Environment strategy: behaviour changes needed to achieve Scotland's goals for biodiversity

6 Scotland’s policy supports for pro-biodiversity behaviours

This chapter presents the findings from the review of existing Scottish policies. For each of the eight pro-biodiversity behaviour categories identified in the literature review (see Chapter 3), we outline the current level of policy support and existing gaps in the coverage of these behaviours.

6.1 Overview of policy support for behaviour change

Figure 5 illustrates the relationships between eight biodiversity behaviour categories (shown on the left) and key Scottish national policy frameworks, strategies, and statutory instruments (on the right) that support or encourage these behaviours. Each flowing line represents a connection identified through a qualitative coding process, where relevant sections of policy documents were systematically reviewed and coded based on their alignment with the behaviours.

Policies and instruments were included if they demonstrated either:

1. Direct Relevance – where the policy explicitly supported or encouraged a specific behaviour, and/or

2. Potential for Behaviour Alignment – where the policy indirectly supported or partially aligned with the intent behind the behaviour. This includes policies that create enabling conditions, express supportive principles, or outline complementary objectives that may indirectly encourage the behaviour over time.

Both types of relevance were combined into a single flow line. The thickness of each line reflects the strength and frequency of the connection, indicating how often and how strongly a given policy supports a particular behaviour. Thicker lines suggest more frequent or in-depth references to the behaviour within the policy text. The dotted lines at the top indicate that the two behaviour categories related to ‘championing’ and ‘investing in biodiversity’, were not underpinned by direct policy support. While there are some indirect references, these behaviours lack clear and dedicated linkage to policy instruments.

To maintain clarity, the diagram highlights only the strongest connections, focusing on policies with the most substantial behavioural content. On the right-hand side, the coloured column segments next to each policy or instrument represent the cumulative number of behavioural links associated with that policy. For example, the behaviour "Leaving natural places as you found them" emerged as the most frequently referenced, indicating broad policy support. Among the policy instruments, the Scottish Outdoor Access Code was the most strongly connected, reflecting a thick right -hand-side column as its alignment is with multiple biodiversity behaviours.

Sections 6.2-6.9 below discuss the current policy support for each of the behaviour categories in more detail.

6.2 Eating less meat

There is policy support in Scotland to promote reduced meat consumption and encourage a move towards more plant-rich diets, with this being framed mainly around health benefits. Policy mechanisms supporting this shift include guidelines and rules set for schools and public sector procurement.

Specific policy examples include:

• Scottish Dietary Goals advise limiting red and processed meat to no more than 70g per person per day on average.
• Instruments like The Nutritional Requirements for Food and Drink in Schools (Scotland) Regulations 2020 set specific maximum limits on red and processed meat provided to pupils weekly. This represents a more direct policy lever within controlled environments than general consumer guidance.
• The Eatwell Guide serves as the leading consumer resource across the UK, illustrating recommended food group proportions for a healthy, balanced diet.
• Scotland’s National Planning Framework 4 and the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 encourage community-growing initiatives that support individuals in producing their own food, thereby directly facilitating access to plant-based food at the household level.
• Good Food Nation Framework seeks to enable healthier and sustainable choices and acknowledges the necessity of transitioning to a more sustainable food system to address climate change and environmental degradation.

While the Good Food Nation Framework links food systems to climate change and environmental degradation, the dietary change narratives in this context make limited reference to biodiversity loss or the climate impacts of meat consumption. Overall, the policy focus is on downstream interventions centring around education and persuasion, through the promotion of guidelines on diets, with some measures employing restrictions on meat served in school meals. The limited reference to biodiversity loss or climate impacts in dietary change narratives could reduce the perceived urgency or rationale for plant-based dietary shifts from an environmental perspective. There is therefore potential to give the environment more prominence in messaging aiming to promote healthy diets, and to actively promote the benefits of reducing the quantity of red and processed meat consumed in favour of selecting plant-based alternatives and/or higher quality meat produced to higher environmental and welfare standards.

