The arrival, early in May, of a pair of White-tailed eagles in the centre of Helsinki may not be a mark of great ecological improvement or even be a surprise to those of us who have seen these magnificent birds in other urban situations, for example along the Oder River on the Poland and German border. Birds are often simply opportunists and may not always be great ecological indicators. But as we have been pre-occupied with the Covid-19 lockdown changes, nature has maintained its natural course regardless and has responded to opportunities created by our relative lack of activity. Closer to home, in rural Perthshire, it seems to me that many animals became habituated quite quickly to an increase in walkers and cyclists. And reduction in overall “noise”. Farming and some forestry carried on as before, but I am sure that a variety of animals became much less wary of people. I have heard this from many other people too.
Another likely upside to lockdown may well have been less roadkill. Certainly, during lockdown, I found very few birds or mammals along the A9 or side roads. This though may now be changing as we all begin to get on the move again. Research carried out on the levels of mortality of birds along road corridors has identified that many birds become adapted to the traffic norm where they are. In particular, their collision avoidance behaviours are related directly to the speed of vehicles that they encounter regularly. Like us, they become habituated to their situation, but with that comes the peril of sudden changes. The chicks that fledged soonest this year may well end up being the least well adapted to our norms of traffic volume and speed. The behaviour of young deer, just recently born, may be similarly affected, although they at least get some parental guidance. But it certainly raises a question about the risk of increased deer vehicle collisions in the coming autumn and winter. A lesson from this is that change needs to be sustained if it is to have long term benefit – although more deer is a dubious benefit to which I’ll return.
As for my own behaviour, and keeping within current guidelines on exercise, I spent many hours exploring places close to home. I have to admit that I savoured the quiet landscape in which I can hear wildlife so much more clearly. From my house, on foot or by bike, and with limited use of public roads (I’ll say nothing here about the shameless blocking of core paths by certain land managers) I can reach hill tops at over 300m; one of Scotland’s great rivers, the Tay; and areas of lowland mire and ancient woodland. Despite the dominance of arable crops, there are many islands of wild nature. Hemmed in by barley and oil-seed rape and higher up by intensively managed heather and spruce, these fragile wonderful places are where everyday nature is flourishing. Seeing how nature is responding to the very small changes in lockdown it is easy to begin to imagine how these areas could quickly and easily become the start of something greater. And yet, they barely get a footnote in official conservation or land use policy. But what if we made a few permanent small changes to how much we plough, spray and burn? What potential might this land reveal if we could redraw the landscape even a little bit for nature and for ourselves?
Making more space for nature and setting limits on our impacts and activities are not new ideas. Perhaps the best outcome from the 50 years of thinking was the Lawton Report in 2010 – Making Space for Nature. Looking back it is hard to see that talk has delivered much progress in diversifying our landscapes and halting loss of locally diverse places, let alone reversing the decades of decline in biodiversity. Instead, we have promoted a series of exceptions to normality, special projects and special places, and temporary environmental schemes. These have absorbed most of our effort, money and time, and while we can point to some conservation successes, there is almost nowhere in Scotland, certainly in the lowlands, where we can point to landscape scale improvement for nature. Farmers and foresters are driven by markets they do not control, while the Scottish and UK Governments are currently planning for our post-EU environment, where cheap food imports and fewer environmental controls may create huge changes with many unforeseen and unintended consequences. On the hills and elsewhere, game managers continue to justify their practices in part by making claims to support other species – such as waders – yet they almost always create very artificial systems that are hostile to predators. Meanwhile, the ordinary places, where there is the greatest potential for ecological improvement at low cost, are not seen as special enough for action.
I have read with interest and delight the new SWT/SEPA Route Map for the £1Billion Challenge. Thinking about the nine stages identified in the route map as I walked around my local landscape, I also mused upon the gulf between its ambition and the potential of what might be done in everyday places. Sadly, we probably do need some of the bureaucracy identified in the route map – although my experience of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy has done little to encourage much enthusiasm for biodiversity bureaucracy. The scale of the ambition is fine but on its own it will not scratch the surface of releasing local potential for nature. Any new approach needs to make explicit calls on engaging all local interests, those of land managers, communities, schools, walkers and visitors too. These people need to be given the responsibility and the means to come up with new ideas for nature in their landscapes. I would like to see communities link access with nature, and nature with education and well-being. That of course means rebalancing the equation between land managers, markets, community input and, most importantly, with public expectations.
What if just 1-2% of low ground and 5% of hill ground was to be given over to nature? Productivity might not change, but the change for nature would be immense, even without a grand plan. I don’t say this is the best course to take, but it wouldn’t be a bad one. For a long time, our attention has been fixed on the big issues of the day. Currently these include climate change and plastics and yesterday included protected areas and pesticides. What we are missing is seeing what is literally at our feet; the pair of peezies somehow holding on in a narrow piece of damp ground between the barley fields, the orange-tips thriving on the stands of cuckoo-flower on the road verge, the king-cup glowing in the undergrowth between the road and the railway. These are the things from which nature can and would spread given the chance. There is already a name for this process, (re)wilding. At its simplest, wilding may just be the process of allowing nature to regain some ground and to head off in its own direction.
In three hours, from my house, I could walk from the Tay, through ancient woods, past lowland mire, through regenerating birch in a forestry block, through scrub and parkland, alongside small lochans to the head dyke and the beginning of the hill ground, and yet I would spend most of the time surrounded by arable crops. If we could allow a bit more of wild nature in this landscape, we would have an ecological network, core paths along which to see and hear nature, an outdoor well-being clinic and classroom. The price would be little more than a change of heart. If every land manager did something and every community got to have a say, and there was a shared responsibility then finding the £1 Billion for putting the icing the cake might also be made easier. Working with and designing with nature should not be about exceptions, it should be the norm.
