Later this year, the UK will host 195 world leaders at an international climate summit in Glasgow. Also known as COP26, the talks will be a crucial opportunity for the global community to come together to find solutions to the climate crisis.
But fewer people are aware of another key summit this year: the international talks taking place to address the equally urgent nature crisis. The COP15 biodiversity summit will take place in Kunming, China. To date it may not have attracted the same level of attention as its climate counterpart, but there’s a lot riding on success at the talks.
What is the Convention on Biological Diversity?
At the landmark 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, world leaders agreed to three Conventions as mechanisms to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals: the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). Each is governed by the Conference of the Parties (COP), where world leaders meet to review progress and take decisions that advance the delivery of the convention’s objectives.
COPs take place every two years under the CBD, with this year’s COP being the fifteenth meeting. The CBD’s purpose is to conserve and ensure the sustainable use of biological diversity at every level.
At the 2010 talks in Nagoya, Japan, 194 countries (or parties) signed up to a series of 20 targets to be met by 2020. Dubbed the Aichi targets after the region in which Nagoya sits, they were created to address a wide variety of issues in support of global biodiversity. Following the conference, signatories were also required to devise national biodiversity plans to meet the targets. In the UK, biodiversity is a devolved policy issue, and so the devolved governments are responsible for creating and delivering their own action, while the UK Government’s plans pertain to England.
Fast forward a decade to 2020, and the5th Global Biodiversity Outlook report revealed that these targets were spectacularly missed across the world. Despite world leaders promising a decade of concerted efforts to tackle the inexorable decline of nature, the world collectively failed to meet a single one of the 20 targets. The UK, and each of the four nations, also failed in their contribution towards this global goal. This lack of progress and the deepening ecological emergency make it clear that while the last UN decade on biodiversity failed, this coming decade on ecosystem restoration cannot.
What’s the plan for COP15?
As if a triple bill of all three Convention meetings in the Autumn wasn’t enough, this year’s biodiversity summit is also an especially important one. As parties prepare to meet in Kunming, initial plans for the new post-2020 biodiversity framework have already been drawn up. The final version will be decided at the conference but is expected to include an agreement to put global biodiversity on the path to recovery by 2030, and a target to protect 30% of the Earth’s land and seas by 2030.
We cannot afford to make the same mistakes and miss these targets a second time. The evidence is clear that continuing nature’s destruction will lead to thousands more extinctions, pose a serious risk to global food insecurity, and increase the likelihood of further pandemics like Covid-19. And as the climate crisis worsens, degraded ecosystems also limit our resilience and ability to adapt to extreme weather events.
What role can the four countries of the UK play in influencing the outcome of COP15?
A new international deal for nature must be matched by domestic ambition to bend the curve of biodiversity loss and deliver commitments made under the CBD. The UK has a strong opportunity to lead, taking advantage of the cross-over with the UNFCCC presidency for COP26 and the G7 presidency. In each country, the political attractiveness of adopting a global leadership role offers the opportunity to leverage greater ambition in national agendas, linking the credibility of negotiating positions to the strength of domestic actions.
In September 2020, the UK Prime Minister announced a commitment to protect 30% of the UK’s land by 2030. In December 2020, the Scottish Government committed to protect 30% of Scotland’s land for nature by 2030, in the ‘Statement of Intent on Biodiversity’. The four Links also welcomed the recent Edinburgh Declaration on post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, which has called for a collective commitment from subnational Governments, cities, and local authorities to raise ambition for nature’s recovery. This is especially important given that most of the land and sea area that is legally protected for nature in the UK is within the jurisdiction of the devolved governments.
However, whilst these announcements are welcomed, all four countries of the UK need to show that they are serious about tackling the biodiversity crisis by translating these promises into genuine action on the ground. We want to see:
Targets:Setting a global goal for the restoration of species and habitats on land, at sea, and in freshwater habitats would be a good place to start. Going into the talks with this already put in place across the four countries of the UK would send a clear signal to other leaders to follow suit. There are opportunities to do this through a State of Nature Amendment to the Environment Bill in England, and similarly through an Environment Bill and the next Biodiversity Strategy in Northern Ireland. To meet the ambitious commitments set out in the Scottish Government’s statement of intent, Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy must contain ambitious and meaningful targets, and be supported with the resources needed to deliver nature’s recovery. In Wales, we are calling for new legislation on environmental governance, to introduce new legally binding nature recovery targets.
Measures to tackle the drivers of biodiversity loss:Targets must be accompanied by a clear plan for how to reach them. The 30×30 initiative could play an important part in any plans, provided protected areas are effectively managed and monitored. At the moment, however, sites protected for nature are often in poor condition and sites designated for landscapes like National Parks do not have clear legal requirements for nature’s recovery. Drivers of nature loss outside the 30% must also be addressed.
