Nature Restoration Fund: interim evaluation

2 Methods

The delivery of the Nature Restoration Fund over its first three years (2021/22, 2022/23, 2023/24) was assessed through its two strands: the Competitive Fund strand and the Edinburgh Process strand. While both strands were evaluated using the same evaluation framework provided by Scottish Government (2.2 Evaluation framework), the data collected and reported for each strand differed significantly, resulting in specific methodological approaches and limitations for each (2.3 Data cleaning and processing). SAC Consulting also conducted case study interviews with selected projects from both the Competitive Fund strand and Edinburgh Process strand to provide additional insights to supplement analyses (2.5 Case study methods).

2.1 Logic model for the NRF, including Inputs, Activities, Outputs, and Outcomes

The key components of the NRF are listed in this section and visualised in Figure 1, below.

The NRF involves commitment of funds, staff time and expertise across stakeholder organisations working within the NRF Governance Structures for the NRF Competitive Fund strand and the NRF Edinburgh Process strand. It operates under the overarching framework of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy alongside the drivers of biodiversity loss as identified by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES^[10]), which are its key policy drivers (Inputs).

These inputs provide the context in which activities are undertaken, such as ensuring there is awareness of the NRF funding opportunities among potential applicants, that funding applications are forthcoming, and that funding is allocated in line with NRF criteria (Activities).

These activities lead to the establishment of new NRF projects (Outputs). Each individual NRF project has its own aims, objectives, expected project outputs and outcomes.

The realisation of these project-level outcomes collectively leads to the realisation of NRF programme outcomes (Outcomes). Each project contributes to one or more of the eight programme outcomes.

Programme outputs:

A) Contracts / approvals for NRF-funded projects in place.

B) A greater range and diversity of organisations, landowners and managers secure NRF funds and undertake nature restoration.

C) Projects implemented and deliver agreed outputs aligned to fund priorities.

D) Project leads report to NatureScot on progress, claim funds, and submit final reports (Competitive Fund). Local authorities submit summary reports on NRF projects to Scottish Government (Edinburgh Process).

Programme outcomes:

The NRF, as a programme, aims to have achieved the following outcomes by the end of the funding period (March 2026):

1. Contributed to native woodland restoration at a landscape scale.

2. Improved management of species rich grassland to increase habitat for pollinators.

3. Supported habitat creation to protect priority species (non-pollinators).

4. Implemented natural flood management to lessen the impact of climate change.

5. Restored degraded aquatic and riparian habitats to safeguard freshwaters.

6. Enhanced connection and integration of habitats and species to the urban fabric and increased urban nature-based solutions for healthy and resilient communities.

7. Controlled invasive non-native species (INNS) in a catchment, or protected a previously uninvaded catchment, to protect habitats and halt biodiversity loss.

8. Contributed to the long-term enhancement, conservation status and recovery of the marine and coastal environment and of priority marine features.

Long-term outcomes:

Programme outcomes support impacts across five NRF priority areas. These priority areas are referred to as Long-term Outcomes and include:

1. Habitat and species restored.

2. Freshwater restored, including natural flows in rural catchments.

3. Nature across, and between, towns & cities enhanced and connected.

4. Invasive non-native species (INNS) impacting on nature controlled.

5. Coastal and marine environments restored, recovered, enhanced and resilient.

In turn, these long-term outcomes feed into two Scottish Biodiversity Strategy (SBS) objectives:

• SBS Objective 1: Accelerate restoration and regeneration.
• SBS Objective 4: Protect and support the recovery of vulnerable and important species and habitats.

Figure 1: A logic model for the NRF.

Inputs

• Policy context – Scottish Biodiversity Strategy 2022-2045; IPBES drivers of biodiversity loss
• Funds – Competitive Fund strand (£16.2 million across 3 years); NRF Helping Nature; NRF Transforming Nature
• Funds – Edinburgh Process strand (£19.3 million across 3 years); Direct allocations to local authorities, including allocation to be spent on projects benefitting Nature Networks
• Governance Processes – NRF Oversight Board; NRF Competitive Fund Panel; Biodiversity Programme Board
• Staff time and expertise – Local authorities, NatureScot, Scottish Government staff time

