Publication - Report

Heat and energy efficiency strategies: consultation analysis

Published: 14 Nov 2017
Directorate:
Energy and Climate Change Directorate
Part of:
Environment and climate change
ISBN:
9781788514170

Analysis of responses to the consultation on heat and energy efficiency strategies and regulation of district heating.

96 page PDF

793.2 kB

96 page PDF

793.2 kB

Contents
Heat and energy efficiency strategies: consultation analysis
6. Consultation Feedback

96 page PDF

793.2 kB

6. Consultation Feedback

6.1. At the end of the questions, respondents were asked if they would like to provide feedback in order to help improve future consultations and this section outlines the findings from these responses.

How satisfied were you with this consultation?

6.2. As the table below demonstrates, of those providing an answer, more respondents (28) were satisfied with the consultation than were dissatisfied (eight).

Section Evaluation: Question 1

Very Satisfied Slightly Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor dissatisfied Slightly Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied No reply
Business & Industry (24) 5 7 3 - 1 8
Network, Professional or Trade body (18) - 3 1 1 - 13
Local government (17) 2 4 3 1 - 7
Third sector & Community (9) 1 - 1 1 - 6
Public sector (7) - - 2 1 - 4
Academic (4) 1 1 - - 1 1
Other organisation (1) -- - 1 - - -
Individuals (7) 1 3 1 2 - -
Total (87) 10 18 12 6 2 39

6.3. Only 19 respondents, across all sub groups, provided any additional commentary. The key comment, from four respondents was that the consultation paper was too long, with another two respondents commenting that the questions were too repetitive. Other comments about the questions, each made by a single respondent were that the questions:

  • Were too verbose.
  • Not well worded.
  • Too detailed for a high level consultation.
  • Too ambiguous.
  • Not all relevant to the respondent or their sector.
  • Were worded from the perspective of established schemes with little regard to the low penetration of district heating systems nationally.

6.4. One respondent suggested that a separate list of questions be made available for people to review prior to responding to a consultation; another requested a simpler version for members of the general public; another disliked the 'agree / disagree' style of question.

6.5. Other comments in relation to the consultation included:

  • Scottish Government do not realise the implications of expecting organisations and individuals to respond to consultations as they take up a great deal of time and resources, particularly given the high number of consultations put out every year.
  • The timeframe for responding was too short.
  • There needs to be much more background work done on district heating.
  • The workshop session was informative and useful.
  • This consultation should be done in connection with SEEP and the Climate Change plan, not in isolation.

How would you rate your satisfaction with using this platform (Citizen Space) to respond to this consultation?

6.6. As the table below demonstrates, of those providing an answer, more respondents (41) were satisfied with using Citizen Space than were dissatisfied (three).

Section Evaluation: Question 2

Very Satisfied Slightly Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor dissatisfied Slightly Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied No reply
Business & Industry (24) 11 - 3 1 1 8
Network, Professional or Trade body (18) 3 1 - 1 - 13
Local government (17) 6 4 - - - 7
Third sector & Community (9) 2 1 - - - 6
Public sector (7) 1 2 - - - 4
Academic (4) 2 1 - - - 1
Other organisation (1) - 1 - - - -
Individuals (7) 6 - 1 - - -
Total (87) 31 10 4 2 1 39

6.7. Only eight respondents provided any additional commentary. These comments were:

  • Citizen Space is an excellent tool that is easy to use.
  • Some of the questions needed additional options for 'unsure' or 'other'.
  • Would like to be able to provide short contextual comments in the questionnaire format – would like this above the question and answer section.
  • Can be slow to work through the consultation questions.
  • Not all questions were relevant.
  • Would be useful to be told at the start of the consultation paper that a pdf copy of responses would be provided.
  • Dislike of the presentation of the consultation paper.
  • Difficult to find the actual consultation document.
  • A request to advertise the consultation better.

Contact