You may recall that I said I would return to roadkill, deer and roads. I started this blog with an observation that nature is very capable of adaptation when given the chance. This suggests that wilding a little everywhere would work to address biodiversity deficits. But it also raises other issues. Why, just by reducing road traffic and increasing walking, did deer become so much less timid? Perhaps, because they are so at ease in landscape where there is nothing trying to eat them. One reason for that is that we have lost space for species such as the lynx. One of the best ways to reverse that position would be to start wilding a bit everywhere as soon as possible and at some point, the idea of having lynx will seem normal too. It is not inevitable that we continue to lose biodiversity or that we will reverse past losses. Recovery of a little of what we’ve lost already may depend less on raising £1billion than on changing the mindset. If I may quote from a recent TV advertisement, conservation should be about expecting “the wonderful everyday”, everywhere and for everyone, without exception.
This blog is published as part of the Scottish Environment LINK project: A Circular Economy for a Fairer Footprint.
The recent lockdown has been the perfect opportunity to demonstrate that mindset and behaviour change can be positive. Look at what’s happened in just a few short weeks – transport down by 60%, air pollution reduced by 50%, we’ve been buying less, fixing more and sharing tools, toys, books and time with our communities. Let’s leverage that change to prepare Scotland’s schoolchildren for life in a resilient and buoyant Circular Economy. A circular economy (CE) is an alternative to a linear economy. A linear economy, which has increasingly characterised our economy in recent decades, follows an extract, make, use, dispose pattern. In contrast, a more circular economy aims to keep resources and materials in use for as long as possible, extracting the maximum value from them whilst in use and recovering products and materials from them at the end of each service life.
In a Circular Economy we will think, design, buy and work differently. We will understand that we need to take care of the world’s resources and keep them at their highest value for as long as possible to ensure that there is enough to go around. This will be reflected in the jobs we do, the holidays we take and the clothes we choose to buy.
The problem is that our current education system simply doesn’t equip us for life in a Circular Economy. We have all been educated to accept that economic growth is good and that the environmental and social costs of this do not concern us. Both our formal education and the structuring of our economy have formed us to crave and consume more and more things, while stripping away our ability to look after them.
So what needs to change? Firstly, and most fundamentally, we need a mindset change that enables us to understand the crushing impact of our current way of life and to commit ourselves to a world in which we can choose to consume less, share more and make things last. Instead of learning subjects in silos, we need to learn in a way that cultivates whole systems thinking, so that we can join up the dots and see the effect that buying a pair of jeans in Dundee might have on a woman in Dhaka; or getting a new smartphone in Glasgow could have on the rivers and wildlife of Pica. Secondly, we need to be trained in the new jobs and skills that a Circular Economy will bring – a 2015 report by WRAP estimated 205,000 new CE jobs by 2030 across a range of sectors. These will include jobs in re-use and remanufacture, and crucially, in design. The Ellen McArthur Foundation estimate that, “80% of environmental impacts are determined” at the design stage, so just imagine the impact if we could transform from linear to circular design.
How can we make this happen? We are lucky in Scotland that our Curriculum for Excellence, in which students are taught to make connections across the curriculum, rather than to learn subjects in silos and by rote, is the perfect bedrock for a successful CE education. We are lucky also to have a group of organisations dedicated to bringing about the Circular Economy working in schools across Scotland, including Young Enterprise Scotland, the Ellen McArthur Foundation, Veolia and Ostrero’s Making Circles design and making workshops.
However, what we really need is a national strategy for Circular Economy education – one that integrates a circular approach into the Curriculum for Excellence to ensure that every schoolchild in Scotland finishes school with a mindset in which making things last is the norm. To do this we need joined up thinking across all sectors and input from Education Scotland, the Scottish Government and Zero Waste Scotland, using evidence and experience from those already working on delivering the CE in Scotland’s schools. We need hands-on training centres to ensure we are learning the relevant skills, we need to stimulate circular design and circular business models – but the first and most essential step is to achieve true mindset change for all learners, which will in turn lead to the behavioural change required. A similar approach in Finland has resulted in the hugely successful Circular Classroom.
The National Museum of Scotland has an online display capturing the experiences of Scotland’s children through lockdown, and which aspects of lockdown they think can help us build back an economy that respects the environment. Their answers show that a major mindset change is possible, and indeed, has already happened in lockdown. One nine year-old wrote: “When schools went on strike for climate action, lots of people said we wouldn’t be able to get people to change how they live. The lockdown is proof that we CAN change how we live to help our planet. We can live without shopping for joy and we can travel less or in a pollution-free way – and we can still be happy!” Children wrote about how neighbours are sharing tools, plants, books and toys; how the reduction in pollution has meant they can hear the birds singing more clearly and see more wildlife; how technology is enabling them to keep in touch with friends and family without them having to travel; and how, because it’s harder to get to the shops, they are repairing their clothes and toys instead of buying new ones.
Education is not all about what children learn from their teachers. Let’s make sure we all learn from the experiences of Scotland’s children during this extraordinary time, and ensure that we respect their ideas for growing the Circular Economy in Scotland.
Mary Michel is the Co-Director of Ostrero, which works to grow the Circular Economy in Scotland through a variety of projects, including Making Circles, a series of circular design and making workshops for schools and universities across Scotland. She is a Trustee of the Wellbeing Economy Alliance Scotland and Vice Chair of Craft Scotland.
If you believe your local environment is being harmed due to the failure of a public body to meet environmental standards, you can raise an official complaint and request an investigation. Well, you can until the end of December 2020, that is, when the Brexit transition period ends.
A major benefit of EU membership is that it allows individuals and organisations to complain to the European Commission, bringing specific, local cases of environmental damage to light. Often, the judgements in such cases have set important precedents in environmental law.
