Category:

By Elizabeth Mills, Young Sea Changers Scotland

“50% of young people do not understand how the ocean impacts them or in turn how they impact the ocean.”

In February 2025, Back to Blue released their findings from a global ocean literacy survey of over 3,500 responses aged 18-24 and highlighted what they referred to as the ‘great disconnect’ between young people and our seas. Ocean literacy is defined as the understanding of the ocean’s influence on us and our influence on the ocean.

All young people deserve to be able to connect, learn and be heard in spaces where decisions are made around our seas. This blog reflects on what environmental organisations can learn from this study to help address this gap for the young people of Scotland.

It’s so important to ensure we have high levels of ocean literacy among young people as they will inherit our seas. Only with an ocean literate society can we truly understand how important healthy and resilient seas are for our society and how we can restore and protect them for future generations.

One of our Young Sea Changers Scotland members, Cat Ferguson, reflects on one barrier to this:

“It isn’t mandatory in school to understand how interconnected our health is with the planet’s. The reliance of fish stocks, clean water and a regulated climate on the continued stability of our ocean system risks never being discussed in some circles or being lost in the mass of information bombarding young minds.”

For those working in the environmental sector, it is sometimes easy to take for granted how much access to knowledge surrounding our oceans we have, how easily we are often invited into spaces to learn more, input on decisions and are supported to do so by our organisations. But with this access to knowledge, we must also ensure that others, particularly those who are often underrepresented in those areas, including young people, are given opportunities and space to engage with science and nature.  

The Back to Blue survey found that around half of young people rely on print media, social media and film for ocean information, while only around one in three turn to educational courses. But these statistics also highlight a great opportunity for environmental organisations to help address the ocean knowledge gap through sharing ocean-related content on their social media platforms. Well-curated and engaging educational content can spark young people’s curiosity into what is going on beneath the waves and motivate them to take action. As Cat concludes, “with the increase in social media use and trends, there are opportunities to take ocean and planet health to the forefront of young people’s minds.” 

But knowledge does not automatically lead to behaviour change. Access to – and connection with – our oceans is just as crucial.  

“As a young person, your mind is pulled in a hundred different directions when navigating the transition from teenage years to adulthood. Finding time and opportunities to visit or cultivate appreciation and understanding for the ocean is difficult when you’re only just managing in so many other areas” Cat highlights. The Back to Blue survey found that 38% of people cited lack of time, 35% lack of transportation and 25% lack of opportunity barriers to connect with the ocean.

This has implications then for support for ocean action. As the old saying goes, “you can’t protect what you don’t love.”  That’s why at YSCS we have launched the Youth Ocean Action Fund to support activities that foster connection, community, and creativity, as well as opportunities to become upskilled in marine advocacy.  

As Cat powerfully shared: “I sometimes consider it to be quite difficult for me to engage with the ocean in a way that isn’t dread. So many conversations surrounding the ocean and climate focus on everything that is wrong, but the majority of my love for the deep blue has been cultivated quietly and with the privilege of spending lots of time there as a child. Even in Glasgow, not far from the sea, many children and young people hardly see it, let alone have time to worry about the problems facing it. With no time to create a bond with our seas, and the narratives being predominantly negative, why would young people spend hard-earned money and time on it?” 

This reflection gets to the heart of the issue: if young people aren’t given the time, tools, and space to build a meaningful relationship with the ocean, how can we expect them to care for it?  

I encourage everyone to read the rest of Black to Blue report, which offers a powerful breakdown of the gaps between young people and ocean literacy. We have a collective responsibility to bridge this gap by removing the barriers and pressures that have led to the ‘great disconnect’. Every organisation in this space has the chance to lead the way in making ocean engagement more accessible and empowering.  

And personally, when I too feel discouraged about the future of our oceans, I only have to look at my experience engaging with young people through my work at YSCS.  I have seen first hand how powerful it can be to support and uplift young people. It is much easier to see hope for our oceans knowing the next generation is stepping up with the skills and support to make change.    

No comments yet

This is the final blog in a series looking at the four sections of the Natural Environment Bill. You can look back at Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.

