Public bodies climate change duties - draft statutory guidance: consultation analysis - final report

5. The first duty – reducing emissions (climate change mitigation)

This chapter outlines responses to three consultation questions, Q5, Q6 and Q7. These questions look specifically at the information provided in Chapter 5, Annex A and Annex B of the guidance.

• Chapter 5 outlines information about implementing the first duty of reducing emissions and the expectations of all public bodies.
• Annex A includes a template Carbon Management Plan and relevant guidance, which is aimed at smaller and less complex public bodies, and allows public bodies to adapt it for themselves.
• Annex B includes a template Climate Change Plan for local authorities to support them to demonstrate compliance with the three climate change duties.

Comments on these three elements of the guidance were made across Q5-Q7; however, they have been presented below under the most appropriate question.

Q5. Do you have any comments about the guidance provided in this chapter on complying with the first duty?

Four fifths of all respondents commented on Q5, which focused on Chapter 5 of the guidance. The most common themes, in order of prevalence, were specific positive aspects of Chapter 5, the need for greater clarity, and areas to strengthen.

Chapter 5 guidance is comprehensive, clear and useful

Many respondents commented positively on Chapter 5, including that it is comprehensive and understandable. Other comments raised either by one or a few respondents included that it contains helpful signposting to legislation and good examples, outlines actions expected of public bodies to reduce emissions, and is helpful for compliance.

Several respondents commented on how the guidance will help support work to reduce emissions, move towards net zero, and compliance with the first duty. Respondents felt the guidance was in-depth, flexible, and suited to different organisations.

“The guidance provides a clear and comprehensive framework for complying with the first duty, reflecting the maturity of climate mitigation action and the generally robust reporting processes across the public sector” – Royal Conservatoire of Scotland

Several respondents noted that the guidance provided in Chapter 5 is clear in its intent and in the advice provided for public bodies to comply with the first duty. It was felt to be easy to follow, well written, and organised. A few respondents also noted alignment between the guidance and other advice and existing approaches in public bodies.

Areas to clarify, strengthen and increase practicality

In contrast to the above, many other respondents felt Chapter 5 of the guidance needed greater clarity and detail (see Chapter 2 of this report for more general comments on this theme). A range of specific suggestions included improving clarity on reporting emissions from outsourced incinerations or treatment.

Many respondents also highlighted where they thought Chapter 5 of the guidance could be strengthened. These suggestions were varied and specific. For example, several respondents suggested increasing the focus on the net zero agenda, adding more sector-specific content, ensuring links are up to date, and adding references to other guidance. Several respondents suggested increasing the practicality of the guidance to support implementation, such as through more worked examples.

Some respondents requested specific additions to the guidance, including how to finance carbon reduction projects, adding pension schemes at section 5.3 under the question ‘does your public body influence’, and guidance for local authorities on pathways to take to remain aligned with the Paris Agreement. Some respondents commented on the need for general simplification (see Chapter 2).

Comments on offsetting carbon emissions

Some respondents at Q5 and a few at Q15 raised the issue of offsetting carbon emissions. Views on carbon credits included that current approved schemes have very limited carbon credits. Suggestions to address this issue included that UK-based credits could be used if there is a shortage of credits directly attributable to Scottish projects or that a method could be adopted to support applications for carbon credits. Other concerns focused on the high cost of offsetting. Related suggestions included only requiring public bodies to offset their carbon emissions if there is a wider obligation which includes private sector businesses, to provide clarity on short-, medium- and long-term offsetting expectations, and not to expect public bodies to offset emissions unless required by funders, e.g. over a 10-year period. One respondent felt that Sustainable Scotland Network could set up a working group to consider what offsetting means for the public sector.

“While the focus on only offsetting unavoidable emissions is appropriate, there is a missed opportunity to stress that public bodies should maximise nature-based solutions in their land and the wider areas as a means of improving the absorption potential of greenhouse gas emissions, increasing carbon storage potential, increasing flood attenuation and improving biodiversity and nature networks.” – East Dunbartonshire Council

“A general ban on offsetting at this stage could strengthen the expectation and subsequent action towards, mitigation-first and offset as a last resort.” - EAUC

Other comments

The need to consider wider contextual factors was raised by some respondents. This is covered in Chapter 2 of this report. Some respondents also highlighted concerns with the approach outlined in Chapter 5 of the guidance, including challenges with the measurement and reporting of emissions. A few respondents noted duplication of reporting in existing reporting structures, such as through parent organisations of IJBs.