Scotland’s environment charities, alarmed by the risk posed to our unique wildlife and landscapes by the loss of EU protections, have been calling since 2018 for new Scottish laws to maintain and build upon these crucial safeguards. The Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign has gathered support from almost one hundred organisations across Scottish society, and from more than 22,000 individuals who wrote to Nicola Sturgeon to call for new legislation.
Green recovery
In 2020, the coronavirus pandemic and the resulting lockdown have brought a heightened awareness of the importance of our natural environment for our health and wellbeing, and of the inequalities in access to nature. As we emerge from the crisis, maintaining and building upon high environmental standards will be essential in achieving a green economic recovery by ensuring our natural habitats and wildlife are protected.
Campaigners were pleased, therefore, when in June the Scottish Government published its long-awaited EU Continuity Bill, outlining how it plans to fill the major gaps that will be left in Scotland’s environmental protections.
So, are the Scottish Government’s plans up to scratch?
They’re certainly a very welcome step in the right direction. But we believe the new law will need to be much stronger if it is to maintain the level of protection that EU membership has brought to Scotland’s world class natural environment.
First, the good news
The Continuity Bill meets a key demand of our campaign by embedding four key environmental legal principles, applied until now by the EU, into Scots law. These include the principle that where there is reasonable concern that an activity could be harmful, it should not be carried out unless it can be proved to be safe. In Scotland, this has underpinned action against fracking, neonicotinoids and genetically modified crops. They also include the principle that polluters should pay for the environmental damage they cause, which has helped drive up the quality of Scotland’s drinking water and beaches.
Barra
Also on the plus side, the bill sets up a new watchdog, to be called Environment Standards Scotland, to monitor and investigate public bodies’ compliance with environmental law. The need for a watchdog to replace the oversight and enforcement roles of the European Commission, European Court of Justice and other EU bodies is another key demand of our campaign. The new organisation outlined in the bill goes some way towards meeting this.
A watchdog that won’t listen?
Now for the bad news. Unfortunately, the new watchdog has two major weaknesses.
While it will be able to investigate complaints, it will only be able to take enforcement action on those relating to broad deficiencies in government policy or strategy. This means that specific complaints of the kind dealt with by the EU system won’t be addressed. We believe this deprives citizens of an essential means of making their voices heard and getting justice on environmental matters.
The watchdog set out in the bill also lacks teeth. Scottish Government ministers will appoint its senior officials, with little oversight from parliament, which could seriously compromise its ability to impartially investigate complaints and force public bodies to up their game. The strength of the EU institutions lies in their independence, and the new Scottish body is not sufficiently independent from government.
No going back
Aside from the weaknesses of the proposed watchdog, environment charities are disappointed with the extent to which the bill provides for ‘keeping pace’ with EU law after the Brexit transition period ends. Scottish environment secretary Roseanna Cunningham said in 2019 that the Scottish Government had committed to maintain or exceed current EU environment standards. But there’s nothing in the bill to explicitly prevent standards being rolled back. And while the bill enables Scottish government ministers to align with improvements in environmental standards at EU level, it doesn’t require them to do so. We think it should. Otherwise, we risk becoming once again the ‘dirty man of Europe’ of the 1970s.
Here’s how the bill can be strengthened
We want the Scottish Parliament to amend the Continuity Bill so that it:
empowers the new watchdog to take enforcement action on complaints about specific decisions affecting people’s environment
strengthens the watchdog’s independence to ensure it has teeth to enforce environmental protections
requires Ministers to maintain or exceed EU environmental standards.
The bill is at the very beginning of its passage through parliament, and with your continued support we’re hopeful that public pressure and parliamentary scrutiny will result in new laws with the strength to protect Scotland’s iconic natural environment.
A version of this blog featured in The Scotsman on 9 July 2020.
The Covid crisis and associated lockdown has brought into sharp focus many aspects of our life, our society and our economy; what is important to us and how well equipped we are to deal with sudden shocks. The recovery package being considered by the Scottish Government offers an opportunity to set our economy on a different trajectory – one that allows us to live well within Earth’s limits.
Prior to the recent abrupt downturn in economic activity, our economy was eating its way through the world’s natural resources at a rate that was both unsustainable from an environmental point of view and undesirable from an economic resilience point of view. The world’s consumption of materials has hit a record of 100 bn tonnes a year, and the proportion being recycled is falling – was the sobering headline from January’s Circularity Gap report.
What’s more, the quantity of raw materials consumed is a key driver of our climate and nature emergencies according to the 2019 Global Resource Outlook. Unsurprisingly, Western societies are the main culprits. We are consuming far more than our fair share and if everyone lived like UK citizens, we would need about 3 Earths to sustain ourselves, according to ecological footprint data.
We need to move to one planet, to re-programme our economy from one that ‘takes, makes, uses and discards’ to one that ‘takes less, makes to last, uses repeatedly, and recycles what’s left’. This is called a circular economy. Also essential to a circular economy is that it is restorative, regenerating the natural systems on which we all rely.
The economic fallout from Covid is going to be huge and governments around the world are thinking about and announcing recovery packages. The Scottish Government has committed to a green recovery. Now is the time for a purposeful redirection to a less wasteful, and more circular economy.
In order for this to happen, we need to invest in enterprises which contribute to a circular economy and create the markets for them to thrive. We need products that are designed to last a long time and producers to be responsible for the whole life cycle of their products; we need a coordinated approach not only to recycling, but also to repair, re-use and sharing; and we need to incentivise the use of used and recycled materials so that they loop back into the system. We need investment in infrastructure that enables a less polluting and wasteful economy and we need joined up policies, so that circularity is embedded across all facets of the economy.