One of the standout artworks at the National Galleries of Scotland is the immediately recognisable Monarch of the Glen, a 19^th century painting of a stag in a Highland landscape. It is an image which has been widely reproduced, used in advertising and to promote tourism. The painting was bought for the nation at a cost of millions. Yet it is described by the National Galleries website as “loved and loathed” and “sometimes hard to stomach” due to the association of stag hunting with the Highland clearances.

The painting, and the public’s mixed views towards it, illustrates the complicated relationship Scotland has with deer. Deer are some of Scotland’s most charismatic and beloved wildlife. But, at the current population numbers, they are also an enormous environmental problem.

The recent article by Duncan Orr-Ewing, Convener of LINK’s Deer Group, summarises the environmental challenges posed by unsustainable deer numbers and the background to the current proposals in the Natural Environment Bill. In short, there are far too many deer, their numbers have a significant impact on vital woodland and peatland habitats, and attempts to control their numbers to date have failed.

The Scottish Government estimate that there are around one million deer and “aim to reduce this to a level which habitats and ecosystems can recover and regenerate and deer densities are maintained at sustainable levels by about half by 2030.”

Powers of public intervention

Deer management is regulated by the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996. The Natural Environment Bill makes multiple changes to the Deer Act, with the intention of enabling more effective deer management and ultimately reducing deer densities to support ecological recovery.

Central to this is improved powers of intervention. The Bill’s policy memorandum states that the policy intention is to “remove unnecessary barriers to effective control and put in place measures to ensure that public interests are protected” and that a “more efficient use of intervention powers in the public interest is critical.”

The Bill approaches this by:

• Adding a new requirement for NatureScot to safeguard the public interest in relation to deer
• Adding a new ground for intervention for the purpose of nature restoration

NatureScot currently have grounds to intervene in deer management to prevent damage. These powers involve entering into a voluntary agreement with a landowner (Section 7) or making deer management measures compulsory (Section 8). However, these powers have been underutilised – the power to introduce a control scheme was used for the first time this April. 

The new ground for intervention will allow NatureScot to pursue deer management to support the preservation, protection, restoration or enhancement of the natural environment, or in support of any relevant target, strategy or plan relating to the environment, climate change or biodiversity. This will allow for the use of Section 7 and Section 8 powers to support the objectives of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy and the achievement of nature restoration and climate targets. In practice, this could be a significant step forward for efforts to support the natural regeneration and colonisation of our woodlands and the protection of our peatlands.

Other changes in the Bill

The Bill makes a number of changes building on the recommendations of the Deer Working Group. These are listed in full on p.52-56 of the policy memorandum. Changes in the Bill include improvements to NatureScot’s investigatory powers and allowing NatureScot to permit deer killing during the close season and at night.

Top image: Calum McLennan

No comments yet

This article was first published in the Scotland on Sunday on 25 May 2025.

The day before David Attenborough’s film Ocean was released in cinemas worldwide, an extraordinary exchange took place in the Scottish parliament. MSPs Fergus Ewing and Jackson Carlaw agreed that the Scottish fishing fleet had been severely depleted by ‘over-regulation’. Ewing also cited ‘the influence of NGOs’ (non-governmental organisations).

In reality, the long decline of Scotland’s traditional coastal fishing fleet stems not from environmental regulation, but from a lack of fish. It can be traced back to policy decisions that have favoured industrial fishing methods over traditional, low-impact practices, allowing bottom trawlers and scallop dredgers to operate close to shore, leading to the degradation of vital spawning and nursery habitats. This shift resulted in the collapse of local fish stocks and the marginalisation of small-scale fishers.

Neither Fergus Ewing nor Jackson Carlaw is currently a government minister. But the narrative that pits environmental protection against the economic survival of fishing communities could be behind the total absence of marine nature protection from John Swinney’s programme for government.

Scotland has, on paper, a network of marine protected areas designated since 2014. The Scottish government is required by law to design and implement protections for each area, which in many cases will mean restricting bottom trawling and dredging while allowing small-scale, lower impact fishing to continue. Yet these measures have been delayed again and again, leaving our marine ‘protected’ areas largely unprotected.