Adequate financing and a framework to track progress:A robust monitoring, enforcement, reporting, and verification system will also be crucial for assessing progress towards targets, and efforts to reach them must be supported by appropriate funding.
Coordination across the four nations: It’s important to remember that nature knows no borders and as global temperatures rise, species will shift their ranges to stay within suitable conditions. To successfully meet any targets, it will be essential for the four UK Governments to work collaboratively. Although each nation will be responsible for its own biodiversity strategy to suit its specific ecology, no single country can do this alone. The only way we can achieve the scale of change we need is through global leadership and commitment to legally binding targets for nature in every country.
Over the next few months, the four Links will be working together to develop our recommendations on how the four Governments of the UK can work together and contribute to the success of the post-2020 biodiversity framework. It will be impossible to solve the climate crisis without tackling the nature crisis and vice versa, and so securing good outcomes at both summits should be of utmost priority for the four governments. COVID-19 may have derailed 2020 as being a ‘super year’ for the environment, but through global leadership at COP15 and COP26 the four countries of the UK could be instrumental in helping 2021 claim the title.
Juliet Caldwell, Nature Advocacy Officer at Scottish Environment LINK
Imogen Cripps, Policy Officer at Wildlife and Countryside Link
Jill Eagleson, Policy & Projects Officer at Northern Ireland Environment Link
Rory Francis, Nature Targets Advocacy Officer at Wales Environment Link
By Dr Phoebe Cochrane, sustainable economics officer at Scottish Environment LINK
We all know that recycling is important – that waste does not end up in landfill, but instead gets recycled into new things. Ideally, we would like all new things to be made from either renewable or recycled materials. That would mean we would no longer need to quarry, mine or drill for non-renewable raw materials.
In yesterday’s UK budget, the Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced draft legislation for a new Plastic Packaging Tax, which will come into effect in April 2022 across the UK. This tax will apply to all plastic packaging that contains less than 30 percent recycled content. It has been broadly welcomed by environmental campaigners.
It takes 75 percent less energy to make a plastic bottle using recycled plastic compared with using virgin raw materials. Despite this, the market for plastic recylate has been variable, being at the whim of fluctuations in the price of crude oil and suffering from underinvestment and varying quality.
The purpose of the tax is to incentivise the uptake of recyclate and provide demand for reprocessed plastic, providing assurance to the recycling value chain and stimulate new investment in domestic recycling infrastructure.
For example, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) is readily and widely recycled and it is relatively easy to achieve high percentages of recycled content in PET bottles and containers. So, the threshold for PET could be higher, especially when the upcoming Deposit Return scheme provides an additional stream of plastic bottles for recycling.
Then there is the question – why only plastics? There is a need to bolster the recycled content of all packaging materials.
There are also other ways in which governments can encourage businesses to increase the recycled content of their packaging. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), for example, aims to ensure that producers bear financial responsibility for the environmental impacts of their products, and are incentivised to reduce these impacts.
EPR has tended to focus on ‘end of life’ impacts, and increasing recycling, but is currently under review (with the second consultation due this spring). If the focus was on reducing the whole life-cycle impact of packaging and the fees that producers pay were sufficiently differentiated to reflect this impact, it could incentivise increased use of recycled materials.
However, one of the problems with using taxes or EPR to incentive use of recycled material is that the effectiveness of these measures varies according to market prices of the virgin and recycled raw material. Regulation is more straightforward.
The Scottish government could introduce regulations under the neglected section 82 in our Climate Change Act which allows government ministers to specify the recycled content of items procured or constructed in Scotland. This could be an opportunity to identify what local recyclate streams could be available and what local businesses might be ready to use those recyclates, and then to create, by regulation, good stable home markets to promote innovative eco-designed products.
Last, but certainly not least, while we do need to establish markets for recyclate, we mustn’t lose sight of the fact that recycling is near the bottom of the waste hierarchy. In terms of packaging, we must be thinking about how we reduce unnecessary and single use packaging, moving to less packaging and reusable packaging.
There are some examples of brands using reusable packaging for deliveries and of supermarkets and other shops offering loose produce, but these need to become the norm rather than the exception.
Rishi Sunak’s Plastic Packaging Tax is a step in the right direction. Let’s keep up the pressure on governments to do much more to reduce packaging waste.
Today is United Nations World Wildlife Day and this year’s theme is “Forests and Livelihoods: Sustaining People and Planet.” In recent years forests have attracted attention for their role in capturing carbon in the fight against climate change. They have sustained the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people globally for much longer than that. For as long as there have been people and trees, woodland has fed and sheltered us. Here in Scotland that is as true today as it ever was.