The current crisis has exposed the vulnerability of our international and just-in-time supply chains. The time is both critical and opportune – many businesses have been disrupted due to the lockdown and are being forced to rethink business models, and the adaptive nature and ingenuity of some enterprises has been inspiring. There are examples in the food sector of increased demand for locally produced and sustainable food. Let’s build on these initiatives and reappraise our food and farming system so that more of the food produced in Scotland is consumed in Scotland, there is less waste, both by households but also further up the supply chain, and the footprint of Scottish farming is reduced. We need to think about sources of protein, following examples in other countries, to help steer us away from imported soya towards innovative use of by-products for animal and fish food and more home-grown protein. There are already innovative examples such as using insects to turn food waste into fish food and fertiliser, and the potential is huge.
It is time to be bold and decisive – governments need to invest in the infrastructure and enterprises that will contribute to the type of economy we aspire to and to not support practices that lock us into a linear, polluting and wasteful economy.
Let’s hope that a more circular economy is one of the positive outcomes of this difficult time.
Dr Phoebe Cochrane is the Sustainable Economics Officer at Scottish Environment LINK and leads on the project: A Circular Economy for a Fairer Footprint
Dr Deborah Long, LINK’s Chief Officer, talked to Solape Alatise at the Partnership Bulletin about COP26, the role of the private sector in addressing climate change and the importance of green space.
How would you describe the work of Scottish Environment LINK? Scottish Environment LINK is a network organisation and our members are the environmental NGOs that work in Scotland. We have 39 member organisations ranging from big and well know organisations like WWF, RSPB and National Trust for Scotland and down to tiny ones like the Scottish Allotments and Gardens Society and Frog Life. We are very conscious of the fact that the environment doesn’t have a voice itself, particularly in policy circles and government. The network co-ordinates and amplifies the voice of our members, so we’ve got a voice for the environment operating at a policy level.
On a day-to-day basis what does the work look like? Our members work in themed groups that are decided by our members according to their interests and priorities for the next 12 months, three years and five years. At the moment we have 15 policy areas we work on, which range from a circular economy group (the bill that’s coming through Parliament) to wildlife groups who are looking at nature-based solutions to climate change – nature networks. We also have a planning group and are launching a legal strategy group which is a completely new initiative for us. The group is trying to set up an environmental rights centre so that communities have access to courts in order for them to have the ability to challenge developers if and when needed. Each policy area that we work on has been defined by the members and is run by the members, with some staff support to help run it and co-ordinate it.
How integral is infrastructure to what you are trying to do? Of those 15 policy areas, I would say that we have three groups that are working in areas directly linked to infrastructure. One of them is the planning group who are pulling together the response from the current consultations, the current calls for ideas. We then have a group that is looking at land use and land reform, and they are working on issues the Scottish Land Commission is throwing up at the moment, in terms of how we organise land use across Scotland, what that looks like on a regional basis, how regional land partnerships work and how regional land use plans work. The final group is the wildlife group who are specifically working on nature networks. We are saying in the wildlife group that we need a top down and bottom up approach to the natural, green and blue, infrastructures and we need to bring them together.
How important is bringing the public and private sector together in addressing the climate change crisis? It’s the only way we are going to be able to do it. They are such big issues, both the climate emergency and the nature crises. They’re huge issues that no one sector, not even government on their own, can make the scale and level of progress that we need to see. The only way we can do that is by bringing the public, private and social sectors together. Otherwise we are not going to be able to make the level of changes we need to see.
What should the government’s priorities be – investing in infrastructure that directly combats climate change, such as flood defences, or ensuring that existing and new infrastructure projects have sustainability at their core? It’s both. The one area of work that we put a huge amount of effort into quite a few years ago now, but has never really delivered what we hoped it would, was the Land Use Strategy. Because we could see this fragmentation. Unless you bring it all together to a sufficient national level, the danger is that you will develop really good regional strategies that are then disconnected from the rest of the country. So they don’t actually operate as effectively at all. Where regional plans need to be particularly effective is in making sure existing infrastructure is fit for purpose and is resilient to change. It’s absolutely crucial that what we have is fit for purpose.
Who should be the main champions in pushing forward the climate change agenda in infrastructure? Different organisations and different groups of people have got different roles. What you are seeing at the moment, particularly in the climate change arena, is that you’ve got the public who are ahead of the government in many ways, saying: “We want to see dramatic change so that greenhouse gas emissions are going down”. What follows is the government running to catch up. There is a role for government to ensure the national level policies are in place and are contributing across the whole piece to meet the demands of society as well as fit with private business needs so that we’re not just over emphasising economic development above the wellbeing agenda. It has to be everyone, but everyone has specific roles which need to mesh together and I don’t think that has happened yet.
Do you think there is enough of a government budget to address the climate crisis through existing buildings? It’s a bit like decommissioning either nuclear or oil and gas instillations. You can see that logically there needs to be a point where they need to be decommissioned but it’s just that these things weren’t really considered at the time the installations were set up. The responsibility is collective but at the end of the day it’s going to have to come down to government. We need to learn the lessons of the past so that we’re not sat here in 50 to 100 years times, having exactly the same conversation. One of the big demands is leadership – the best place for that to start is Scottish government so that everyone can see what their role is and how they can contribute to the solution going forward. Without leadership we end up with a very fragmented approach that means we’re losing opportunities and building up challenges, which if we’d had a bit of foresight could have perhaps been avoided.
Is that a big part of your work, communicating with the government and trying to inform potential leaders? Yes it’s partly communication but it’s also giving them the confidence to act. Because when you think about it, a five year political term, at the absolute maximum, is not long enough if you’re looking at environmental issues. They have to be really confident that what you’re asking for or saying must be done, is something that society is behind. It gives politicians the confidence they need to put through what will inevitably be in some sectors pretty unpopular policies.
