Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture research strategy 2027-2032: consultation analysis

2. Methodology

Introduction

Section 2 provides details on the public consultation methodology and analysis, and comprises sub-sections on:

• the public consultation
• consultation engagement events
• analysis
• consultation limitations

Appendix A has more information on data management and cleaning and analysis. Appendix B provides a list of all the organisations who responded to the consultation. Appendix C provides details of respondents’ satisfaction with the consultation.

The public consultation

A total of 70 validated responses were included in the final analysis.^[1] The Respondent Information Form (RIF) captured information about individual and organisation respondents.

Table 2.1 shows that responses came primarily from organisations (84%). A review of the consultation responses from individual respondents (16%) shows that just over one-quarter of these responses were from academics.

EKOS, in discussion and agreement with RESAS, categorised organisation respondents under five broad categories, and Table 2.2, below, shows the number of each type of organisation respondent. It is recognised that there may be instances of overlap and a ‘best-fit’ approach has been adopted to categorisation.

A diverse range of organisations responded to the consultation, including:

• third sector organisations – charities and non-governmental organisations at a regional, Scotland and UK-wide level. These organisations operate across a range of sectors including food and drink, built environment, and agriculture. Examples of third sector respondents include Bioregioning Tayside, Community Woodlands Association, and Nourish Scotland
• other stakeholders – including private sector companies, other stakeholder groups, cooperatives, and associations at a Scotland and UK-wide level. Other stakeholders operate across a range of sectors including food and drink, communications, and agriculture, and examples include Scotland's International Environment Centre, the National Farmers Union Scotland (NFU Scotland), and Seafood Scotland
• other public bodies – for example, non-departmental public bodies and other statutory bodies at a Scotland and UK-wide level. These public bodies operate across various sectors including food and drink, heritage, public utilities, and agriculture. Examples include the Crofting Commission, Cairngorms National Park Authority, and Quality Meat Scotland
• Research Institutes/Centres of Expertise – including the main research providers (MRPs) for the SRP comprising James Hutton Institute, Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), Moredun Research Institute, Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, Biomathematics and Statistics Scotland and Rowett Institute
• other scientific organisations – including those that promote science and technology through research, education, or advocacy. These organisations operate at a Scotland and UK-wide level and span a range of sectors including agriculture, technology, animal health and welfare, and environmental conservation. For example, Hannah Dairy Research Foundation, Sustainable Farm Networks, and British Veterinary Association

Consultation engagement events

The only source of information for the consultation analysis were responses made via Citizen Space and other response types (for example, emails).

The draft ENRA Research Strategy 2027-2032 was an agenda item at the RESAS Science, Evidence and Policy Conference 2025 that brought together stakeholders from across the rural and environmental research and policy landscape in Scotland. The Scottish Government RESAS division also met with representatives from Research Institutes and other stakeholders as part of the wider engagement process. These individuals and organisations were signposted to submit a response to the public consultation via Citizen Space.

Analysis

There were no closed-ended questions asked in the consultation document.

For open-ended questions, the analysis report aims to convey both the strength and frequency of the themes raised. The qualitative analysis identifies the key themes across responses to each question. This means that:

• most sections in the report contain numbered themes (for example, Theme 1, Theme 2, Theme 3) – these have been set out in order of relative importance with Theme 1 noted by the greatest number of respondents
• themes/points raised have been quantified in some way to articulate the strength of opinion – for example, we use the terms ‘a small number’ (10% or less of respondents), ‘some’ (11% to 25% of respondents), ‘many’ (26% to 50% of respondents), ‘the majority’ (51% to 74% of respondents), and ‘the vast majority’ (75% or more of respondents)

This consultation analysis report includes quotes from respondents who gave permission for their response to be made public to add richness to the analysis. This does not indicate that these comments will be acted upon or given greater weight than others.

Consultation limitations

Similar to other public consultations, the main limitation of the consultation process is that respondents are self-selecting, and the responses may not be representative of the population as a whole.

Points raised that are outside the scope of the consultation

It should be noted that points were raised in consultation responses around the degree to which the operational models of the Centres of Expertise may change in the future. This is, however, outside the scope of this public consultation.