Since winning the last Holyrood election in 2021, the current Scottish government has repeatedly promised to get these crucial protections in place. Its first programme for government, in September that year, committed to getting the job done by March 2024 at the latest. Marine protected areas also featured in 2023 and 2024.

Then in 2025 – nothing. The sea doesn’t even get a mention in the environment section of this year’s flagship policy announcement.

To be fair to the government, it has completed the statutory public consultation on protections for offshore marine protected areas – those between 12 and 200 nautical miles from the shore.

But it hasn’t even consulted yet on measures for inshore areas – those up to 12 nautical miles from the shore. These coastal waters are where most of Scotland’s fishing fleet operates. They are incredibly rich in marine life, and they include the spawning and nursery habitats that are vital for fish stocks – and for fishing.

Both sets of marine protected areas desperately need protection. To this day, due to the absence of protection measures, destructive bottom-towed fishing methods including trawling are permitted in most of them,  devastating fragile habitats like maerl beds and flame shell reefs where many fish breed and grow to maturity. There is also evidence that disturbing the seabed releases stored carbon, exacerbating climate change.

Attenborough’s film makes it clear that saving the sea is vital to saving the planet.

But getting the long-delayed fisheries management measures in place in our marine protected areas is not only a crucial step towards restoring our seas to health. It’s essential for the future of Scotland’s small-scale inshore fishing industry. More protection means more fish, means more local, sustainable jobs.

The idea that protecting and restoring our seas and supporting the future of fishing are opposing interests holds no water. Instead of delays and silence from the Scottish government, we need accountability and action.

Esther Brooker, marine policy and engagement officer, Scottish Environment LINK

No comments yet

Bees are some of Scotland’s most loved insects. They can be found buzzing around our gardens, in grasslands, on our coasts, in wetlands and even up mountains. Whilst many will be familiar with one species in particular – the honeybee – bees are in fact very diverse: they come in many different sizes, rely on different flowers for food, and some bees live in colonies whereas many more are solitary.

The 20^th May marks UN World Bee Day – a day to recognise the essential roles that bees and other pollinators play in our natural environment and in our day-to-day lives. And, with 115 different species of bee recorded in Scotland, there’s a lot to celebrate!

The theme of this year’s UN World Bee Day, as the title of this blog suggests, acknowledges the critical importance of bees and other pollinators in food production. Indeed, bees are one of the most significant groups of pollinating insects – all of which we depend upon for pollinating 80% of our wild and cultivated plants[i]. In financial terms, pollination by bees and other insects is estimated to add over £600 million per year to the UK economy, with an estimated replacement cost of a staggering £1.8 billion[ii] if we were to try to pay people to hand-pollinate crops without bees.

Despite their critical importance, these remarkable insects are under threat. In 2024, UK bumblebee numbers declined by almost a quarter (22.5%) compared to the 2010-2023 average[iii]. More broadly, pollinator numbers in the UK have declined by 24% since 1980[iv]  and the number of flying insects sampled on vehicle number plates across Scotland has fallen by a shocking 65% since 2021[v].

With threats including habitat loss and fragmentation, the widespread use of pesticides and climate change and extreme weather, it’s clear that our wild bees and other pollinators need support. These declines also have far-reaching implications for our countryside and our ability to produce healthy, affordable food.

To mark UN World Bee Day and to raise awareness of the plight of our wild bees and pollinators, Scottish Environment LINK were joined by five MSP Nature Champions (Patrick Harvie MSP, Roz McCall MSP, Mark Ruskell MSP, Graham Simpson MSP and Evelyn Tweed MSP) for a special bee visit, hosted by the University of Stirling.

As part of this visit, MSPs heard from Senior Lecturer, Dr Gema Martin-Ordas, who is leading on some fascinating research at the University of Stirling into bee cognition. Dr Martin-Ordas took us on a tour of her lab and described how her recent research has shown that bees are capable of logical reasoning – a skill that was once thought to be unique to humans – showing just how much there is still to learn about these extraordinary insects.

