Community engagement events for National Marine Plan 2: analysis and synthesis

4 Results

The results are categorised based on attendee feedback relevant to the community engagement event objectives, specifically:

• feedback on priorities and area-based perspectives for NMP2 development
• building community capacity and understanding of marine planning, including awareness of NMP2, its development process, and engagement opportunities
• feedback on wellbeing and access
• how communities feel they could be involved in decision-making in marine planning

4.1 Priorities for NMP2

4.1.1 Competition for space

Many attendees expressed concern regarding the increasing competition for space across Scotland’s seas and highlighted it as an issue that needs to be addressed through marine planning. One attendee explained that they wanted greater clarity regarding which activities will take priority in NMP2. Another called for balance between the different uses of the sea and suggested that a spatial system would help to manage the different sectors in a holistic way.

The competition for space between fishing and offshore wind development was the conflict that was raised the most by attendees, with critical risks faced by the fishing industry in line with achieving net zero ambitions.

4.1.2 Impact on traditional industries

Safeguarding marine industries was a top priority for many attendees. The significant socio-economic benefits that the fishing industry brings to local communities was highlighted many times and attendees expressed concerns that the expansion of offshore wind would be at the expense of the fishing industry. Planning, for those attendees, was therefore seen as vital.

However, some event attendees emphasised that better access, such as safe harbours and appropriate transport, would be needed to enable more job opportunities from aquaculture. For example, one attendee pointed out that despite the presence of fish farms in the local area, the local community could not benefit from employment opportunities from the fish farm because of insufficient local infrastructure.

4.1.3 Just transition

The concept of a ‘just transition’ was explicitly mentioned by a few event attendees as an opportunity for boosting the local economy and, therefore, is a priority to them. Many more attendees implicitly discussed a just transition through various comments regarding the shift towards a more sustainable marine economy, the pace of change, and the need to safeguard more traditional industries.

4.1.4 Access to the marine environment

Difficulties in accessing the marine environment, especially in urban areas, was a recurring concern among attendees, with many calling for improved accessibility.

The quality of the marine environment was also considered a barrier for those wishing to use the marine environment. For example, a priority amongst attendees was to see improvements in water quality so that it is suitable for wild swimming, water sports, and other recreational activities.

4.1.5 Protection of marine life

There is widespread concern regarding the protection of marine life and ecosystems, with many expressing a strong desire for more effective conservation measures, including the Marine Protected Area (MPA) network. There is an expectation that a priority for NMP2 is to enhance biodiversity and avoid catastrophic decline in marine life, which also underpins wellbeing.

4.1.6 Co-location

Attendees emphasised the need for co-location and coexistence and that this should be facilitated by NMP2, including better communication between sectors, such as windfarm developers and fishers, to effectively support and manage co-location.

4.1.7 Awareness and education

Attendees highlighted the importance of raising awareness and educating the public about protection of the marine environment. There was a strong emphasis on engaging younger generations, with suggestions for events and initiatives, such as beach schools or a marine equivalent of the Scottish Association of Young Farmers^[2]. However, challenges were noted, such as a lack of capacity to engage effectively with schools and young people.

4.2 Regional priorities

Across the North, East, and West regions of Scotland, a significant shared concern is the competition for marine space, with fears around job losses and displacement. Attendees across all regions emphasised the importance of the marine environment for wellbeing and recreation. All regions also expressed the need for protecting and recovering marine biodiversity and highlighted issues with marine litter.

However, several regional differences also emerged from the engagement events. For example, in the North, there was a strong focus on the vulnerability of island communities and the need for a distinct approach when addressing the challenges faced by coastal versus island communities. Concerns over the use of marine space by some activities that undermine the quality of other activities, or the environment, were raised. For example, one attendee felt that fish farms are too close to sites suitable for snorkelling and the migration routes of wild salmon.

In the East, a primary concern was the impact of offshore wind development on other marine industries. Many participants pointed to an anticipated decline of the fishing industry. One participant, who had family that worked in oil and gas, felt that offshore wind was “moving too quickly” and that it should be developed in a more gradual way, further expressing that the industry can’t keep up with the targets set by the governments. These concerns were not shared by all and other participants wanted to see wind farms built in order to meet the net zero targets.

The protection of seabed and marine life was also raised as an important issue that needed to be acted upon quickly. The theme of co-existence or co-location of activities came through strong in the East, with attendees highlighting the potential for offshore wind, fisheries, and artificial reefs being in the same marine area.

Urban-specific issues, such as sewerage affecting water quality, and the difficulty of accessing marine spaces in cities, were highlighted in the East.

Similar to the events held in the North, attendees at the West coast event echoed concerns about the unique approach needed for island communities. However, there was a larger variation and number of issues raised in the West. Attendees highlighted additional issues including the abandonment of aquaculture sites, marine litter, the need for better representation of community voices in marine planning and fisheries management. Further concerns were raised over the conflicts between fishers, marine conservation, and marine tourism.