The policies examined in this research reflect a multi-level governance approach, operating across different scales: national guidelines (such as the Scottish Dietary Goals and the Eatwell Guide), sector-specific regulations (e.g., School Food Regulations), and place-based initiatives (such as community growing projects). This reflects the multi-level nature of food system governance.

Public procurement is another common lever that influences markets and supply chains towards desired outcomes (e.g., sustainability and local sourcing). Policies directly address opportunity within specific settings, particularly schools, by limiting meat provision and encouraging access to fruit, vegetables, and alternatives. Public sector procurement influences the availability of local and potentially plant-based options in public institutions. Further exploration of the potential for strengthened public procurement targets around sustainable meat products may be beneficial.

The Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 simplifies legislation on allotments, making it easier for individuals and communities to grow their own food. Support for community growing facilitates household access to home-grown plant-based food. One of the gaps identified during the workshop was the affordability of healthier, sustainable, or plant-based options. The policies and instruments show a lack of detailed policy levers to enhance the general opportunity for households to access affordable, convenient, and appealing plant-based options in broader retail and food environments. Further exploration and potential development of public procurement targets for future iterations of the Good Food Nation Plan are needed.

6.3 Choosing sustainable product options

Scotland's approach, particularly through its Environment Strategy, is to tackle the environmental impacts of consumption and production, with emphasis on biodiversity loss and the broader global footprint. To address sustainable consumption objectives, the strategy highlights action towards developing the circular economy and considering the global footprint via supply chains, both of which are less central to the current project’s scope. The policy review did, however, identify the following approaches aimed at influencing household consumer behaviour:

• Menu planning in schools and hospitals includes guidance on using local, seasonal, and sustainable ingredients. For example, the Nutritional Requirements for Food and Drink in Schools (Scotland) Regulations 2020 set the standards that are applied to all food and drink supplied in Scotland’s schools.
• Programmes like Food for Life Scotland offer best practices for stepwise adoption of sustainable food sourcing, setting out a process by which public catering services incrementally implement the requirements needed to achieve Food for Life Scotland accreditation.
• Campaigns under the Organic Ambitions Plan emphasise organic food's environmental and social benefits.
• Scotland's Fisheries Management Strategy (FMS) regulates for low-carbon, responsibly sourced food systems. It sets out an approach to managing sea fisheries as part of the wider Blue Economy. The FMS is a ten-year strategic document, and many actions will be delivered over the longer term.

The following areas could be further explored to support and encourage more sustainable consumer choices:

• Promotion of sustainable choices: Encouraging specific behaviours like adopting plant-based diets, choosing organic and seasonal produce.
• Information-based levers: Tools like certifications and ecolabelling aim to empower consumers to make environmentally conscious decisions. There are limitations with such tools (see also section 5.3), including the difficulty in providing comprehensive information (e.g., on labour or social conditions). There is limited policy focus specifically aimed at helping consumers make easier and more informed decisions about biodiversity impacts, for example, through mechanisms such as eco-labelling. Developing clearer, more accessible, and reliable labelling tools, such as a simplified yet comprehensive sustainability label that could help address this gap, however such an ambition would likely require coordination at the UK or international level. A simpler first step may be around raising awareness and understanding of existing ecolabels and certifications.
• Economic incentives and taxation: These offer a means of shaping consumer behaviour in support of biodiversity goals. The Soft Drinks Industry Levy serves as a useful example, demonstrating how fiscal policies can steer choices through price signals by creating a direct economic incentive for healthier consumption.

Beyond relying solely on individual consumer choice, particularly in relation to complex environmental issues, there is a case for more upstream intervention. This could include regulatory measures, such as banning specific environmentally harmful products. The Scottish Government has already committed to phasing out use of peat in horticulture^[6]. The rationale for such interventions is that they relieve individual consumers from the responsibility of navigating complex environmental impacts, thereby ensuring more consistent and effective outcomes.