A few commented on leadership and decision-making. This included the need for a whole-organisation approach, including senior leadership endorsement for implementation, simplifying monitoring by considering organisation policy decisions, and developing area targets in partnership with important stakeholders. Two respondents called for more engagement with relevant industries and co-design of a just transition process.

Q6. Do you think the Carbon Management Plan template is suitable for its intended purpose? (Annex A - template Carbon Management Plan: ‘baseline’ plan aimed at smaller public bodies)

Almost seven in ten (69%) of respondents answering Q6 felt the Carbon Management Plan template (referred to below as ‘the template’) was suitable for its intended use, while 16% did not and 16% were unsure. While a majority of most types of public bodies agreed, IJBs were less likely to agree (33%) and more likely to express uncertainty (50%).

Two thirds of all respondents provided a comment to explain their answer to Q6. This question focuses on information provided in Annex A, which includes the template and associated guidance aimed at smaller and less complex public bodies. The most common themes in order of prevalence were the suitability of the template, specific positive comments, and the proposed approach aligning with existing reporting requirements. A few respondents noted this question did not apply to them as they would follow the Climate Change Plan template for local authorities (see Q7).

The Carbon Management Plan template is suitable

Many commented positively on the template, stating it is suitable for its intended purpose, provides a standardised approach to carbon management, and creates a structured approach to emissions reduction. General comments included that expectations were clearly outlined and that the content is appropriate, comprehensive, and well structured.

“A template for a Carbon Management Plan (CMP) is welcomed as it will establish a standard for the information that should be present in the CMPs of public bodies.” - sportscotland

A range of positive aspects of the template were noted by several respondents. Views included that it is proportionate and useful for smaller and less complex public bodies by being suitable for those with limited capabilities for measuring, monitoring and reporting carbon emissions. Some respondents highlighted that the template aligns with existing reporting requirements and guidelines, notably the public bodies climate change reporting master template, as is noted in Annex A. Respondents also acknowledged the template's alignment with their current reporting and plans and felt the template was clearly set out.

Suggested improvements

Ways to improve the usability of the template were suggested by some respondents. These included adding more examples and case studies, providing guidance on the identification, implementation and exit for interim solutions, and better reflecting the roles and emission profiles of different public bodies. Other singular suggestions were made, such as including a checklist, a tiered approach to scope 3 emissions inclusion, and continuously updating the management plan format.

Additional information to include was suggested by some respondents, such as:

• Measuring transport emissions from service users.
• Including a review period and mechanism.
• Including supply chain and international student travel in the inventory table.
• Encouraging early-stage scope 3 considerations.
• Incorporating energy use intensity reporting requirements per building.
• Adding a methodology for costing emission reduction targets.
• Referencing land use and food procurement in the emissions scope and targets examples.

A range of suggestions for strengthening the template included:

• Noting that mitigation adaptation and sustainable development are interlinked.
• Ensuring alignment between the rest of the guidance and the template.
• Focusing more on enabling measures, such as supply chain emissions, and assessing effectiveness and progress.
• Prompting identification of wider benefits and adapting to changing circumstances.
• Considering greenhouse gases beyond carbon dioxide.

“However, the template could be developed further to incorporate the recognition highlighted in the statutory guidance that mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development are interlinked. The template could, for example, within the policies and projects register section include prompts alongside mitigation projects such as “Adaptation considerations within project / policy” and “Sustainable development and EDI considerations within project / policy”. This would help facilitate holistic thinking around mitigation activities and help avoid unwanted adverse impacts, such as inadvertently creating vulnerabilities or missing opportunities for wider sustainability benefits. Information contained in the prompts could also be used as decision-making evidence to demonstrate public body compliance with the statutory duties.” – Glasgow Kelvin College

Some respondents thought the template would benefit from additional detail and clarity. Comments from a few respondents included calls for clarity on what units are to be used, who is expected to complete the template, and explaining carbon insetting and usage.