How important is COP26 and how much difference will it make to Scotland’s climate agenda as the host country? It’s absolutely crucial on a global scale as well as a national scale. Scotland is going to be in the limelight for both COPs. We’ve not just got COP26, we also have COP15 and Scotland’s got a leading role in that as well. The whole world will be looking at Scotland which means that Scotland is going to have to walk the walk in terms of delivering on Net Zero targets, delivering on biodiversity targets and showing the way forward for better and achievable biodiversity targets. Having the view of the world is helpful because it means it provides the oxygen of publicity to Scotland, to really up the game in terms of climate and biodiversity and to promote the good things that are coming out of Scotland.
Finally a question we will be asking in all our ’30 minute interviews’ – if you could pass a law tomorrow, what would it be? One of the things that would be most beneficial for Scotland in terms of its environment and the health, both physical and mental, of its people, is to make sure that every person in Scotland has a healthy green environment that they can access easily, maybe within a mile. Because once people start to interact with nature it makes them feel better and makes them value it a bit more and that’s what it is all about really.
In June, the Animals and Wildlife (Penalties, Protections and Powers) (Scotland) Bill was passed by the Scottish Parliament. The bill will increase the maximum penalty for the most serious animal and wildlife crimes to five years’ imprisonment and an unlimited fine and was supported by LINK members. We were delighted to see a number of MSP Species Champions from across the political spectrum seize the opportunity in the final debate on the Bill to bring forward several amendments to improve protections for Scotland’s animals and wildlife. This was a fantastic example of highlighting how MSPs can stand up for their species in their Parliamentary work and secure stronger protections that will allow them to thrive in future.
In the words of Minister for the Environment and Rural Affairs, Mairi Gougeon, Species Champion for hen harrier “If anything can be taken from the debate, it is the passion and strength of feeling that members across the chamber have for animal welfare and our wildlife, and the seriousness with which we treat those issues not just here in Parliament but more widely in Scotland”. With 1 in 9 species at risk of extinction in Scotland, we need a strategic approach to protect our environment and ensure that our nature is healthy and thriving for future generations.
Alison Johnstone MSP, Species Champion for hare, lodged an amendment which the Scottish Government agreed to back. The amendment makes mountain hares a protected species, effectively ending managed control on grouse moors. Alison Johnstone stated ‘Amendment 30 seeks to protect the iconic mountain hare and to preserve the species, which is in decline. A major academic paper that was published in August 2018 found that mountain hare populations on some grouse moors in the north-east Highlands had declined by 99 per cent since the 1950s’. Newly published data by the EU shows a massive decline in mountain hare populations in Scotland. The report, based on Scottish Natural Heritage’s data, has led to the mountain hare’s status to be downgraded to unfavourable, meaning that special conservation action needs to be taken to arrest further declines. Alison Johnstone has epitomised the spirit of the Species Champion role through her determined and dedicated work to gain more protection to mountain hares. Her colleague, Mark Ruskell MSP, supports Alison Johnstone’s commitment by stating ‘Many of us in the chamber are species champions, but I have seen no one more determined and driven to protect her species than Alison Johnstone’.
Colin Smyth MSP, Species Champion for the badger, tirelessly and patiently lodged a number of amendments to help prevent badger suffering in the Animals and Wildlife Bill. Vicarious liability will now be extended to offences involving traps and snares, allowing landowners and managers to be prosecuted in addition to the individual trap operator. Furthermore, Claudia Beamish MSP, Species Champion for forester moth, lodged an amendment to increase penalties for the destruction of badger’s nesting and resting places. Claudia Beamish stated ‘I am quite clear that the destruction of setts is as serious as killing or injuring a badger in terms of the damage that is caused’. 50% of badger crimes are the failure to apply for a licence for allowed badger disturbance. The bill now recognises that penalties for sett offences are on a par with offences directly against badgers. Sett and badger offences will now carry 5 years in prison or an unlimited fine or both when tried by solemn procedure, and 12 months or a £40,000 fine or both when tried by summary procedure. Species Champions Colin Smyth, Mark Ruskell and Claudia Beamish worked closely with Scottish Badgers in presenting amendments which ensure the protections of badgers. Colin Smyth complimented the work of LINK member, Scottish Badgers, for their ‘outstanding work to promote the study, conservation and protection of Scotland’s badgers’.
Documents obtained under freedom of information law show that Scottish National Heritage have been advocating for fish farms around the coast to reduce and phase out the use of “acoustic deterrent devices” (ADDs), to protect marine mammals. Gillian Martin MSP declared ‘…as the grey seal champion, I am delighted that seals cannot be shot any more, even if that measure came in at the last minute’. Although preventing the salmon farms from shooting seals is a very positive step, there are concerns around alternative methods of deterring seals that may also have negative welfare impacts. Recognising this, Mark Ruskell MSP, Species Champion for white tailed eagle, tabled an amendment requiring the Scottish Government to review the use of ADDs and produce a report by March 2021. This amendment was agreed to. These devices emit noises that deter seals, but they are known to be harmful to other marine animals including whales and dolphins.
However, an amendment tabled by Mark Ruskell seeking to ban the shooting of beavers unless they were in favourable conservation status was voted down. The beaver is the first mammal to be reintroduced to the UK and is classified on the IUCN red list as endangered. Mairi Gougeon concluded the discussion on beaver protection by stating ‘I hope to see the beaver population start to expand away from high-conflict areas and into suitable habitats where they can thrive and where we can all see the positive benefits that those remarkable eco-engineers can bring’.
The result of MSPs getting to know their species and the threats they face encourages Species Champions to stand up for their species in Parliament. The MSP Species Champions who took part in the debate have proven to be an informed, passionate and supportive group of Champions who has ensured our wildlife has a voice. The Species Champion initiative provides a clear and accessible way for MSPs to do their bit for Scotland’s nature and future generations, we welcome the support provided by the MSP Species Champions at the Animals and Wildlife Bill stage 3 debate. We hope that MSPs, and, in particular, Species Champions MSPs, will continue to stand up for nature and support strong and effective laws that will protect and enhance our environment.