MSPs were then led on a ‘Wild Bee Safari’ around the campus by LINK colleagues from Bumblebee Conservation Trust and Buglife Scotland. On the safari, MSPs were able to get up close with different wild bee species to learn about their unique characteristics, before engaging in a competitive cross-party game of ‘Wild Bee Bingo’. These organisations also provided presentations on how they’re helping to recover bee and pollinator populations through projects such as B-lines and Skills for Bees, as well as highlighting the key actions that policymakers need to take to protect and restore Scotland’s pollinators.

With much to learn and admire about these ever-busy creatures, we hope that these MSP Nature Champions were able to ‘bee inspired’ to take their learning back into the Scottish Parliament and to be a voice for some of Scotland’s smallest inhabitants. After all, we simply cannot afford to lose them.

By Andrew Marks, Parliamentary Officer

[i] IPBES (2016). The assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on pollinators, pollination and food production. S.G. Potts, V. L. Imperatriz-Fonseca, and H. T. Ngo (eds). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany.

[ii] Potts S.G., Breeze T.D., Garratt M.P. & Senapathi G.D. (2023). The Role of Bees and Other Pollinators in the UK Food System – An Evidence Update. Written evidence submitted by University of Reading, School of Agriculture, policy and Development (INS0032), University of Reading, Berkshire, UK.

[iii] Comont, R. F., & Dickinson, H. (2025). BeeWalk Annual Report 2025.  Bumblebee Conservation Trust, Stirling, UK. Available at: https://www.bumblebeeconservation.org/publications/beewalk-annual-report-2025/

[iv] JNCC (2022). UK Biodiversity Indicators: Status of Pollinating Insects. Available at: https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi-pollinating-insects/

[v] Ball, L., Whitehouse, A., Bowen-Jones, E., Amor, M., Banfield, N., Hadaway, P. & Hetherington, P. (2024). The Bugs Matter Citizen Science Survey of Insect Abundance. Buglife, Peterborough. UK. Available at: www.buglife.org.uk/news/bugs-matter-survey-shows-ongoing-decline-in-uk-flying-insects

No comments yet

Guest blog from Plantlife Scotland

Nature Networks are starting to take root across Scotland – and wild plants and fungi are finally getting the attention they deserve.  

Plantlife Scotland have published guidance that offers practical recommendations to put plants and fungi at the heart of Nature Network plans. Bringing these essential groups into nature-recovery opportunity mapping will result in a more resilient landscape, rich in wild plants and fungi and the multitudes of species that they support.    

What are Nature Networks? 

Nature Networks are a new mechanism to map ecological corridors between existing wildlife-rich areas in Scotland. Creating Nature Networks offers a route to connect our most important sites for nature (the protected site network) with the wider landscape, allowing our species to move, adapt and thrive.  

Nature Networks are being planned from the bottom-up, led by Local Authorities, and the priorities they identify will help target public and private finance, and attract interest for future nature recovery projects.

For more information on the Nature Networks concept and its application see Nature Networks Toolbox | NatureScot.

Why is this guidance important? 

Creating Nature Networks can unlock action towards Scotland’s national and international targets to protect and restore nature. The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy identifies Nature Networks as a key process for targeting action for nature recovery to 2030 and beyond.

Local authorities, landowners and communities are being directly involved in Nature Network planning, mainstreaming nature recovery and empowering more people to shape a better future for nature and people.

What are the key recommendations?

Plantlife Scotland’s guidance signposts users to the best available data for mapping nature recovery opportunities, provides recommendations for spatial prioritisation, and outlines how other land use types can be improved for biodiversity. A closer look:

Grasslands
Species-rich grasslands are unsung heroes. They sustain a huge diversity of species, contribute significantly to carbon storage, and improve our food security and wellbeing. However, most species-rich grasslands have been lost over the last century.

Rainforest
Scotland’s temperate rainforests are a globally significant habitat, which we have an international responsibility to protect. Despite being an irreplaceable part of Scotland’s natural heritage only c.30,000 fragmented hectares remain. Their survival is threatened by habitat degradation and invasive species. 

…Supporting these superhero habitats by identifying them as high-priority core areas, and targeting degraded sites as priorities for restoration, will bring resilience and diversity to Nature Networks.

