Offshore wind - compensating for adverse effects on Protected European Sites: statutory guidance 2026
Statutory guidance on compensating for adverse effects from offshore wind on protected European Sites in Scotland.
6. Reasonably Proportionate
Scottish Ministers must be able to conclude that the compensatory measure or package of compensatory measures benefits the UK MPA network in a manner that is reasonably proportionate to the adverse effects, or predicted adverse effects, of the proposed offshore wind development on the integrity of the impacted European site network (i.e. the SAC or SPA).
In this guidance, reasonably proportionate means that the scale and anticipated ecological benefit of the compensatory measure(s) must be judged by Scottish Ministers to be relevant to the magnitude of the ecological loss arising from the offshore wind plan or project, recognising that compensatory measures must deliver an ecological contribution to the UK MPA network.
The benefit of a compensatory measure(s) does not need to match the impact exactly. However, a credible, evidence-based judgement must be provided demonstrating that the scale and relevance of the ecological benefit delivered by the compensatory measure appropriately compensates for the impact of the plan or project. This judgement must take account of the current ecological condition of the impacted feature based on evidence from the Appropriate Assessment.
Determinations of ‘reasonably proportionate’ must be based solely on ecological considerations. Economic, financial or commercial considerations must not be used to reduce the scale of compensation required to address the ecological impact.
Where possible and appropriate, the impacts being compensated for and the expected outcomes of the proposed compensatory measure(s) should be quantified, clearly explaining the methods and assumptions used.
Where quantification is not feasible, a clear justification must be provided and instead a reasoned qualitative assessment should be detailed, based on ecological evidence and expert judgement. Relevant research or precedent should be referenced where available. Any uncertainties, data gaps, and limitations in the evidence must be clearly set out.
The evidence required to support conclusions on reasonable proportionality, including acceptable standards and types of evidence, is set out in section 7.