Down the west coast heavy rainfall, mild temperatures and clean air create the conditions for an explosion of biodiversity under the canopy of native woodlands. Every surface is lush with mosses, lichens and ferns. These are our rainforests and it is our responsibility to look after them. We would have a cheek to criticise countries clearing tropical rainforest to ranch cattle or mine minerals, while allowing our own temperate rainforest to be grazed out by deer or overgrown with Rhododendron ponticum.
Scotland’s rainforest is one of our most precious habitats, and yet most Scots are not even aware we have it. A voluntary partnership of over 20 organisations, The Alliance for Scotland’s Rainforest is seeking to change that, and also to turn round the fortunes of this dwindling habitat.
Our rainforest can help us combat the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis. Its rare and fragile ecosystem is a so-called “nature-based solution” as it locks up huge volumes of carbon while providing a vital home for a globally significant assemblage of species, some of which occur nowhere else. But Scotland’s temperate rainforest, just like the tropical rainforest isn’t just important for biodiversity or climate control. People live and work here. They always have.
At Lagganulva on the Isle of Mull Helen MacKay relies on the hazel, oak and ash woodland surrounding her farm to provide year-round shelter for livestock, which is especially valuable during calving. Helen says it is a healthier environment than any shed. It allows her cows to follow their natural instincts when it’s time to separate from the herd. She should know, as she is also the local vet. Like other farmers in the area, Helen is eager to protect her slice of rainforest and encourage natural regeneration.
Based in Morvern, Donald Kennedy is a contractor and partner in the Lever & Mulch Partnership and has been working to remove invasive Rhododendron ponticum from native woodlands across the west coast for more than 15 years. This essential task is an important source of employment for many communities.
So is deer management. John Taylor works for Forestry and Land Scotland and is tasked with managing large areas of woodland in the heart of the rainforest zone. This involves controlling the red deer population and restoring forests planted with non-native conifers back to native woodland. Deer management provides local employment, reduces traffic accidents that involve deer collisions, and even reduces the emission of methane, a greenhouse gas far more damaging to the climate than carbon dioxide.
Scotland’s rainforest is a visitor attraction even if most of those visitors have yet to realise it is a rainforest. Jon and Angela Mercer run Glenloy Wildlife – a tourism business in Lochaber. Jon says nature-lovers are blown away by the variety of wildlife here. It cannot be experienced anywhere else. The more rainforest there is, the more opportunities for wildlife watching and nature tourism.
So our rainforest supports jobs; its canopy provides cover for livestock; people use it for exercise and to recharge their mental batteries. It is a natural classroom for school children; a meeting place for groups and volunteers; and a destination for tourists. Scotland’s rainforest is a hugely important natural asset contributing to the economic, social and mental wellbeing of the people who live in and around it. That is why action on green recovery must include expansion and restoration of the rainforest.
Yes, Scotland owes it to the world to look after these woods for their natural wonders, but we owe it to local people to look after them as a considerable community asset too.
In the next Parliament we will be working closely with Nature Champion MSPs to secure a better future for the rainforest and the people it supports.
George Anderson
PR and Communications Officer at Woodland Trust Scotland
Scotland should follow suit. Like Europe, we should be aiming to reduce our consumption of raw materials to sustainable levels – we have a moral, as well as an environmental, duty to do so. We currently use about 3 times our share of global resources and the quantity and nature of goods we use has a huge environmental impact.
MEPS voted overwhelmingly to back mandatory material reduction targets.
It is not only environmental NGOs who are concerned about the unsustainable nature of resource extraction rates. Security of supply of raw materials is a core interest of business and the rising costs of raw materials is a primary concern of Scottish business leaders.
Our economy is currently mainly linear – take, make, use, dispose. A circular economy offers a new approach, based on the principles of designing out waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use, and regenerating natural systems.
Unfortunately, although the idea of a circular economy is innately appealing, we need government policy to make it happen. We also need to know that the policy initiatives are making a difference to the things that matter. It is great to increase our recycling rates, but if we are not then substituting recyclate for secondary raw materials; and using less raw materials overall; we won’t address the climate and nature crises. We can still enjoy new and different goods, but they need to be made and used differently.
Scottish Environment LINK, together with a coalition of other organisations, has been calling on the Scottish government to introduce consumption reduction targets. We need our government to:
Publish data on the quantities and types of materials we are using and wasting;
Set targets to reduce our overall consumption of raw materials;
Produce plans that detail how this will be achieved and how to deal with problematic materials.
We hope the next Scottish government will bring forward a Circular Economy Bill this year and demonstrate its alignment with progress in Europe, with a focus on reducing our overall consumption. Action on raw material use must be central to Scotland’s efforts both to tackle climate change and to reverse global biodiversity loss.