Species Recovery
Species are the building blocks of biodiversity, and preventing species loss is essential to protecting resilience. Establishing local species priorities and designing Nature Networks that support them is needed to ensure the recovery of species that are closest to extinction.

The document also promotes nature-positive land management practices such as wildlife-friendly Road Verge and Green Space management, ‘Right Tree, Right Place’ principles, low-input farming and non-destructive forestry techniques.

Final thoughts

Mainstreaming nature recovery will be essential to upscaling delivery, and this document aims to mainstream the restoration of wild plant and fungi across Scotland, to the benefit of all.

Read Plantlife’s new guidance

Top image: Calum McLennan

No comments yet

This is the third in a series of blogs looking at the Natural Environment Bill. Part 1 is available here and Part 2 is available here.

Most of the political energy around National Parks in recent years has related to the Scottish Government’s commitment to establish at least one new Park by the end of this parliament.

Scotland’s two existing National Parks – Loch Lomond & the Trossachs and Cairngorms – cover some of our most iconic sites for nature. The Parks were established in 2002 and 2003 respectively and the Park Authorities are required by law to support environmental aims alongside other responsibilities.

The establishment of a new National Park is not directly related to the Natural Environment Bill. The Galloway proposal has undergone public consultation and, if designated, this would be done under existing legislation. However, the Natural Environment Bill does make some changes to the legislative framework which underpins Scotland’s two existing National Parks and any Parks established in future.

The roots of these changes are in earlier consultation exercises which proposed changes to the statutory aims and governance of National Parks. The proposals to change the governance of Parks, and the proposal to create an “overarching purpose” for the Parks, have not been included in the Bill.

National Park aims

Scotland’s National Parks have four aims set out in law, relating to conserving the area’s natural and cultural heritage; promoting sustainable use of natural resources; promoting understanding and enjoyment of the area; and promoting sustainable economic and social development.

The Bill proposes modest changes to these aims, tweaking the language at points – such as changing “sustainable use of natural resources” to “sustainable management and use of natural resources”. 

The Bill however adds a new subsection following the four redrafted aims which includes a more specific list of activities designed to mirror the priorities of the existing Parks in practice. These include restoring biodiversity, tackling climate change, and supporting access and recreation.

The Bill’s policy memorandum explains that the redrafted aims are intended to “ensure that the legislation accurately underpins the work being undertaken by the National Parks”. This means that the changes to the aims are unlikely to lead to significant changes in the existing Parks, though it does provide some level of future-proofing.

The proposal to introduce an overarching purpose – of taking “leadership of nature recovery and a just transition to net zero” – has not been included. However, the existing law already contains a provision – known as the Sandford principle or National Park principle – that says where the aims of the Park are in conflict more weight should be given to the first aim (conserving and enhancing natural and cultural heritage).

Responsibilities of other public bodies

The Bill makes two changes to the responsibilities of public bodies, other than the Park Authority, working in a National Park.

The first is a new duty on public bodies, including Scottish Ministers and local authorities, to have regard to the aims of the National Park while carrying out any activity within a Park’s boundaries. This will be balanced against the other responsibilities of public bodies.

The second is a strengthening of the duties of public bodies specifically relating to the Park plans produced by each Park authority. This will change the current duty – to have regard to the plans – to require public bodies to facilitate the implementation of the plans. This change is welcome and should encourage more active collaboration across the public sector. It does however imply that Ministers feel a duty to have regard to, as is being introduced in the new duty, is not particularly impactful.

Access authorities

One change in the Bill specifically relevant to the proposed Galloway Park is the section on access authorities.

The 2003 Land Reform Act, which introduced the right of responsible access (“right to roam”), designated the two existing National Parks as access authorities, allowing the Park authorities to uphold access rights in their area. The 2003 Act does not provide the ability to allow any future Parks to become access authorities, an omission that this Bill will correct.

Fixed penalty notices

Finally, the Bill allows National Parks to issue fixed penalty notices related to local byelaws. Currently, fixed penalty notices can be issued for littering or fly-tipping offences under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (and only in Loch Lomond & Trossachs, as there are no byelaws in place in the Cairngorms). Any other byelaws can only be enforced through reports to the Crown Office.