One significant lever highlighted in policy is the strategic use of public procurement to drive more sustainable production and consumption patterns. The Sustainable Procurement Duty requires contracting authorities to consider how their procurement activities can improve environmental wellbeing, including reducing biodiversity loss and supporting nature's adaptation. Public bodies are specifically encouraged to procure local, healthy, and sustainable food, including organic and seasonal produce options. Guidance like 'Catering for Change' supports this. Catering procurement criteria can specify food items that benefit biodiversity, such as seasonal and organic options. Public procurement also seeks to avoid products linked to adverse environmental impacts, citing examples like products from overfishing/by-catch waste, forest clearance, and the use of peat-based products. Mechanisms like the Sustainability Test in procurement are designed to help buyers assess potential negative biodiversity impacts within supply chains. Public services like hospitals and schools are highlighted as essential spheres of influence where procurement policies on local sourcing and organic certification can impact.

One of the challenges underpinning these efforts is the opacity of supply chains. This opacity makes it hard for people (and presumably procurers) to understand the impact of their purchases and hinders their ability to make sustainability-oriented decisions. Making supply chains more transparent is important for enabling sustainable purchases.

6.4 Conservation volunteering

Institutional support for conservation volunteering is primarily channelled through targeted campaigns and strategic initiatives. A notable example is NatureScot's Make Space for Nature campaign, which encourages individuals to dedicate time to nature-based activities and participate in citizen science. The campaign aspires to broaden its reach by establishing national frameworks promoting nature volunteering and citizen science, enhancing public engagement and fostering sustained action for nature. These are frameworks to provide guidance, tools, and support to make it easier for individuals/groups to participate, drawing on a range of intervention functions including education, persuasion and enablement.

Citizen science is recognised as an important mechanism for enhancing ecological knowledge, particularly in monitoring species such as pollinators. Scotland depends on citizen scientists to generate species data including many of the species used to analyse change in the State of Nature reports, allowing access to broader datasets than would be feasible through traditional, funded research alone. This reliance highlights the value of volunteer contributions to ecological data collection and biodiversity monitoring.

The workshop participants noted that getting beyond those already involved (the ‘converted’) is a key challenge, suggesting a need for broader engagement support or mechanisms. Also noted was that policies place comparatively little emphasis on forming and supporting institutional partnerships, such as those between universities, schools, and conservation organisations, which could help build capacity around conservation volunteering. Strengthening policy support for these cross-sector partnerships presents a significant opportunity to foster more structured, inclusive, and sustainable volunteer engagement while reinforcing the long-term integration of conservation values across education and civic life.

Policy instruments such as those underpinning community gardens and broader community empowerment frameworks contribute to localised planning for access to land and social spaces conducive to conservation-related volunteering, such as urban food-growing initiatives. Community empowerment is thus positioned as a key enabler of volunteering and participatory environmental governance. The Community Empowerment Policy articulates a connection between enhanced community capacity and increased volunteer engagement, seeking to build behavioural change by developing individuals' capabilities and opportunities for local action. This policy provides tools for community involvement and supporting community-led initiatives, to increase skills and foster collaboration and partnership.

Overall, policy documents reference time-giving and citizen science, however there is potential for further policy support around the provision of services that provide opportunities for volunteering and in delivering a framework for opportunities for partnership and capacity building around volunteering opportunities. The stakeholder workshop highlighted that government policy can play a vital role in supporting volunteering by enabling funding mechanisms for core costs such as travel, training, and coordination. This, in turn, can facilitate local access through community-based hubs and subsidised transport. Policies could support the establishment of more dedicated, paid roles that coordinate and sustain volunteer activity. By funding these positions, policymakers can help ensure the long-term viability of volunteer-led initiatives, enhance community participation, and strengthen the infrastructure that underpins social and environmental action. There is also potential for broader recognition and promotion of diverse volunteer activities beyond data collection and large-scale restoration, such as local habitat maintenance, seed collection, and educational outreach.