Steps towards a circular economy
Designing out waste and pollution. The way that products are designed is really important – they must be designed such that their life-cycle environmental impact is minimised; so that they can be used for as long as possible; and so that, if there is any ‘waste’, it can be recycled and become a resource – a secondary raw material or a compost to replenish our soil.
Keeping products and materials in use. Products, such as buildings, cars, furniture, clothes or electronic goods, must be designed so that they are easy to repair and reuse, straight forward to disassemble and their component parts and the materials from which they are made are all re-useable or recyclable. Also, products that are typically idle much of the time, such as private cars or tools, are better shared, through clubs or libraries.
Regenerating natural systems. Instead of being extractive and polluting, our economy must be regenerative, and pay particular attention to the condition of our soil. Agriculture and other land uses must be regenerative, returning carbon and other nutrients to the soil.
Scotland’s EU Continuity Bill was passed by MSPs on 22 December 2020. This bill is an important one for Scotland’s natural environment, as it aims to ensure that the environmental safeguards that came with EU membership remain in place now that the UK has left the EU. It also sets up arrangements for Scots law to remain aligned with EU law on the environment and other matters in the future.
Following the publication of the bill last June, we campaigned hard for the Scottish government to strengthen it to ensure no gaps were created in environmental protections following Brexit. Thousands of people lobbied their MSPs to encourage them to vote for stronger measures. So how good is the final bill?
The bill secures some crucial protections for Scotland’s environment…
The bill embeds key EU environmental principles into Scots law and stipulates that Scottish ministers and policy makers must have regard to these when developing new policies or legislation. This follows two years of pressure from Fight for Scotland’s Nature supporters, who can chalk it up as a great victory. The principles include the precautionary principle, which requires that preventative policies must be put in place where there is concern that an activity is causing or could lead to environmental harm. In Scotland the precautionary principle has previously informed decisions not to allow fracking, genetically modified organisms or the use of harmful pesticides.
Significantly, an additional ‘integration principle’ was added to the bill, stating that consideration of the environment must be embedded across all areas of government.
The bill also grants Scottish government ministers new powers to keep pace with developments in EU law. Use of these powers in the future must be to advance environmental standards and social rights. This allows the Scottish government to uphold its commitment to ‘maintain or exceed’ European environmental standards in the future.
Campaign supporters will also be aware that the bill establishes a new Scottish environmental watchdog, Environmental Standards Scotland. This is itself an achievement, as it provides a mechanism by which Scotland’s environmental laws can be enforced now that we will no longer have the oversight of the EU Commission.
… but a vital gap remains in ensuring the watchdog can take action on public complaints of environmental damage
Throughout the second half of 2020, the Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign pushed for the law setting out the new watchdog’s remit to be strengthened. Very disappointingly, the legislation prevents the watchdog from taking any enforcement action on individual complaints of environmental damage or breaches of environmental law. This could include an individual making a complaint about a specific incident of environmental damage in their local area. At EU level, action to rectify individual cases has been effective, and has set new precedents in environmental legislation, preventing problems from reoccurring elsewhere.
Instead, the new Scottish watchdog has been designed to only take enforcement action when a public body fails to comply with environmental law when the matter is deemed to be of ‘strategic significance.’ This could be, for example, significant breaches in air quality levels across the country or a failing in law to protect a particular wildlife species or habitat type.
Unfortunately, despite the many emails that were sent to MSPs on this issue, and the backing of Labour, Scottish Green and Liberal Democrat MSPs, we were not able to make progress on this vital issue. Amendments to the bill to empower the watchdog to act on individual cases were opposed by SNP and most Scottish Conservative MSPs, with opponents claiming that such a change could cause regulatory confusion and that the watchdog’s enforcement powers are expected to be used only on rare occasions. We’re disappointed that MSPs took this view, as in our experience strong enforcement powers can act as a deterrent and help to rectify issues early on.
However, this is not the end of the road for strengthening the arrangements of the watchdog. Scottish Environment LINK pushed for the bill to include a commitment for the Scottish government to hold a future consultation to assess the effectiveness of post-Brexit environmental protections, including to seek views on the need for a Scottish environmental court. MSPs agreed to add a requirement for this consultation into the bill and we can expect public views to be sought after the Holyrood election.
The organisations behind the Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign, members of Scottish Environment LINK, will continue to make the case for the watchdog to be given more teeth to fully investigate and take action following individual complaints from the public.
The Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign will continue to call on the Scottish government to take steps to protect Scotland’s wildlife and habitats. We will be making the case for the Scottish government to set clear, legally binding targets to halt the decline of our species and habitats and restore nature for future generations.