Image: Sandra Graham

No comments yet

This is the second in a series of blogs looking at the Natural Environment Bill. Part 1 is available here.

In what is overall a positive piece of legislation, Part 2 of the Natural Environment Bill has raised considerable concerns within the environmental sector.

The Bill as introduced would give Ministers the power to amend two significant parts of environmental protection – Environmental Impact Assessment legislation and the habitats regulations.

Why this matters

Together, EIA legislation and the habitats regulations act as vital pieces of environmental protection.

EIA legislation requires that the environmental impacts of major developments are understood and scrutinised. This allows decision makers to understand how the negative impact of a development can be mitigated, and to block developments where the impact would be unacceptable.

The habitats regulations refer to protections for the conservation of natural habitats, wildlife and wild plants. The regulations required the designation of a network of protected areas (Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas) which encompass our most important sites for nature: including ancient woodlands, peatbogs, rivers and lochs, and more.

Background

Both EIA legislation and the habitats regulations are domestic law which have their origins in European Union directives and were initially implemented as a result of our EU membership.

The Bill’s policy memorandum explains that, as a result of Brexit and the repeal of the European Communities Act, Scottish Ministers have lost powers to amend EIA legislation and the habitats regulations that were previously used.

But the powers under the European Communities Act allowed Ministers to modify regulations in line with European law. This flexibility was necessary so that changes to the law at a European level could be implemented domestically. But Ministers could not radically change or undermine the level of protection for nature.

If the Bill is implemented as is currently drafted, there would be no such European backstop preventing the weakening of these vital environmental protections.

Henry VIII powers

Usually, existing law can only be amended by the passage of new primary legislation (an Act). In some cases, Ministers can use so-called “Henry VIII powers” to amend the law by secondary legislation

Secondary legislation has nowhere near the same level of scrutiny and oversight as primary legislation. Unlike Bills, parliament cannot amend secondary legislation, and can simply approve or reject government proposals. The use of Henry VIII powers is at times controversial, and is not appropriate for significant changes in the law.

Purposes for modification

As introduced the Bill includes six purposes for which Ministers could use their Henry VIII powers to modify existing regulations. These six purposes include allowing regulation “to improve and simplify the law” or “to take account of changes in technology”. The Bill does not include a non-regression clause which would prevent these powers from being used to weaken environmental protection.

When consulted on prior to the introduction of the Bill, concerns were raised over a lack of detail on how these powers would be used. The policy memorandum provides some examples, though argues that it is not possible to anticipate all uses of the power with the legislation needing to be “future-proof”.

The examples cited include minor technical changes to EIA operation in forestry and allowing a move away from requiring physical paper copies of EIA reports. It also includes examples implying materially significant changes to the operation of the regulations, including facilitating the development of renewable energy at pace and scale, and taking a more flexible approach to the management of protected sites. These examples may be significantly more controversial than ending hard copies of documents.

There is however a bigger picture. The current intentions of policymakers, whether Ministers or civil servants, might be entirely benign. But this legislation could stand for decades, and the enabling powers could be used in future to deliberately undermine environmental protections unless the Bill protects against this. It is essential that the Bill – introduced to drive the restoration of nature – does not unintentionally undermine it.

No comments yet

This is the first in a series of blogs looking at the Natural Environment Bill.

The Natural Environment Bill, introduced in February and currently undergoing parliamentary scrutiny, will introduce legal targets for nature restoration as well as making changes to National Parks, deer management, and the powers to modify environmental protections. This blog will consider the introduction of nature targets, with the other parts of the Bill to be explored in future blogs.

Legal nature targets is a long-standing demand of the Scottish environmental sector and mark the only outstanding ask of the Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign, launched in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum. The government committed to introducing these targets in the Bute House Agreement, though the legislation was delayed. Following the collapse of the SNP-Green deal, LINK launched the Scotland Loves Nature campaign to push for the Bill, which was included in the 2024-25 Programme for Government.

Why targets?

Targets alone will not restore nature. Setting a target in law does not guarantee it will be met – as has become painfully clear in the context of climate targets. But statutory targets do increase the momentum towards action and build in accountability if targets are missed.