Wider concerns

Comments that the template may not be as suitable for IJBs and organisations that are not small organisations or local authorities, were made by a few respondents. One suggested allowing for adaptation by larger organisations.

A few respondents raised potential duplication of the template, such as with existing organisational climate reporting, plans, and strategies, with a concern that this could result in duplication of effort. A few raised concerns with the proposed approach, including the view that the template is not adaptable to different sectors and organisations and that it is challenging to implement with year-on-year funding. Two respondents called for embedding monitoring and governance expectations in the template and for the plan to be fluid to allow for changes.

Q7. Do you think the Climate Change Plan template for local authorities is suitable for its intended purpose? (Annex B – template Climate Change Plan for local authorities)

Just under half (48%) of all respondents answering Q7 felt the Climate Change Plan template for local authorities (referred to in this question as ‘the template for local authorities’) was suited for its intended purpose, with 16% stating it is not and 36% unsure. Over four fifths (81%) of local authorities agreed that the Plan was suitable for use, while 15% did not and 4% were unsure. Higher levels of ‘don’t know’ among other respondent types likely reflects the lack of relevance of the template to those organisations.

Almost three quarters of all respondents left an open comment at Q7. This question focuses on information provided in Annex B of the guidance, which includes a template Climate Change Plan for local authorities. Given this focus on local authorities, two fifths of those who commented noted the question was irrelevant to them or that they are not a local authority. However, a few still responded and are included in the analysis below.

In order of prevalence, the most common themes evident at Q7 were positive comments on the usefulness of the template for local authorities, the need for more practicality in the template, and suggestions for greater clarity.

Positive comments

Several respondents made positive comments highlighting the usefulness of the template for local authorities and that it is suitable for its intended purpose. Regarding usefulness, general comments included that it is helpful, practical, detailed, appropriate, proportionate, adaptable, and will support consistency across local authorities. Respondents noted that the template for local authorities was well structured, covered key information, followed existing standards, and a few felt it was clearly set out.

“Renfrewshire Council believes that this standardised reporting will improve the quality and consistency of reporting by public sector major players and will complement and enhance existing plans, such as the Council’s Carbon Management Plan and give the ability to ensure one source of reporting and update for both organisational and area-wide emissions. Using standardised formats allows for useful and valid comparisons across similar public bodies’ functions. It also brings the opportunities for knowledge sharing and replication of transformational change.” – Renfrewshire Council

A few respondents commented that the template for local authorities aligned with their organisational action plans, strategies, and approaches. One commented that it would support the alignment of local action with national targets, and another noted it is well aligned with Annex A of the guidance.

“We found this one of the most useful parts of the guidance. The Council has a Climate Change Route and internal Climate Change Plan. However, we liked the practical hands-on feel of the document and will integrate it into our forward thinking, and it reflects our current approach, as a Council.” – Scottish Borders Council

Suggested improvements

Some respondents emphasised ways the template for local authorities could be improved to increase usability and practicality. Some commented generally on the need for greater detail, simplification, and clarity. Specific comments included changing the template for local authorities' structure, such as making the plan into two parts for corporate emissions and area-wide emissions and including sustainability in the name.

A few respondents noted areas of the template for local authorities that they felt could be strengthened. These suggestions were varied and specific. Two felt the guidance regarding community engagement should be strengthened. A few respondents commented on the need for collaboration to be reflected more in the template for local authorities. This included comments on community, local, and national collaboration and partnership for reducing area-wide emissions.

Suggested additions were made by a few respondents, such as including sustainable tourism strategies from local authorities and considering how local authorities can influence organisations and businesses in their area.

Concerns

Alongside general concerns about resourcing (see Chapter 2), specific concerns included that the success of the Climate Change Plan requires appropriate capacity at a local level and that investment in fossil fuels is not taken into account in area-wide emissions. In addition, there were concerns that local authorities have little influence on area-wide emissions but can lead by example, and that larger local authorities may need several plans given the extensive scope of the guidance.

A few respondents noted that the template for local authorities could create duplication of work, such as with IJB plans. One suggested using shared platforms to minimise any duplication of effort.