6.5 Wildlife gardening

Broad policy support exists for wildlife gardening through actions such as installing ponds, planting hedgerows, and creating habitats, yet there is an absence of specific policy instruments explicitly targeting biodiversity-enhancing practices in domestic gardens. Several policies and legal frameworks underpin the broader biodiversity agenda and are tangentially relevant to wildlife gardening:

• NatureScot's "Make Space for Nature" campaign is a prominent communication initiative designed to engage the public in simple, nature-supportive actions. The campaign advocates for creating microhabitats (e.g., log piles, hedgerows, and ponds), discourages using artificial turf, decking, and paving, and promotes citizen science and conservation volunteering. However, this remains an awareness-raising initiative rather than a formal policy instrument.
• The Wildlife and Countryside (Scotland) Act 1981 and the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 provide the legal framework for species protection. They forbid actions such as disturbing protected birds and bats, uprooting wild plants, and releasing non-native species. While these acts help safeguard biodiversity, they do not contain direct provisions or incentives to encourage biodiversity-supportive behaviours in private gardens.
• The Pollinator Strategy for Scotland (2017–2027) represents one of the few documents that explicitly acknowledges the role of private gardens in supporting biodiversity. It promotes the development of pollinator-friendly habitats, including in gardens and allotments, and supports accessible guidance for householders on how to manage flower-rich areas and urban green spaces.
• The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy to 2045 and the associated Biodiversity Delivery Plan also reference the importance of enhancing biodiversity in urban green and blue infrastructure. These strategies support habitat restoration, the creation of pollinator pathways, and the integration of wildlife-friendly design features in both public and private landscapes.
• The Organic Action Plan (2016–2020) emphasises practices associated with organic systems, such as avoiding synthetic fertilisers and promoting native species habitats, as models for ecologically beneficial land management. While these principles can apply to domestic gardening, the plan primarily targets agricultural systems rather than household settings.
• The concept of Nature Networks, as outlined in the Biodiversity Strategy, includes ambitions to expand ecological connectivity across urban and rural areas. Gardens and domestic green spaces are implicitly recognised as potential contributors to these networks, although specific guidance or mechanisms for private participation are limited.

Despite this suite of policies, the approach remains reliant on guidance, voluntary action, and public awareness campaigns. While useful, these largely address motivational drivers of behaviour. There is potential for future policy development in this area to consider support for interventions that enable wildlife gardening e.g. through individualised and community-based support. Financial incentives for wildlife gardening and local planning restrictions e.g. to limit conversion of vegetated surfaces in gardens also offer potential. In addition to the existing commitment to ban use of peat in growing media, there are further opportunities for regulation/legislation to restrict the use of specific pesticides for household use. Additionally, as not all households have access to private outdoor space, policies could consider opportunities for engagement in wildlife gardening through community gardens and allotments.

While popular media (e.g. television programmes and social media) play a significant role in shaping public interest in wildlife gardening, there may be significant potential in seeking to engage those who are not already gardening enthusiasts. The current emphasis on awareness alone may be insufficient, especially in the context of wider socio-economic challenges such as the cost-of-living crisis, which can deprioritise nature-friendly practices perceived as costly or complex.

The policy landscape reviewed reveals potential gaps in terms of:

• Financial or regulatory incentives for biodiversity-supportive gardening, such as grants, tax reliefs, or subsidy schemes aimed at homeowners or community groups.
• Consideration of the potential for metrics for monitoring biodiversity contributions of private gardens, whether at the household or local authority level.
• Control of pollution from private gardens, including from household pesticide use or garden chemical runoff, which is not comprehensively addressed in wildlife or biodiversity policy.
• Encouragement of native species, with existing policies emphasising controlling non-native and invasive species rather than proactively promoting native planting.
• Spatial planning - the Biodiversity Framework Delivery Plan 2024–2030 references National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) as Scotland’s national spatial strategy, underscoring its central role in tackling the climate and nature crises. NPF4 outlines spatial principles, regional priorities, national developments, and national planning policy and requires that all new developments or green spaces demonstrate positive effects on biodiversity.