As we begin this new year, we lift our heads to the horizon for glimmers of hope. Across the globe, people are calling on governments to build back better after the pandemic, to transform how we do business and live and work together for a brighter, fairer and more sustainable future. With the intertwined climate and nature emergencies still rampant, collective recovery packages must lock-in clean, sustainable practices that actively contribute to climate and nature recovery. Last year, international expert reports confirmed that our global ocean has warmed unabated since 1970, absorbing more than 90% of the excess heat in the climate system, and that fishing has had a significant impact on marine biodiversity in the past 50 years alongside other significant drivers. Yet we also know that healthy fish populations and undamaged seabed habitats are better at locking up carbon. Overfishing, unsustainable development and climate change mutually reinforce a vicious cycle of ocean decline.
In Scotland, recent government announcements have increased the area of Scotland’s sea within the Marine Protected Area (MPA) network to approximately 37%. Yet, most of the network awaits actual effective protection from the most damaging industrial activities. For example, less than 1% of the area of inshore seabed fished by trawlers and dredgers has subsequently been protected from those heavy industrial activities within the existing MPA network. In fact, there is only one small fisheries no-take zone, pioneered by the Community of Arran Seabed Trust in north Lamlash Bay on Arran, in the whole of Scotland. Meanwhile, new salmon farms are still being proposed in existing MPAs, such as in Wester Ross to which we have collectively objected.
Business-as-usual has brought our ocean to the brink, with governments collectively failing to meet 11 of 15 Good Environmental Status indicators for the health of our seas that was required by 2020. Harbour seal populations have declined by 95% in parts of Scotland, North Sea cod stocks have reduced by 31% since 2015, black-legged kittiwake populations have declined by 69% since 1986 and most of Scotland’s seabed, particularly reef and “blue carbon” habitats, is not in good condition.
Ahead of 2021, the start of the crucial UN decade of Ecosystem Restoration and Scotland’s continued Year of Coasts and Waters, LINK’s Save Scottish Seas coalition have launched an Ocean Recovery Plan. It calls for requirements in law to set and meet ocean recovery targets, strengthening of Scotland’s MPA network to ensure at least 30% of Scotland’s seas are highly protected, with at least one-third of that area fully protected by 2030, a just transition to a climate and nature positive fishing industry and significant investment in ocean recovery.
In a poll commissioned by LINK, three out of four Scots agreed Scotland should commit to the target of 30% or more of the sea being highly protected. Whilst there has been some welcome progress in improving marine conservation, it has been slower than hoped and measures do not go far enough. International best practice recommends at least 30% of the ocean should be under high levels of protection, yet currently in Scotland that figure is lower than 1%. Increased levels of protection would help boost sea life, fight climate change and ensure coastal communities and livelihoods thrive long into the future.
The Scottish Government must turn rhetoric into reality and deliver a transformative decade of ocean recovery. Our plan charts a course to ensure that by 2030 the curve of ocean decline has been reversed and Scotland’s ocean ecosystems are on a path of recovery, able to support the fight against climate change. As we step into 2021 seeking a brighter future, nothing short of transformative change of the MPA network, fisheries management and marine conservation investment will deliver the scale of ocean recovery needed.
Calum Duncan, Convener of LINK’s Marine Group and Head of Conservation Scotland at Marine Conservation Society
A version of this blog was published in The Scotsman on 19 January 2021
Today MSPs at Holyrood voted to pass the EU Continuity Bill, setting out how Scotland will protect its natural environment from 1 January 2021, when the crucial environmental safeguards that come with EU membership cease to apply.
The Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign has called since 2018 for strong new laws to protect and restore our amazing nature, and many thousands of people have added their voices to the campaign.
We’re really pleased that the bill embeds key EU environment principles in Scots law. These have underpinned Scotland’s ambitious climate change targets, and action against fracking and genetically modified crops. It’s a great achievement that they’ll continue to guide environmental policy.
The bill also sets up a new Scottish environment watchdog, Environmental Standards Scotland. Pressure from members of the public has helped give the watchdog greater independence, strengthening its ability to hold government to account.
But we’re disappointed that despite thousands of us writing to our MSPs on the issue, the new watchdog won’t be able to take enforcement action when people raise complaints about individual cases of harm to their environment. This deprives Scotland’s people of a vital means of seeking justice on environmental matters. And it means that determined campaigning by people and communities will be more important than ever in defending Scotland’s unique nature.
Scottish Environment LINK will continue to raise this issue with the Scottish government, pushing for the watchdog to have the power to act on citizens’ concerns.
Next, Fight for Scotland’s Nature is calling on the Scottish government to set clear, legally binding targets to halt and reverse the loss of our species and habitats. Look out for more on that in the new year.
A huge thank you goes to everyone who has supported the campaign so far.