Juliet Caldwell
Species Champion Coordinator at Scottish Environment Link
Within a matter of months life has changed considerably for us as we begin to embrace our ‘new normal’.
The pandemic has brought into sharp focus the life we led before, the people we cherish and the kind of life we wish to lead once this crisis blows over. With less cars on the road and cleaner air, it has also got us questioning why we ever accepted our ‘previous normal’ and with it the dangerously rapid decline of our nature.
Since the 1960s the use of plastics and our heavy reliance on fossil fuels has grown to take centre place in almost everything we possess.
From the pens we write with to the protective coating in our canned foods to the numerous children’s toys and household gadgets throughout our homes – add to this, the global surge in yet more single-use plastics as cafes, restaurants and pubs turn to providing takeaway services in response to the crisis. It is safe to say plastic is everywhere and is going nowhere, fast.
Plastic is a major source of pollution. It pollutes at every stage of its lifecycle from the oil and gas extracted to produce it, right through to when it ends up in our soil, rivers and beaches and by default in the fish and livestock we consume.
According to a recent report by the UN Environment Programme, plastics make up as much as 95 percent of the marine litter found on coastlines, sea surface, and the ocean floor. Anyone who has followed the Blue Planet series would know exactly what this means for our waters and the precious life these sustain.
Sadly, things look set to get worse. As the pandemic takes hold, streets and beaches are becoming littered with disposable masks and gloves and single-use plastics are getting a new lease on life.
In Europe alone, each year, over 25 million tonnes of plastic waste is generated. Of this, less than a third (30%) is collected to be recycled. The rest is destined for our already burgeoning landfill sites, incinerators or to developing countries who are paid to deal with it – and not always with the means nor the necessary checks required.
The appetite for change, however, is there and Scotland can and should do more to minimise its reliance on plastics.
A recent survey undertaken by Survation on behalf of Scottish Environment LINK, a coalition of leading environmental agencies in Scotland found that almost three quarters of Scots (74%) agreed that wherever possible the Government should only allow materials that are practicably and safely recyclable to be sold in Scotland. Almost all of the people surveyed (90%) believed that producers and retailers have a responsibility for the environmental impact of their products and as many as 80% support a ban on all environmentally harmful items where there are practical re-usable alternatives.
Growing levels of pollution and the alarming decline of biodiversity as the aftermath of our reliance on fossil fuels can no longer be ‘our normal’.
The pandemic has been a tough lesson for us all. It has also allowed us to see the status quo is not necessarily the way forward. That the rapid decline of the health of our nature and everything it helps to sustain is not a done deal. That the ‘normal’ we have got used to is not working and that now is not too late to think of a ‘new normal’, which is good for us and our precious and only planet.
This difficult period presents us with an opportunity to rethink and reshape how we live, consume and the type of world we wish to see in the future. A world we all deserve – before it’s too late.
Dr Phoebe Cochrane, Sustainable Economics Officer, Scottish Environment LINK
This blog was published in The National on Sunday 28 June 2020.
Written in May, still locked down in Scotland, there was time for pause. I fell to wondering about where we were headed.
The daily permitted escapes from home are mostly helping to find or regain some calm – in a local wood, on a beach, a country path or looking up at a vapour trail free sky. Breathing clean(er) air. Hearing birdsong, clearer, louder, more diverse. Seeing wildlife in empty streets. In such strange times there is a clear opportunity to reflect and to reimagine and to plan.
How on earth did we get here?! We did let it or, in some cases, make it happen. It has been a long journey from our origins inside nature, to the times of subduing it with a sense of right and sovereignty. All the way to a point where nature is seemingly fighting back against the uncomprehending, careless human foe that has wreaked such havoc.
The trajectory saw us “survive” various self-inflicted tragedies: wars, economic crashes, previous pandemics, the Silent Spring. We have proposed limits to growth, a case for sustainability, even sustainable development goals. Some have seen these as opportunities to continue conventional growth models and variations on neoclassical economic dependence on stimulating demand and offering more and more supply that exploits the resource base of the planet, but better dressed up. Nodding appropriately towards greenness. But with fingers crossed behind our backs. Growth at all costs. The cost in fact of planetary health and therefore, ultimately, our own.
We have crescendoed now to climate and ecosystem crises and crises too of democracy and trust in governments, of media influence, intense global poverty and management of diseases stretching beyond our once seemingly supreme creativity and power. So, in surviving, what have we learned? What will we do differently?
With some echoes of the 1930s US New Deal, there is extensive talk of Green Recovery and Green New Deals and an EU strategy too. But is this really a late on, ecologically credible Franklin Delano Roosevelt make-over? Great, beneficial and necessary, often “environmental” public works giving society useful and serious work. Decarbonising? Bringing lifelong skills, networks and participation? On a fair, fair-paid, community-building and sustaining basis? Universal basic income maybe, and a farewell to effete, class-based, pejorative “low pay=low skill=low value”? And all, respectful of our planetary asset base?
Once, clean air, water and land, healthy and safe environments were goals and objectives likely to be shared by, almost, all. Achieved by a positive clear vision, strong policy, plans and investment and competent, effective regulators. Reflecting on parallels with the banks and the Global Financial Crisis still sends a shiver. How we got in; how we got out. Self-regulation, for the genuinely responsible professional, the perpetually focussed and the lucky, may be good and work for a time.
But then if jobs (number not quality) and growth matter most, and recovery is just about “getting back to work”, getting on with profit, flying, driving, making, polluting, selling and buying as before, what has changed? Is it a marketing gloss and more political rhetoric? And where really does environment fit?