Activities / Outputs

• Awareness-raising – NRF promoted across potential applicants
• Funding applications – Applications received from a wide range and diversity of applicants / customers (including new applicants)
• Funding allocation – Extent of funding allocation for the Competitive Fund strand; Extent of funding allocation for local authorities
• Monitoring & evaluation – Ongoing data collection; Lessons learned and best practice; Staff training and experience
• Projects established – A) Contracts / approvals for NRF funded projects in place
• Projects implemented – B) A greater range and diversity of organisations, landowners and managers secure NRF funds and undertake nature restoration; C) Projects implemented and deliver agreed outputs aligned to fund priorities; D) Projects are manged by funding / project officers, report outcomes, claim funds, and submit final reports

Programme-level outcomes

• Contributed to native woodland restoration at a landscape scale
• Improved management of species rich grassland to increase habitat for pollinators
• Supported habitat creation to protect priority species (non-pollinators)
• Implemented natural flood management to lessen the impact of climate change
• Restored degraded aquatic and riparian habitats to safeguard freshwaters
• Enhanced connection and integration of habitats and species to the urban fabric and increased nature-based solutions for healthy and resilient communities
• Controlled INNS in a catchment, or protected a previously uninvaded catchment, to protect habitats and halt biodiversity loss
• Contributed to the long-term enhancement, conservation status and recovery of the marine and coastal environment and of priority marine features

Long-term outcomes

• Habitat and species restored
• Freshwater restored, including natural flows in rural catchments
• Nature across and between towns and cities enhanced and connected
• Invasive non-native species (INNS) impacting on nature controlled
• Coastal and marine environments restored, recovered, enhanced, and resilient

SBS Objectives

• SBS Objective 1: Accelerate restoration and regeneration
• SBS Objective 4: Protect and support the recovery of vulnerable and important species and habitats

2.2 Evaluation framework

Both strands were evaluated using the NRF logic model (Figure 1, above) and Scottish Government evaluation framework (Annex 4: NRF Outputs, Outcomes, Measures and Indicators), which outlined multiple measures and indicators (i.e. metrics) against the four NRF outputs and eight NRF programme outcomes (listed above) to assess program delivery.

Data was reviewed to link reported milestones and actions to these outputs and outcomes. For each output and outcome measure / indicator, data was aggregated and summarised to give an indication of what was achieved across all projects supported by the NRF.

2.3 Data cleaning and processing

Competitive Fund strand

Projects awarded funding via the Competitive Fund strand submit progress and claims forms with supporting evidence to enable the release of grant funds. This was done via a standard template, tailored to reflect the outputs and activities that NRF agreed to fund. This includes quantitative data, where this was available. It also includes free text space to capture additional information. Several milestones, from a selectable list, are set for each project at the outset by the Funding Officer responsible for the grant, including any bespoke milestones (created to capture the outputs of that specific project). To reflect the diversity of projects the NRF supports, this suite of milestones has evolved over time.

It is important to note that the milestone reporting presented in this report did not cover all projects that successfully applied to the NRF Competitive Fund strand over the timeline (April 2021-March 2024). Specifically, Transforming Nature Development Phase (DP) projects, which focus on preparatory activities such as surveys and designs rather than direct on-the-ground restoration, have a separate suite of milestones. Direct funding awards, where capital funds were awarded to existing initiatives and partnerships, also were not required to complete milestone reporting.^[11]

For the purposes of this interim evaluation, a milestone report was exported from the corporate system directly into a spreadsheet and, after some cleaning and reformatting, was transferred to the evaluators.

Data cleaning included consolidating similar milestones, correcting typographical errors, and standardising inconsistent reporting. Predefined milestones and bespoke milestones were reviewed and linked to the most relevant NRF outcome measures where possible.

Edinburgh Process strand

Local authorities reported annually through return forms provided by Scottish Government. These forms captured summary-level quantitative data (e.g., funding received, spend, and total area supported) and project-level qualitative information (e.g., descriptions of measures deployed and expected biodiversity benefits). While in 2021/22, local authorities reported on all projects collectively, in 2022/23 and 2023/24, local authorities reported on projects individually. Additional reporting fields were introduced in 2022/23 and 2023/24, such as indication of key successes and challenges in the use of NRF funding and information on Nature Network activities. Local authorities submitted the completed return forms to Scottish Government, who transferred them to the evaluators.