Scottish Environment LINK, a coalition of Scotland’s leading environmental charities, has warned Scotland’s natural environment and wildlife remain at grave risk unless major gaps in new Scottish nature laws are closed before Brexit.
The warning comes just days ahead of a crunch vote on the EU Continuity Bill in the Scottish Parliament next week (22 December), which embeds a new set of legislation to replace those Scotland will lose once it leaves the EU on 1 January 2021.
The coalition is calling on the Scottish government to commit to strong laws that don’t water down the very EU legislations that have protected Scotland’s nature for decades. It has also stressed that failure to do so would undo decades of progress that could seriously set back Scotland’s environment and economy as the nation battles with the impact of climate change, Brexit and the coronavirus – bringing home the very real dangers Scotland is facing.
Scottish Environment LINK went on to raise concerns about plans for the new Scottish environment watchdog, Environmental Standards Scotland, also created under the Scottish government’s EU Continuity Bill. Unlike the EU watchdog, the proposed environment watchdog for Scotland will not be fully independent of government, risking its ability to hold ministers to account.
Furthermore, unlike the rights enjoyed as EU citizens, the new watchdog will not have the power to enforce action on specific cases relating to people’s concerns about their local environment in Scotland. An example of this includes the case brought forward by marine biologist, David Ainsley who in 2007 won a landmark ruling at European Court of Justice to halt the damaging practice of scallop dredging in the Firth of Lorn. The coalition points out that the new environment watchdog will be excluded from taking enforcement action on cases such as these whether the complaint is made by an individual, a charity, a community group or indeed whoever.
It has stressed that the watchdog will in effect be ‘toothless’ unless MSPs step up to the plate and use a crucial vote next week to give it the power to protect Scotland’s people and nature.
Marine biologist David Ainsley, who was part of the group which won the case at an EU level to protect the Firth of Lorn from scallop dredging, said:
Unless MSPs vote to amend the EU Continuity Bill to give the new watchdog powers and duties to address citizens’ complaints, it will be nigh on impossible to persuade a future government to enforce legislation protecting Scotland’s wildlife.
In 2007, after a long campaign to stop the damaging practice of scallop dredging, we won our case at an EU level and dredging in the Firth of Lorn Special Area of Conservation (SAC) was ruled as illegal. It’s amazing the difference this had made. Wildlife in and around the Firth of Lorn has recovered and is thriving. A healthier natural environment has also helped to support local businesses and create more jobs than when dredging was allowed. The recovery came about because as EU citizens we could raise concerns about damaging environmental practices and have an independent watchdog investigate it and enforce action against it.
As the Scottish government’s EU Continuity Bill stands, this will no longer be possible. This is tragic and comes at a time when one in nine species in Scotland is at risk of extinction. This in itself should be a ‘wake up call’ for the Scottish government to do more and not less for the health and wellbeing of its people and natural environment.
Vhairi Tollan, Advocacy Manager, Scottish Environment LINK said:
Without enforcement powers for individual cases, when citizens make official complaints about harm to a local coastline or greenspace, for example, the new watchdog won’t be able to do anything about it. This will deprive Scotland’s people of an important means of seeking justice on environmental matters – and a right we’ve enjoyed for decades as members of the European Union.
The Scottish government has promised to maintain or exceed environmental standards after Brexit – but by leaving this hole in the new Scottish system, it manifestly fails to do so. We urge MSPs to give the new watchdog the power it needs when they vote on 22 December, just nine days before EU protections cease to apply in Scotland.
We also urge the people of Scotland to contact their MSPs ahead of next week’s vote to ensure Scotland’s environment and its people are not let down at this critical time in our history.”
A blog from Charles Nathan, Head of Planning and Development at RSPB Scotland and Vice-Convener of LINK’s Planning Group.
One of the best ways to deliver transformational change is not only powerful, it can be easily delivered. A Scottish Nature Network helps focus effort and resources toward improving the ecological health of Scotland’s natural assets, including everything from vast landscape scale interventions, like restoring or planting woodland, to local projects such as enhancing or creating new city parks and community green spaces. Taking a strategic approach like this would result in a healthy and vibrant nature rich world that offers a wealth of benefits to society, not least in helping tackle the climate and nature emergency. This is explored in Scottish Environment LINK’s short film.
The rationale for a Nature Network is strengthened by Scotland’s natural assets. Scottish Government has committed to a target of Net-Zero emissions by 2045 – 5 years earlier than the rest of the UK – and are able to do so because of the wealth of its surroundings, such as vast peatlands and native woodlands, which capture and store carbon. However, to achieve these targets, changes to how we strategically plan, build on and manage land across Scotland, from hill-top to city park are needed. A Scottish Nature Network provides this, giving a common purpose to both rural and urban communities to enable them to enhance and reconnect nature by targeting where best to collectively take action and invest.