6.6 Managing impacts of pets

There are existing regulations and guidance around preventing dogs from harming livestock and ensuring public safety. The Scottish Outdoor Access Code's recommendations for dogwalkers on controlling dogs in natural areas is advisory rather than enforceable. Under the Scottish Outdoor Access Code, ‘proper control’ of your dog depends on where you are. Key guidelines include: never take your dog into fields with young animals, avoid fields of fruit or vegetables unless you're on a clear path. These guides help protect livestock, crops, and other people enjoying the outdoors. The Dog Fouling (Scotland) Act 2003 addresses failing to clean up after one’s dog in public open spaces, appealing to social norms around cleanliness and public decency, using coercion (in the language of the BCW, referring to penalties) and regulation to enforce compliance. This offence is punishable by a fine of up to £500. While it indirectly reduces environmental health risks, the focus remains on hygiene and nuisance rather than on the ecological impact of faeces, such as eutrophication or the disturbance of soil fauna. There is no explicit mention of biodiversity, thereby missing an opportunity to expand public motivation to understand and act on broader ecological harms. For the Control of Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act, this legislation criminalises dogs “worrying” livestock, primarily reflecting agricultural priorities. Affecting wildlife is absent from its scope, limiting its contribution to broader biodiversity. In the workshop it was discussed that access rights are technically conditional on a dog being under close control. However, the challenge lies in enforcing this condition and interpreting what constitutes 'close control', with some participants expressing a preference for it to mean that dogs should be kept on a lead. In the Control of Dogs Order 1992 this primarily focuses on mandatory identification of dogs via collars and tags. While this aids in owner accountability and enables enforcement, its primary rationale lies in public and livestock safety. It operates via regulation, creating a formal expectation for owner responsibility, but does not address wildlife or free-roaming impacts.

The Scottish Outdoor Access Code is a hybrid instrument combining regulation, guidance, and education. It introduces ecological protection as a behaviour target, but the language remains advisory for most wildlife interactions. Its influence on motivation may be limited by challenges in enforcement, and its impact on capability depends on pet owners’ ecological awareness, which varies widely. Moreover, opportunity for compliance is not always supported by physical infrastructure (e.g., signage, fenced paths).

While dog owners are often advised to control pets near livestock, equivalent messaging for sensitive wildlife areas is minimal, inconsistent, or framed as advisory only During the workshop, discussions centred on the harms caused by dogs to seal pups, coastal birds, and wildlife more broadly. Discussions highlighted that local governance is typically reactive rather than proactive, and whilst site-specific bylaws exist, they are unevenly implemented. Few ecologically rich areas have on-site personnel, such as rangers or wardens, to manage pet behaviour or intervene in cases of disturbance. There is also no standard system for reporting repeat offences, such as dogs chasing deer or cats preying on protected species.

In relation to animal welfare, the Codes of Practice for the Welfare for Cats and Dogs, play a guidance role as government-issued welfare codes. For instance, the Cat Welfare Code suggests keeping cats indoors at night to reduce harm. While framed around cat safety, it indirectly addresses wildlife predation by domestic cats, particularly of birds and small mammals.

6.7 Leaving natural places as you found them

This theme is well reflected in Scottish policy documents, particularly in relation to outdoor access and responsible behaviour in natural environments. The Scottish Outdoor Access Code promotes the principle of leaving natural places as you found them. It emphasises responsible behaviours such as staying on designated trails, avoiding littering, and respecting wildlife, and is one of the primary frameworks through which this ethos is communicated and encouraged. The Scottish Government seeks to promote positive public action for nature and reduce environmental impact. Responsible access to most land and inland water is a legal right in Scotland, and central to this is the expectation that individuals care for the environment and avoid causing harm while exercising these rights. Adherence to the Scottish Outdoor Access Code encourages practical measures to minimise environmental degradation, such as following established paths near homes or agricultural land, avoiding soft or wet ground when cycling, and using appropriate routes in forested areas. It also serves as a key awareness-raising tool, reinforcing behavioural norms and responsibilities associated with outdoor access.

