Fish farm consenting pre-application pilots: independent evaluation report

Appendix B - Questionnaire 2 (Other stakeholders)

Independent Evaluation of Aquaculture Fish Farm Consenting Pilot Sites (Stakeholders)

Thank you for participating in the evaluation of the pre-application process within the pilot projects. Your feedback is crucial in helping us understand the successes and challenges of the pilots, and in identifying areas for improvement.

This questionnaire is the first step in our data collection process. It aims to gather basic information about you and your organisation, as well as your initial feedback on various aspects of the pre-application process. Your responses will provide valuable insights into how the pre-application process has impacted the consenting process overall.

After completing this questionnaire, you will be invited to participate in a one-to-one interview. During this interview, you will have the opportunity to expand on your responses and provide more detailed qualitative feedback. This will help us gain a deeper understanding of your experiences and perspectives.

Please note that while you have the option to retain anonymity in your responses, full anonymity cannot be guaranteed due to the small number of stakeholders involved. However, all information will be treated with the utmost confidentiality.

Thank you for your time and valuable input. If you have any questions, contact Jennifer at Jennifer.fox@aquatera.co.uk at any time.

A reminder of the pre-application process:

Stage One. Request for pre-application advice

Stage Two. Provision of joint pre-application advice

Stage Three. Community and third party engagement

Stage Four. Screening/ Scoping Opinion Request and issue of a Joint Scoping Opinion Report and Advice

* Required

Section 1. Basic Information

1. Name:

2. Organisation: *

3. Role within your organisation:

4. Level of experience (Number of years working in the sector):

5. Which pilot project(s) have you been involved with? Please identify the projects by region and/ or site name. *

6. Please respond to the questionnaire in the context of one pilot project at a time. For example, if you're involved in three pilot projects, please complete this questionnaire three times - once for each of the pilot projects. Please let us know which pilot project you're referring to in this questionnaire. *

7. What stage is the pilot project that you are working on in the pre-application process?

Stage 1. Request for pre-application advice;

Stage 2. Provision of Joint Pre-Application Advice Report;

Stage 3. Community and third party engagement;

Stage 4. Screening/ Scoping Opinion Request and issue of a Joint Scoping Opinion Report and Advice *

8. How would you rate the general satisfaction levels of the pilot pre-application process, compared to the previous consenting process? *

Satisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Moderate

Somewhat dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Stage 1. Request for Pre-Application Advice

9. How clear were the instructions for the completion of Stage 1. Request for pre-application advice? *

Very clear

Clear

Moderate

Somewhat clear

Not at all clear

Other

10. Was all of the necessary information provided by the developer in the pre-application template in order to allow you (the stakeholder) to provide an informed response? *

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

11. Could anything be added to the pre-application template to improve this stage of the process (Stage One. Request for pre-application advice)? *

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

12. If yes, please provide further details.

13. Did a joint meeting (regulators, statutory consultees and developer) take place to discuss the application? *

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

14. If so, was this useful?

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

15. Was the 2-week timescale achieved? *

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

16. If not, what was the reason that prevented the timescale being met?

Stage 2. Provision of Joint Pre-Application Advice

If you have not yet been through this stage of the new process, please skip to the next section.

17. How would you rate the coordination of Stage 2 (Provision of Joint Pre-Application Advice)?

Excellent

Good

Neutral

Fair

Poor

Other

18. Did a joint meeting of regulators and statutory consultees take place to discuss the application?

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

19. Was a suitable deadline provided to allow you to complete your response?

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

20. If not, please provide further details.

21. Were any issues raised by the developer relevant to the advice provided by you in the draft report?

Yes

No

I don't know

Other

22. If you answered ‘yes’, what improvements could be made to the process to avoid similar issues being raised in future applications?

23. How helpful was the Joint Pre-Application Advice in identifying potential constraints early on?

Very helpful

Somewhat helpful

Neither helpful nor unhelpful

Somewhat unhelpful

Very unhelpful

24. To what extent did the Joint Pre-Application Advice streamline the consenting process, when compared to the previous process?

Not at all

To a small extent

To a moderate extent

To a great extent

To a very great extent

25. Do you have any recommendations for how the Joint Pre-Application Advice template could be improved?

Stage 3. Community and Third Party Engagement

If you have not yet been through this stage of the new process, please skip to the next section.

26. How effective were the mechanisms for community and third party engagement?

Very effective

Somewhat effective

Neither effective nor ineffective

Somewhat ineffective

Very ineffective

27. How effective was the process in improving transparency and community engagement compared to the previous consenting process?

Very effective

Somewhat effective

Neither effective nor ineffective

Somewhat ineffective

Very ineffective

28. What improvements, if any, could be made to this stage of the process?

Stage 4. Screening/Scoping Opinion Request & Issue of Joint Scoping Opinion Report & Advice

If you have not yet been through this stage of the new process, please skip to the next section.

29. Was it clear what level of response was required from stakeholders at this stage?

Yes

No

Maybe

I don't know

30. What improvements, if any, could be made to this stage of the process?

31. How useful was the draft Scoping Opinion and Joint Advice Report in streamlining the consenting process?

Extremely useful

Somewhat useful

Neutral

Somewhat not useful

Extremely not useful

Final Section - Overall perspectives

32. How effective is the pilot pre-application process in minimising delays in the consenting process (i.e. have all unnecessary steps/duplication of effort /unnecessary downtime been removed?)?

Not at all

To a small extent

To a moderate extent

To a great extent

To a very great extent

33. How well did the process provide an early understanding of potential constraints?

Extremely well

Somewhat well

Neutral

Somewhat not well

Extremely not well

34. To what extent will the new pre-application process help with preparations for the formal aquaculture consents application process?

Not at all

To a small extent

To a moderate extent

To a great extent

To a very great extent

35. Based on your experience of how the pilot scheme went, please provide recommendations for how the pre-application process could be improved.

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Microsoft. The data you submit will be sent to the form owner.

Microsoft Forms