Peatland restoration and ambitious tree planting targets are the most familiar examples that demonstrate the power of nature to help society tackle the climate emergency, however many other natural habitats and systems, if in a healthy functioning state, can provide equally important benefits. The Scottish Nature Network identifies the locations and the measures that are needed to achieve healthy, resilient natural habitats that in turn help our society and economy. For example, Scotland faces a trend of warmer and wetter winters which are already increasing the risk of floods. These risks can partly be managed by recreating, altering or protecting parts of rivers. Using nature manages and reduces the impact of flooding. These include planting woodland on floodplains, changing the soil characteristics of adjacent fields or blocking streams in a way that mimics fallen trees and branches that all slow the flow of the water and decrease the effects of flooding.
Having the Network allows stakeholders to collaborate and identify the opportunities to contribute to the Network in their area, drawing together communities right across rural and urban areas from farmers and foresters, developers and health boards, key agencies and community enterprises. This approach would help align efforts to help achieve climate targets, restore nature, increase opportunity for, and investment in, green jobs, and help enhance the wellbeing of communities.
Nature is fundamental to human existence, it’s the very fabric upon which we all depend not only for climate regulation, food, timber, clean water and air but also for our personal and collective wellbeing. The natural spaces in our communities provide a space to breathe and reflect, a space for wildlife to exist in addition to the regulatory functions it plays in balancing water and air quality, temperature and noise pollution. But the advantage of a Scottish Nature Network is that it makes the situation better for nature, not just people, by restoring our natural environment and its ecosystems.
Strong government support for and investment in Scotland’s Nature Network is central to a green recovery. A recovery where we can reach climate and biodiversity targets with speed and efficiency, maximising the benefits to nature and climate and creating a positive change to the economic and social activities of our communities. From here on in we will be calling for the adoption of Scotland’s Nature Network.
A guest blog by Carla Worth del Pino, consultant at Resource Futures
Why don’t we repair?
If you’re anything like me, you have at least one electrical item gathering dust deep in a forgotten cupboard at home – perhaps it suddenly gave out on you, or maybe you decided to upgrade. The issue of upgrades is being partly tackled by company buy-back/trade-in schemes, like Curry’s PC World recycling old machines for free with cash-back of up to £75 towards a new one. But that’s of no use if an item just stops working. When faced with this, what is stopping you from trying to repair it?
The answer often relates to confidence, particularly around electronics. For many of us (me included) our repair abilities are limited to ‘turning it off and on again’ and giving it a solid tap, hoping that will do the trick. More complex repairs feel daunting. It’s a reason why electronics is the core focus for The Restart Project – a repair network that aims to showcase how electronics can be easier to fix than they seem, even with minimal experience.
We worked with Restart to seek ways to measure confidence, and how to measure the long-term impact that attending a repair event plays in building and maintaining this. Many Restart groups and Repair Cafes engaged with our research, from Repair Café Glasgow all the way down to a range of Repair Cafes in Devon linked to our Community Action Groups network. We found that attendees consistently cited a lack of confidence in repairing electrical items on their own as a major motivation to come, stay, and return to the repair events.
Planned obsolescence
While repair events are typically very successful in fixing broken items, we also found that in some instances, electrical items simply cannot be repaired even by repair experts – a recurring frustration among attendees and volunteers. For example, a manufacturer may have glued a battery into a phone, forcing you to replace the whole device when the battery wears out. In technical terms, this is called ‘planned obsolescence’: a policy of planning / designing products with an artificially limited life, making it obsolete (unfashionable / no longer functional) after a certain period of time.
The Centennial bulb, Livermore, California
One of the most notable examples of planned obsolescence is all around us – the humble light bulb. They typically last around 83 days (in constant operation); LED lightbulbs last longer at around 5.7 years. So how can one lightbulb have been in constant operation since 1901 – over 119 years? Coined the ‘longest burning light bulb in history’, a webcam streams live video of the ‘Centennial bulb’ to thousands of viewers every day.
The concept has infuriated consumers for several decades. However, abolishing planned obsolescence is not straightforward; there are larger chicken vs. egg arguments at play. What came first, planned obsolescence or our consumer habits? Are companies designing cheaper quality items in response to our consumer culture, or are we quickly consuming items because they are cheaper quality?
The concept is further complicated by the number of players involved: consumers, retailers, manufacturers, media advertising, designers and government actors all intertwine in a ravenous and fiercely competitive consumer culture. Manufacturers may feel forced to make goods at cheaper and cheaper price points to get products featured on retailers’ shelves; at the same time, consumers will understandably prefer to purchase a new item for cheaper than it would cost to repair their old one. It becomes a cyclical system whereby repairs become effectively uneconomical.