However, the Code and associated policies do not provide comprehensive detail on how the principle of “leaving the land as you found it” is monitored, enforced, or supported in the context of less severe or unintentional impacts. At the stakeholders’ workshop, participants challenged the idea of simply 'leaving natural places as you found them.' Instead, they called for a more active approach, suggesting we should aim to 'leave it better than you found it' to encourage stronger care for the environment.

Legal protections also exist to prevent direct harm to wildlife and habitats. The Wildlife and Countryside Act (Scotland) 1981 makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly pick, uproot, or destroy protected wild plants and, in some cases, any wild plant without landowner permission. It also prohibits the planting of certain species in the wild. Although a review of waste policy falls outside the remit of this research, legislation concerning littering is in place. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, authorised officers from designated litter authorities are empowered to issue fixed penalty notices.

NatureScot has the authority to erect signage for the protection of natural heritage in areas where access rights are exercised. Supplementary guidance is available for specific activities, such as wildlife watching or foraging, which emphasises care and caution to avoid ecological disturbance. The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code offers similar guidance in marine environments.

Overall, the current policy framework addresses responsible outdoor recreation behaviour through a combination of access rights, guidance, legal restrictions, and environmental restructuring including the provision of infrastructure such as designated paths to shape public interaction with nature. While specific harmful behaviours are prohibited (e.g. littering or damaging protected flora), there are few explicit policy levers requiring users to prevent, report, or remediate accidental or indirect environmental impacts. There is also limited emphasis on encouraging restoration or on accountability mechanisms for damage beyond criminal thresholds.

6.8 Championing biodiversity

Policies and instruments that encourage private citizens to champion biodiversity primarily focus on engaging individuals in actions that contribute to nature protection while addressing the indirect drivers of biodiversity loss, particularly those linked to personal behaviours and consumption patterns. The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy recognises the vital role of public engagement, and the celebration of biodiversity champions, particularly at the community level. These initiatives aim to catalyse a broader societal shift in values, fostering a deeper connection with and commitment to biodiversity. While there is not extensive discussion specifically about individual "championing biodiversity" as a distinct policy focus or mechanism, policies emphasize a "whole of government" and "whole of society" approach to tackling the nature biodiversity challenges, recognising that no single organisation or sector can resolve the nature crisis alone.

6.9 Investing in biodiversity

In policies such as the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy to 2045, there is emphasis around investing in nature and mobilising finance for biodiversity. However, discourse in policies predominantly centres on attracting funds from public bodies, private sector actors, and philanthropic organisations. Current efforts largely focus on large-scale institutional financing mechanisms, such as biodiversity credits and natural capital accounting like the Nature Restoration Fund, PeatlandACTION, and woodland grants.

Green finance has become an increasingly important theme in policy discussions, particularly in relation to achieving biodiversity targets. Strategies often focus on leveraging market-based instruments and financial innovations, such as biodiversity offset schemes, ecosystem service payments, and investment-ready natural capital frameworks to draw in institutional investors. For example, as part of the Scottish Government’s Natural Capital Market Framework, it will create an Ecosystem Restoration Code (Scottish Government, 2024). However, there are limited mechanisms designed to engage individuals or households in direct financial contributions to biodiversity conservation, such as micro-investments, local green bonds, or citizen-led biodiversity funds (mentioned in Biodiversity Framework Delivery Plan 2024-2030), This gap presents a policy opportunity to expand the green finance ecosystem, supporting the development of investment opportunities that allow citizens to invest directly in local or regional biodiversity efforts.