If new cycle lanes will soon be redrawn narrower once more, if shareholders still want arms and oil sales, if assets are as maldistributed as before….we return to rainforest clearance, habitat loss, poor air quality and health.
These genuinely are testing times. We must be tested. And how will we perform? Will we fight to protect what we have rediscovered as valuable: things, ultimately, we do not wish to live without.
Pollution levels have fallen dramatically but the downward spike, if it turns to a rebound, will count for nothing….other than a massive generational opportunity missed to make better, life-saving choices.
Leaders must lead and it will require vision and boldness. Signs of timidity are emerging already. Growth, so long the drug of choice. Growth, infinite, physically impossible growth. And the magnetic draw of the old model, life and politics seems to make some leaders and many followers reluctant to give up the old and to want, to believe in and to seek and lead real change.
Amidst lockdown and sensing clearly what good clean air once again can look and taste like, we could push on with new air quality standards and proper transport plans for the masses; all of us, irrespective of our economic power should be able to buy better quality for ourselves. In London, the congestion charge is returning. But, in Scotland, no, apparently. Now is not the time.
So will we just return to “normal”? We know we know better. Don’t we?
Global commons are perhaps for share-owners after all. But which? For all of us? We all have a share. The environment, like principles, must not be tradable.
Once, not least in the EU context, with an elaborately and, yes, often messily constructed, set of laws and policies, the notion of a clean, healthy and safe environment as a given, an agreed societal goal, perhaps even an inalienable right or a self-evident truth, was beyond argument, if not always the highest priority. Now it simply has to come first. The health of the planet frames our own.
We surely can’t claim ignorance of the connectedness of the system – that oil, plastics, marine pollution, inequality, addictions, drugs, animal trade, greed and disease are related; that natural resources, stock exchange, pension funds, traders, hedgers, prices, shopping, clothes, food, water, waste, housing are all part of a nexus desperately needing improvement?
Rewilding, green growth, the new normal. A genuinely green new deal must be so much more than slogans. It is time to define this and for our leaders to be challenged to set out credible shared visions and real plans, engaging comprehensively in its making and urgent delivery. And certainly not just from traditional economic perspectives. We have had so many warnings. How many more do we need? Would we survive the next?
A blog by Helen Todd, Campaigns and Policy Manager for Ramblers Scotland and former LINK Chair.
Sitting at home at my laptop in Edinburgh during lockdown, I’ve often found my mind wandering to some of my favourite places in Scotland. What’s it like on top of the Cairngorms right now? Are eagles noticing the lack of walkers?
It’s perhaps disconcerting for all of us who love Scotland’s wildlife and outdoors, to realise that nature doesn’t really need us to thrive. In fact, sadly the planet might be a lot better off without us.
However, as people, we need nature.
It’s not just about the air, water and soil we need to survive, but our environment is the context for our lives, from the raw materials which provide our food, medicines and goods, to the natural systems which protect and nurture us, like the bees and insects which pollinate our crops.
But humans are also a part of nature and we need to be in natural places. The Covid-19 lockdown has been hard for many of us, but it’s also highlighted how important it is for us to be able to get into green places. We gain huge benefits for our health and wellbeing from being outdoors, whether in urban parks and woodlands or in the great landscapes of mountains, lochs, coastal scenery and forests which Scotland is famous for, with their intrinsic value for our culture and sense of place.
During the strict lockdown period, the Scottish Government explicitly allowed outdoor exercise and our world-class access rights to continue, recognising these benefits. Even before coronavirus, physical inactivity was found to contribute to more than 2,500 premature deaths each year, costing NHS Scotland around £94.1 million annually. For mental health, being active in the natural environment brings particular benefits, with a 30% reduction in the risk of depression achievable.
You just have to compare the experience of a sun-dappled bike ride in your local woodland to the same distance covered indoors on an exercise bike. It’s like comparing a walk in an old commercial forest plantation to one in an ancient woodland – both may both soak up carbon, but native woodlands bring added value both for biodiversity and enjoyment.
Nature is not just important for our wellbeing. Money spent while getting outdoors for recreation is a vital part of Scotland’s economy, especially in rural areas. Scottish residents contribute approximately £2.6 billion each year through recreation and these activities play a valuable role in supporting sustainable tourism. VisitScotland estimates that walking tourism alone is worth £1.26 billion to the economy annually, supporting jobs in cafés, B&Bs and shops, as well as ranger services, path builders, outdoor instructors and many other small businesses.
Many LINK organisations help to engage people with the outdoors. This includes landowning bodies like RSPB, Scottish Wildlife Trust, National Trust for Scotland, Woodland Trust and the John Muir Trust, or the valuable role played by countryside rangers in bringing Scotland’s nature to life for generations of schoolchildren and adults alike. Add to this the energy of thousands of volunteers harnessed by LINK members in vital conservation work.
Outdoor recreation also has another benefit to society – there’s evidence that people who enjoy the outdoors are far more likely to campaign on environmental matters, helping to protect what we have for future generations. If people aren’t learning to value nature, they won’t care as its richness is depleted.
As we make the strong case for a green recovery from the Covid-19 crisis, it’s more vital than ever that we support efforts to get more people into nature to build a better, more sustainable world. This is particularly important for inequalities, as we know that too many people living in the most deprived areas of Scotland are still missing out on all the benefits of the outdoors. In fact, the wealthiest fifth of adults in Scotland are three times more likely to hill-walk or ramble than the poorest fifth.
But for this to happen there needs to be strategic investment to counter the decades of chronic underinvestment in the staff, infrastructure and the measures needed to help manage people’s visits to nature and protect the environment – and Scotland’s reputation as a destination.