4.3 Capacity and outreach needs

The community engagement events were designed to be informative and increase awareness and understanding of marine planning amongst attendees. For example, at the beginning of the online community drop-in event on 25 January 2025, the NMP2 team provided attendees with an introduction to marine planning followed by an update on the progress of NMP2, before attendees took part in a participatory mapping exercise.

4.3.1 Empowerment through participation

Attendees appreciated the opportunity to contribute their concerns and ideas, feeling that their voices were being heard. They valued the chance to hear about the common challenges facing others in different areas of Scotland and the depth of concern surrounding these issues. Attendees enjoyed sharing ideas and found it empowering to provide direct input, particularly through activities like adding their own sticky notes rather than having someone summarise their comments. Additionally, attendees appreciated seeing who else had joined the engagement sessions, fostering a sense of shared participation.

4.3.2 Barriers to participation

One attendee raised the concern that many people may hesitate to share their thoughts or opinions, feeling they lack the qualifications or expertise. This was evident at several community engagement events, where a common initial response was for individuals to disqualify themselves, underlining that events can be intimidating. Indeed, some attendees said they had no knowledge of NMP2.

However, the NMP2 team made concerted efforts to create a welcoming environment and with a bit of encouragement, attendees often found that they had a wealth of valuable insights to share. It was further acknowledged that engagement events were time consuming for individuals and organisations and that there is a need to demonstrate they are worthwhile and that views expressed are considered.

4.3.3 Differing views on regional marine planning and NMP2

Some attendees displayed a deeper knowledge of marine planning, discussing the positives and negatives of regional marine planning, for example. One participant advocated for abandoning the regional approach altogether, while another emphasised the importance of supporting it. Those who displayed more knowledge about marine planning also had a mixed response to NMP2. Some felt it was crucial to sorting out issues, such as competition for space, while others were uncertain and concerned about what impact NMP2 would have in reality.

4.3.4 Suggestions for improvement to engagement in marine planning

Attendees offered suggestions for how to improve awareness of marine planning and engagement in events in the future, highlighting that more strategic communications could be used to reach a wider audience. This could include creating a campaign with various outputs, such as videos on a variety of social media platforms, having a figure head to increase publicity, and engaging with schools, community groups, churches, and other groups.

4.4 Wellbeing and access

Wellbeing and access to the sea emerged as a central theme throughout the engagement events. Many attendees shared the physical and mental health benefits of being near the sea, highlighting activities such as beach walks, rock pooling, swimming, snorkelling, and buying locally caught fish.

4.4.1 A deep connection

Some attendees expressed a deep connection to the sea. One attendee said: “I have lived most of my life by the sea and it is part of my identity, I frequently visit the coast, and it brings me immense joy and wellbeing, either by watching the sea or engaging in activities that take me into the water.”

4.4.2 Wellbeing overlooked

Some attendees felt that the wellbeing aspect of the sea does not receive enough attention, explaining that it is because it is not quantifiable nor that it has a monetary value.

4.4.3 Challenges with access

For some attendees, particularly those living in urban areas, access to the sea is not always straight forward. For example, one participant said that “ access to the sea and seashore is very patchy and I think a lot of Edinburgh residents wouldn’t consider themselves a coastal community .” Another said: “ I live around 10 minutes from the shore in North Edinburgh but still can’t access the coastline .”

Some feel that the state of the environment is limiting their access to the sea. One Edinburgh resident said: “ I used to swim in the sea regularly, to benefit my mental health, but I don’t like to do this in Portobello anymore as I am very concerned about the high level of sewage waste regularly deposited in the sea.” Attendees want improved access to the sea with one suggestion being to invest more in developing coastal paths.

4.4.4 Impacts of a declining industry on wellbeing

Concern was raised over the impact a decline in the fishing industry could have on wellbeing, anticipating a loss of employment and livelihoods within the fishing sector as offshore wind development expands. The concerns raised further emphasise the importance of a just transition, as highlighted earlier.

4.5 Community involvement in decision-making

4.5.1 Desire for more meaningful engagement

Attendees expressed a desire for more meaningful engagement, increased transparency in decision-making, and wanting to be able to see tangible change as a result of the engagement.

4.5.2 Frustration at lack of influence on decision-making

Some attendees wanted to see more opportunities to have their say and one felt they lacked any real opportunity to influence decisions, with another attendee saying " I feel like I have virtually no say in how [the sea] is managed. "

4.5.3 Platform to have voice heard

However, others felt that the engagement events provided a platform to share their voices and contribute directly to the marine planning process.

4.5.4 Scepticism towards consultations

The findings from the NMP2 engagement sessions indicated there was a general scepticism surrounding consultations. While not linked directly to Scottish Government marine planning consultation events, one attendee criticised developer-led consultations as being merely ‘for show’, suggesting that decisions had already been made.

4.5.5 Relevance of questions

Some attendees felt that the questions posed in NMP2 engagement sessions failed to capture the urgency and significance of their concerns, indicating a need for more thoughtfully designed engagement processes that better reflect local priorities.