Scotland’s child poverty targets are a good example of how legal commitments can drive meaningful policy action and accountability. Recent headlines focused on the government missing its interim target. But the setting of these targets was followed by the introduction of the Scottish Child Payment, a groundbreaking policy which has kept 100,000 children out of poverty. Poverty in Scotland is lower than it would have been without these legal targets, and the political pressure to meet these targets ensures that child poverty remains as one of the government’s key objectives.

Timeline for delivery

Nature targets have been introduced in England, through the 2021 Environment Act, and in the EU, through the 2024 Nature Restoration Law. Both the English and EU approaches include interim targets for 2030 as a milestone on the way to 2050 targets (while the English legislation requires some measures to be met by 2042).

The Natural Environment Bill itself is silent on most of the key details of the targets to be introduced, including the dates they should be met. However, the policy memorandum recommits to the broad timeline included in the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy, for Scotland to be “Nature Positive by 2030, and to have restored and regenerated biodiversity across the country by 2045”.

The Natural Environment Bill will receive royal assent in 2026 and at that point become an Act. The Bill requires that draft targets are laid as regulations within 12 months of section 1 of the Act coming into force. Realistically, the regulations are unlikely to be introduced prior to next year’s election, meaning the second half of 2026 would be the earliest they would be in place.

What targets?

The Bill sets out three areas where Ministers must introduce targets: the condition or extent of any habitat; the status of threatened species; and the environmental conditions for nature regeneration. There is also a fourth “any other matter” topic should Ministers choose to introduce a target which does not fit within the habitat, species, or environmental conditions topics.

An important note is that the Bill requires “at least” one target under the habitat, species, and environmental conditions topics. In practice, there is likely to be a suite of metrics under these topic headings, which will be necessary to capture the complexity of biodiversity.

The Bill also sets out requirements for Ministers to take scientific advice on the setting the targets and appoints Environmental Standards Scotland as an independent oversight body. There is also a process built in for where a target is not met or where Ministers believe a target can no longer be met. 

How the Bill can be improved

With the Bill setting a framework for targets rather than targets themselves, the key details will be determined by regulation in the future. This approach is broadly appropriate considering the complexity of biodiversity and the need to avoid counterproductive or overly simplistic metrics in primary legislation – there is no biodiversity equivalent to the ‘net emissions’ metric at the heart of climate legislation.

Despite this, there are a number of ways in which the Bill could be strengthened:

• The drafting of the existing target topics should be amended to ensure that targets cover both habitat quality and extent, and cover species in decline and not simply, as currently drafted, “threatened species”.
• A wider range of compulsory target areas could be included. In particular the Bill would benefit from targets related to ecological connectivity (the delivery of a “national Nature Network”) and reversal of biodiversity loss against a historic baseline (the Biodiversity Intactness Index).
• The mechanism used to introduce targets is through amendment of the existing biodiversity duty on public bodies. The duty requires public bodies to “have regard” to biodiversity – this should be strengthened to require public bodies to facilitate progress towards the targets.

By Dan Paris, Scottish Environment LINK’s Director of Policy & Engagement

Image: Deborah Long

No comments yet

This first appeared in The National, on Saturday 5th April 2025.

When Scotland votes in the Holyrood election next year there will be voters casting their ballot who were born in 2010, when Scotland had its fourth First Minister and was preparing for the fourth election of the devolution era.

Devolution is not new – and the fact that decisions on key areas like health, education and the environment are taken in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast is now taken for granted.

But devolution has not been unchanging. While Holyrood has gained additional powers over its lifetime it has also, in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum, had its hands tied across a range of areas that were previously within the Scottish Government’s power.

The UK Internal Market Act was introduced to replace the European single market we were leaving, and sought to ensure that businesses could continue to trade across the UK. So far, so uncontroversial.

But in practice the UK internal market has had major implications – most notably in the case of Scotland’s planned Deposit Return Scheme, which faced an eleventh-hour intervention from UK Ministers and was subsequently paused and kicked into the long grass.

Deposit return is a well understood concept which exists elsewhere. Ireland introduced its  scheme just last year. If Scotland had introduced its own scheme before Brexit we would all now be used to returning our bottles to the supermarket – but what is possible within the European single market was blocked within the UK internal market.