Rural communities need help to support tourism with facilities like trails, toilets, public transport hubs and car parks. Investment is also needed in urban areas for paths, woodlands and blue and green spaces. I’ve found it hugely encouraging to see so many people of all abilities and backgrounds making use of Edinburgh’s paths and parks over the past months. Walking in Scotland over the lockdown period went up by 61%, which is a huge positive for the nation – but all these places need ongoing development and maintenance.
While it’s clear that public funding will be under pressure in the coming years, there must be government resources from across a range of policy areas, as well as other sources of funding such as tourism levies to help support honeypot areas. Otherwise the impacts could be even more stark this summer, as people flock outdoors or go on staycation post-lockdown.
By investing in nature and our enjoyment of the outdoors as emerge from this crisis, Scotland can make a bold commitment towards ensuring that we – and our planet – have a sustainable future for decades to come.
A first and personal take from LINK’s Chief Officer on recommendations for a green and fair recovery.
On 22 June, the Advisory Group on Economic Recovery, published a series of recommendations for the Scottish Government to consider as part of an economic recovery to the COVID-19 pandemic in Scotland. Here at LINK, we responded to the Group’s request for our thoughts. You can read what we said here. This afternoon, on 23 June, the Scottish Parliament debates the Group’s recommendations.
Our first impressions are that the Group’s recommendation to shift toward a wellbeing economy is welcome and we welcome the recognition of the important role nature-based solutions to climate change can play in a recovery. However, the report has not set out an ambitious vision for what a post-pandemic Scotland could be and how we can make changes to radically improve people’s lives while tackling the climate change and reversing biodiversity loss. The report acknowledges that a green recovery is central to Scotland’s economic recovery. The vision of the green recovery could be much wider: we need to go beyond green energy generation and circular economy. The examples in the report peer though the traditional lens of exploiting natural resources: whether through green energy, carbon storage.
COVID-19 has highlighted what is really important and what matters to many of us. We must ensure that this realisation underpins what we do next. It’s taken a global pandemic to remind us that nature calms us down and reassure us. That community is a great source of strength, comfort and ability to get things done. That connections to friends and family maintain us and keep us going. That arts and culture feeds our soul in many and diverse ways. That those who work in the emergency and front-line services provide an actual lifeline and that we really appreciate what they do for us all.
This is what matters. We’ve also realised what doesn’t matter: unnecessary travel and commuting; fast-fashion and take away coffee. Going forward then, what we need, and what we hope for, is a way to ensure we can all access everything we need and find ways of building and protecting access to that for us and future generations, while halting behaviours that work against that or that we no longer need.
This is why the next steps for Scotland as we recover from the pandemic require vision and ambition. Steps that put us on a path to where we need to be in the decades ahead. This report describes its approach of handing onto future generations a world as good as the one we inherited. We need to go further than that and build on Scotland’s strengths to ensure we hand on a better world.
And that is why my first reading of the recommendations from the Advisory Group have left me feeling rather let down. It’s hard to find the vision of a better world in here. This report rests on the old school approach to ‘what can we get’. This is encapsulated by its approach to nature, or natural capital: it looks at how we can continue to exploit nature but says very little about restoring it. The examples it gives of forestry, offshore energy, carbon capture, agriculture seem to be focus on getting more for less: with recommendations for actions limited to measuring Scotland’s natural ‘balance sheet.’ With only 10 years to go to reverse trends in climate changes and biodiversity loss, now is the time to act, not prop up old ways of working and a focus only on measuring what we are losing.
Where is the wider vision, identifying what we need to build on to make the world, and the country a better place, socially, environmentally and economically? If society’s response to the pandemic has been to recognise the value of nature, communities and essential workers, these recommendations should recognise that we all deserve to be able to access a green space, that rural communities depend on sustainable tourism and a healthy environment is not just about production.
For example, the Scottish National Investment Bank must be a force for good that invests in socially just, green initiatives. Bringing forward its ability to issue bonds will be a valuable tool to, as the Advisory Group note, ‘effectively address Scotland’s grand challenges’. The Bank needs to drive innovative investment at scale which delivers a positive impact for communities and the environment.
Government ownership stakes in business, strategic business support and foreign investment are obviously going to be important – but they must be steered towards initiatives that protect and restore what’s important – the environment, society and culture. If we are to learn the lessons from the 1980s, tax incentives must be socially and environmentally responsible. Lessons from 2008 show that bail outs must come with conditions of wider benefits to society, not just stakeholders. Planning and investment in natural capital must be targeted towards a vision at scale – both geographically and across time – in an ecologically coherent context. Marine renewables may be part of a wider solution but must be within the context of managing energy demand and contributing to climate and biodiversity targets. It is too easy for renewable infrastructure to do more harm than good.
Nature-based solutions to climate change in Scotland are going to be central to our recovery: peatland restoration and forestry, along with agriculture that works with nature are absolutely key. Scotland already has mechanisms in place to deliver some of these solutions, through forestry schemes and the Peatland ACTION Fund, but the fact is this is not enough. There is a vast untapped potential for ecosystem restoration that deliver multiple gains including restoring local landscapes, bringing new business opportunities, and building skills and new jobs in rural communities. Other countries are leading on this – New Zealand, a country with similar population size as Scotland, is investing NZ$1.1bn to create 11,000 jobs in large-scale nature restoration projects.[1]
This vision is missing from the economic recovery conversation – so far. Investment in large scale restoration projects that bring skilled work and employment opportunities, a restored environment and healthier lifestyles.
I recognise the Advisory Group’s report is a first step – and that often the first step is the hardest. But these recommendations need to go much further if we are to become the innovative, sustainable and forward-looking country we could be. This is not, yet, the pivot from the old way of thinking into a new way of investing in what really matters. Scotland needs to think big and act accordingly. At the same scale as our mountains, wide open landscapes and stretching coastlines. The horizon is a long way away.
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.