Given the limited amount of quantitative data collected for Edinburgh Process reporting, qualitative descriptions were reviewed to infer links to NRF outcomes for missing data and develop a deeper understanding of the type of actions undertaken.

Data was consolidated into three main datasets: (1) Annual summaries of funding and area supported; (2) Project-specific details, including descriptions and outcome measures deployed; (3) Nature Network progress reported in 2023/24.

Data cleaning included correcting typographical errors and standardising inconsistent reporting. Missing or incomplete data points were addressed by cross-referencing qualitative descriptions with reported metrics (e.g., manually assigning measures based on project descriptions).

2.4 Data limitations

While this evaluation provides a robust overview of the NRF’s progress, limitations were identified which impact on the findings, including:

• Underreporting: Metrics are likely to underestimate the scale of nature restoration due to gaps in reporting, the ongoing (i.e. incomplete) nature of some projects, and reporting inconsistencies across local authorities and project leads.^[12]
• Variability: Differences in reporting practices between years and across different local authorities and project leads affect comparability and accuracy.^[13]
• Qualitative bias: The reliance on qualitative descriptions, particularly for the Edinburgh Process, limits quantitative analysis and introduces uncertainty regarding the full extent of biodiversity benefits.

Notwithstanding the limitations of the data available, the results sections offer valuable insights into the NRF’s impact over its first three years of delivery. By highlighting key actions and outcomes achieved, it provides a foundation for ongoing evaluation and improvement of Scotland’s nature restoration efforts and presents key metrics for each of the four NRF programme outputs and eight NRF programme outcomes.^[14] This includes clarification and footnotes throughout, which flag the completeness of underlying data, caveats, and potential sources of error. Annex 3 provides further details.

2.5 Case study methods

As part of this interim evaluation, the SAC Consulting project team conducted interviews with 15 Competitive Fund strand and four Edinburgh Process projects, which were identified as being illustrative of certain themes and trends within NRF delivery. Interviews were also conducted with five NatureScot officers who had served as Topic Leads for Competitive Fund strand case studies, to collect their perspectives on these projects and the delivery of the NRF overall. Data from interviews have been drawn into the results of the report as relevant, providing illustrative examples of the different trends emerging from the quantitative analysis of data supplied in project return forms.

The selection criteria for case studies were co-developed by the Scottish Government and NatureScot research advisory group with the SAC Consulting team. Selection criteria (see Annex 2: Additional detail on case study methods for full criteria detail) included:

• Choosing a diverse mix of projects in terms of habitat targeted, chosen methods, and geographies across Scotland.
• Successful projects fully delivering their intended outputs, on time and within the projected budget.
• Projects that encountered challenges and with hindsight, may have done things differently.
• Projects that are innovative in approach with the potential to extend the current evidence base.
• Multiple (and complimentary) projects delivering in the same geographical area e.g., at various sites along a river.

The case studies are listed below, with the full set of case studies included in Annex 1: Full case studies.

Competitive Fund strand case studies:

• Baron’s Haugh Wetland Project, North Lanarkshire
• Black Hills Regeneration Project, Knoydart, Highland
• Dalrymple Wetland Reserve, East Ayrshire
• Landscape Scale Wetland and Connectivity Project, Highland
• Link Caerlaverock, Dumfries & Galloway
• Managed Realignment at Inch of Ferryton, Clackmannanshire
• Natural Devon – Pool of Muckhart Initiative, Clackmannanshire
• Peffery Catchment Restoration Programme, Highland
• Peffery Wet Woodland, Highland
• Pentlands to Portobello Greening, The City of Edinburgh
• Quharity Burn Restoration, Angus
• Scottish Solway INNS Control and Knowledge Programme, Dumfries & Galloway
• Turning Tarmac into Wetland, Rewilding Kilminning, Crail, Fife
• Wilder, Wetter Caerlaverock, Dumfries & Galloway

Edinburgh Process strand case studies:

• Aberdeenshire Council – Ugie Catchment Small Scale Tree
• Dundee City Council
• Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar – Invasive Species Control Project
• Perth & Kinross Council – Crook of Devon Community Orchard and Pollinator Project