The UK Government is currently reviewing the Internal Market Act and has made positive noises about the need to improve its operation. This is a welcome opportunity to revisit legislation which has – intentionally or unintentionally – undermined the devolution settlement.

There is of course a need to harmonise trade across the UK. But there is also a wider point of principle at stake. The Scottish Government, with vast responsibility for the environment and able to set climate targets and to regulate a wide range of activities, should be able to introduce a recycling scheme.

The issues with the Act go beyond deposit return. Other policy areas have faced complications because of Internal Market rules, and straightforward steps like ending the environmentally destructive use of peat in garden compost, or banning rodent glue traps, have been dragged into a constitutional tug-of-war.

This is a result of the unnecessarily strict approach to managing the internal market. As the Act focuses on the trade of goods, it limits the ability of devolved governments to intervene at the point a product is sold. Even minor and proportionate measures, relating to areas of devolved responsibility, are blocked – and this can only be overturned by the administration in question seeking an exemption from the UK government.

One of the strengths of devolution has always been the ability of each nation to pursue its own priorities, to innovate, and to learn from each other. This was possible under the European single market without damaging trade across the UK. Now, the internal market is having a chilling effect across policymaking, with necessary measures not pursued or dragged into the bureaucratic and politically contentious territory of exemptions.

The environmental sector across the UK is united in seeing the Internal Market Act as an unnecessary blocker to action – a viewpoint shared by the constitutional experts who have given evidence on the review to Holyrood. A system which allows the devolved governments to take proportionate steps without first receiving permission from the UK government is possible. The UK Government has the chance to listen to these pleas and to redesign the internal market to respect devolution.

Dan Paris, Director of Policy and Engagement at Scottish Environment LINK

No comments yet

By Leigh Abbott, Nature for All Officer at Scottish Environment LINK

The final EDI Fortnight as part of the Nature for All project  begins in less than a week’s time, and we are very excited to learn, share, and change our practices to put diversity and inclusion at the forefront of our work in the environment sector.

It will be held on the 7th, 8th and 9th, and the 14th and 15th of April, with extra special talks on the 23rd of April. We have a busy schedule with lots of requested online talks and workshops from our member organisations provided to you, for free! This includes:

• Six LINK member organisation talks on EDI to share, learn, and support each other.
• A session on neuro-inclusive leaders from Differing Minds, including a toolkit to take away with you.
• A workshop on supporting young carers and young people from low socioeconomic class, led by Caitlin Turner.
• A session on employing people on work visas, from an immigration consultant and Nourish Scotland.
• A webinar on supporting others with their mental health from Scottish Action for Mental Health (capped at 50 participants).
• A workshop progressing from last year’s Jo Yuen session, ‘From Awareness to Action’ (capped at 25 participants)
• A workshop on handling difficult conversations from the National Trust for Scotland (capped at 30 participants)

If you work for a LINK member organisation, you can register your place for the online talks and workshops via Eventbrite.

Why register?

Nature is for all, and nature needs all of us. The more voices we have to tackle environmental issues; the better the Scottish environment will be for it.

The scale of the climate and nature crises demands that it’s not enough to know about these issues – we need action to make the change we want to see, and for people to feel that they belong in the environment sector. Progress requires change and you will learn these skills via the talks, training, and workshops provided by the EDI Fortnight.

But don’t just take my word for it, here’s some quotes from our previous EDI Fortnight attendees:

“These events have been invaluable”

“The fortnight has been of great value to our organisation and we have saved all the slides and resources in our internal EDI folder to share the learning even wider. Thanks so much!”

“A more diverse insight into the world around me”

“Listening to the discussions gave me an opportunity to hear others worries and experiences which will help put anti-racism into practice by appreciating and understanding this better”

“I felt really comfortable to participate. It was also super informative and functional – I think everyone was able to take away some positive actions”

Remember: Every. Action. Counts. No matter the size.

So why not come along, share and learn alongside our members and try and make the environment sector the best place to work and volunteer, for everyone.

Register your place for the online talks and workshops via Eventbrite.

Top image: Ross MacDonald / SNS Group

No comments yet