause 10 makes you responsible for your decisions. CIEEM’s March 2026 Membership Regulations require AI declarations in applications. ISEP’s November 2025 advice note asks EIA practitioners to verify outputs, keep an audit trail and declare tools in the EIA report. The Planning Inspectorate requires AI use in casework evidence to be declared.

The landscape at a glance

Four sources shape how an ecologist or environmental consultant should approach AI. None of them is legislation, but each can be used as evidence of the standard a competent practitioner should meet:

Source	Date	Status	What it says about AI
CIEEM Code of Professional Conduct	Revised January 2022	Binding on members; enforced through disciplinary procedures	Nothing directly; general duties apply
CIEEM Membership Regulations V1.8	March 2026	Binding on applicants	Declare generative AI use in applications; lists acceptable and unacceptable uses
ISEP advice note Using AI in EIA	20 November 2025	Guidance	Verification, audit trail, declaring tools in the EIA report, AI policies and training
Planning Inspectorate AI casework guidance	6 September 2024, updated 23 September 2026	Procedural requirement for casework evidence	Declare intentional AI use and the checks made; costs risk for improper use

CIEEM: the Code still governs AI-assisted work

CIEEM is the chartered body for ecologists and runs the Code of Professional Conduct, the Registered Practice scheme and disciplinary procedures. The Code does not mention technology, software or AI, but several clauses map directly onto it:

Clause 3: only undertake work you are competent to do and seek help beyond it. Using an auto-ID tool or habitat classifier you cannot check is a competence question.
Clause 4: act with objectivity, relevance, accuracy, proportionality and impartiality, having regard to published technical guidance and standards. AI outputs that are unverified or depart from accepted methods sit uneasily with this.
Clause 6: ensure those working for you are appropriately qualified, trained, competent, supervised and supported. That extends to junior staff using AI.
Clause 10: accept responsibility for your professional actions and decisions. AI does not shift that responsibility.

The supplementary notes add that members work with due skill, care and diligence, state the limitations of information relied on, record evidence for any departure from published guidance and treat confidentiality as an ethical principle. The Code of Practice for Registered Practices (March 2019) applies at firm level.

CIEEM’s 2026 rules on AI in membership applications

The Membership Regulations V1.8 (March 2026) include a section on "The use of Generative AI in applications". CIEEM takes a transparent, guidance-based approach rather than a ban. Applicants must declare AI use. Refining ideas and checking grammar are acceptable; inflating or inventing experience, submitting unedited generic responses and giving AI an organisation’s sensitive data are not. CIEEM may use AI detection and reject applications where unacceptable use is proven.

These rules apply to applications, not to client work. They are still a clear signal of how CIEEM views unverified generic text and the sharing of sensitive data with AI tools.

ISEP: Using AI in EIA

ISEP launched its advice note on 20 November 2025 (launch report). As its lead author described it for CIWEM, the note sets out these expectations:

practitioners remain responsible for all outputs and must understand each tool’s strengths and weaknesses;
all AI outputs should be checked against the underlying evidence, with an audit trail kept;
the EIA report should state which tool was used, when and for what purpose;
outputs must withstand challenge and match accepted methods and professional standards;
AI supports judgement and does not replace it; firms should adopt AI policies and train staff on data ethics, data management and prompt design.

The note names poor input data, interpretability and accountability, sensitive data and third-party sharing, bias and erosion of entry-level skills as the main risks.

The Planning Inspectorate declaration

The Planning Inspectorate guidance applies to appeals and NSIP examinations in England and Wales. Intentional use of AI to draft, summarise or analyse material, or to generate or alter images, must be declared, with the checks made and confirmation that you take responsibility for accuracy. Each expert declares for their own documents, so an ecologist cannot rely on the lead consultant’s statement. Improper use may lead to a costs award. The guidance was updated on 23 September 2026 on how to declare.

The Castle Way Energy NSIP scoping report (June 2026, reference EN0110037) shows the practice: its AI Usage Statement cites the guidance, limits AI to baseline review and summarisation in some chapters, and records that no AI was used in the ecology and biodiversity chapter.

What it means in practice and for PI

Read together, the sources point to a consistent standard: verify, record, declare where asked, and keep judgement with a competent person. A firm that can show this is in a stronger position if a client alleges negligence. Failure to follow the guidance does not by itself create liability, but it may be used as evidence that the work fell below the expected standard.

For PI, a claim arising from AI-assisted work is usually treated like any other negligence claim, subject to the policy terms. CIEEM expects appropriate PI but sets no minimum. Proposal forms may ask about technology; answer accurately. See AI in ecology chapters of EIA reports, AI in evidence at appeals and does ecologists’ PI cover AI errors. The ecology Aipedia hub links every guide, and Apex arranges cover for environmental consultants and ecologists.

Sources

Frequently asked

Is the ISEP advice note binding?

No. It is guidance from a professional body for environmental and impact assessment practitioners. It can still be cited as evidence of good practice, so departing from it without a recorded reason may be hard to defend if an EIA is challenged or a client claims.

Do CIEEM’s AI rules apply to my client work?

The March 2026 AI rules in the Membership Regulations apply to membership applications. Client work is governed by the Code of Professional Conduct, whose duties of competence, accuracy, supervision and responsibility apply whether or not you use AI.

Does my ecology sub-consultant need to make their own Planning Inspectorate declaration?

Yes. The Planning Inspectorate guidance says each expert declares AI use for their own documents. An ecologist providing a proof of evidence or chapter should make their own declaration rather than relying on the lead consultant.

Has CIEEM disciplined anyone for AI misuse?

As at October 2026 there was no CIEEM disciplinary outcome, court ruling or regulator warning involving AI use by an ecologist or environmental consultant. That may change as AI use grows.

Check your PI covers how you use AI

Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.

Start a PI quote Request a callback

Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.