For any change to happen, efforts are needed to tackle both ends: our linear ‘take, make, use, discard’ consumer culture and poor-quality design of products.
Right to Repair
While repair events play an important role in slowing down our consumption – instilling confidence, teaching valuable skills and giving individuals an opportunity to experience a local and circular economy – effort is also needed to tackle more systemic issues like planned obsolescence.
Enter the Right to Repair movement: a coalition of European organisations directly involved in advocating for repair at EU level. The group advocates for ambitious policy measures to achieve a universal ‘Right to Repair’ through:
Asking that everyone has access to repair information and spare parts – not just professionals
Bringing urgency to policymakers on the need for more repairable and longer-lasting products, at national and European level
Advocating for an EU-wide repair labelling system to guide consumers towards durable, repairable products
Reinforcing their network of supporting Member States and business partners
Promoting repair beyond the EU to accelerate market transformation at global level
Restart is one of the steering members, and advocated for the concept at a ‘FixFest’ in Manchester; the event saw 59 activists from 25 groups come together to draft the ‘Manchester Declaration’ calling for more repairable products. The Declaration has since been endorsed by 17 political figures and many other organisations, such as Green Alliance and Greenpeace UK.
Right to Repair’s advocacy has reached international recognition as well. The European Commission announced in March 2020 that manufacturers of phones, tablets and laptops will face legal obligations to make products easier to repair and reuse under a new recycling plan. The European Commission will extend an eco-design law (which previously set energy efficiency standards) to also cover technical standards so these goods will be made with changeable and repairable parts.
Our consumer culture
The other end of the stick, our consumer culture, is more difficult to change. For this, it’s useful to look to other regions where reuse and repair are more deeply engrained and require less (or no) legislation or advocation for widespread practice. Emma Burlow, whilst Head of Circular Economy at Resource Futures, wrote about her trip to India as a circular economy expert. Her role was to share best practice from the UK on the circular economy and effective waste prevention strategies. She reflects:
“There are the repair shops that are literally on every street corner. Things that get broken are fixed, not thrown away. The age of some vehicles on the road and collections of spare parts in roadside stores shows the demand for repair is huge.”
She muses that perhaps the time has come for an Indian contingent to visit the UK, imparting best practice on creating a cultural revolution.
Our consumerism and disassociation with repair have other noxious effects, not only to the immediate consumer’s detriment but to the detriment of those far way in other parts of the world. Somewhat ironically, India is also a major importer of WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment). The large majority of e-waste in India flows to the informal sector, with only a very small fraction processed by formal regulated recycling facilities.
We’ve partnered with E[co]work and others to help support this informal sector through the provision of better managed space, but the fact remains that our (often repairable and reusable) electronic waste is processed by marginalised members of society half a world away, working in unsafe and unhealthy conditions. How do we instil an awareness of the implications of our consumer culture to both consumers and product designers, and could this reinvigorate the appetite for repair and show the major role it has in minimising WEEE?
The way forward
Industry and manufacturers do not create an insatiable consumer culture in a vacuum: we as consumers gladly (or perhaps blindly) play a part. However, I believe times are changing. Examples from alternative consumer cultures, coupled with the growth of the Right to Repair movement and widespread circular economy efforts, demonstrates that opportunities for a circular, sharing economy are bigger now than ever before. Studies have even shown that the Covid-19 pandemic may be changing our appetite for learning new skills and being more resourceful.
We might not be able to radically change our culture to emulate the resourcefulness in India, but we can encourage repair in new and innovative ways. In Sweden, for example, families can access tax breaks of about £2,500 a year to cover labour costs paid to repair businesses for repairs of appliances. We can develop people’s confidence in, and motivation to, repair, supported by a political framework that prioritises repair through reducing unnecessary planned obsolescence.
The Scottish Government has a unique opportunity to design and introduce ambitious policy to support this vision, facilitate this growing movement and help transition Scotland toward a more circular economy. Scotland’s upcoming Circular Economy bill is an ideal place to further drive the right to repair in Scotland. While the importance of repair is mentioned in connection with keeping resources in use for as long as possible, ambitious and explicit policy should be designed to the tune of the Manchester Declaration and the EU’s right to repair regulations.
On an individual level, as someone with very little experience in repair, I encourage everyone to seek out a Repair event in your community – there are several organisations hosting repair events; try searching ‘Restart Project’, ‘Repair Café’, ‘Transition Town’, or ‘Remade Network’ for an event near you. The experience of fixing something with your own hands that you thought was beyond hope is immensely satisfying and leaves a lasting impression. And next time you purchase an electrical item, maybe you will consider spending a bit more on an item that will last longer.
Can the repair movement gain enough momentum, at an individual, community, and institutional level, so that planned obsolescence becomes obsolete?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
