Scotland's draft Climate Change Plan 2026-2040: consultation analysis

Findings

Profile of respondents

The consultation received a total of 489 responses from the Citizens Space platform and from direct emails. In addition, there were 112 consultation events organised by the Scottish Government and delivered in collaboration with ‘trusted messenger’ third-sector organisations as part of the Scottish Government Public Engagement Strategy for Climate Change. The table below summarises the number of responses by mode of engagement.

Table 1. Number of responses by mode of engagement

Mode of engagement	Number
Citizens Space	376
Email – Structured	71
Email – Unstructured	44
Consultation events	112
Total	603

Out of the 447 structured responses, there was an almost even split between individuals (52%) and organisations (48%), as shown below. A detailed presentation of the response rate by question is presented in Appendix B.

Below, we present the findings from the thematic analysis of the 32 open-text questions of the consultation and the quantitative analysis of one closed-ended question. These findings are based on all 603 responses across modes of engagement. Insights from the 112 consultation events, representing over 1,800 people, are presented in separate paragraphs in each question where the themes differ from the main analysis. Where the themes are the same, they are included in the main thematic analysis.

Section 1: Delivering a Just Transition

The following questions concern the Delivering a Just Transition section of the Plan, more specifically: communities, skills, workforce, employers, and adapting to climate change.

Question 1

What are your views on our approach to delivering a just transition for people and communities?

The most common theme concerning the Scottish Government’s approach to delivering a just transition was broad agreement. Respondents welcomed the Plan and the integration of Just Transition principles to ensure fairness for all affected people and communities.

We support the Just Transition and welcome the Scottish Government’s continued commitment to the principle of climate action which is fair and assists the most affected people and communities. [Organisational response]

Very much agree with the principles of a Just Transition. [Individual response]

The second most common emerging theme was concerns regarding the clarity of the plan's implementation, delivery requirements, and expectations. Respondents raised concerns about how funding is accessed, noting the absence of detailed sector- and region‑specific guidance. They suggested that this uncertainty creates additional burdens and risks repeating past mistakes in delivering just transitions.

[…] Significant progress has been made, and a lot of work has gone into producing this document. However, I am concerned that this is not a Plan. Rather, it seems to comprise a wide number of activities describing what has happened, along with aspirations, targets, policies and funding describing what should happen, but it does not specify who is accountable for delivering what by when. Without these, reaching the targets will not be deliverable. There is an overall lack of coherency and co-ordination. [Organisational response]

The following themes concerned the need to increase local engagement beyond what is currently outlined. Respondents emphasised that local communities will be directly affected by the Plan, hence they should have opportunities to meaningfully contribute to its design and delivery.

The principle of a just transition being woven into the Climate Change Plan is welcome and absolutely vital for reaching climate targets while ensuring quality of life for communities. However, as defined in the CCP, the concept of a just transition is narrowly focussed on skills, jobs and energy prices. Communities most directly impacted by net zero developments and / or closure of fossil fuel industries should be given agency to define what a just transition means to them, for example through support to develop Local Place Plans. […] [Individual response]

The next most common theme was concerns about the Plan’s potentially burdensome financial impact on local and rural communities. Respondents pointed to the absence of a robust strategy for protecting jobs and ensuring employment opportunities during the transition. To address the adverse financial impacts, respondents suggested stronger provisions for vulnerable and marginalised groups, as well as developing delivery models tailored to specific regions and circumstances.

[…] In my view, grants for insulation and heat pumps should be directed only to those in fuel poverty who are not on mains gas. A separate policy for the 81% of Scottish homes that are served by mains gas could deliver huge improvement. [Individual response]

It is very poorly thought out you are getting rid of oil industry jobs much much faster than the any green jobs are being created to replace them and you are not cutting down the amount of oil used, so we lose tax revenue, peoples jobs, and don’t make any difference to the actual real climate change. [Individual response]

While we support a standardised framework to provide clarity for developers and communities, we do not support a "one-size-fits-all" approach to Community Benefits. Project economics for solar can be tighter and more sensitive to grid connection costs. A rigid, high-level mandate risks making strategically important projects unviable. We support the principle of a standardised framework within which there is significant flexibility to cater to differing project economics and community ambitions. [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

All themes discussed in this question were also reflected in the engagement events. Additional points raised included concerns about an overreliance on CCUS technologies, the high energy demands of AI data centres, and the perception that the public bears an unfair share of the costs of this transition compared to the private sector.

Local people are being asked to carry the stress, effort, and responsibility for climate action, while government still seems to prioritise business interests. Communities are expected to fight hard just to be heard, whether that’s about safe cycling routes, public transport, or local energy projects and progress can take years.

Additionally, there was a call to make communications around net zero more tangible and to highlight the benefits.

"Net zero” and carbon targets feel abstract; use plain, tangible frames like food security, flooding, wildfire risk, and health.

Offer a positive vision: Pair targets with a clear picture of better lives—stronger communities, less isolation, richer nature, and slower, less tech-driven living.

Question 2

We recognise that workers face particular impacts from the Plan, and we have outlined our approach to supporting the transition of the workforce, including skills for jobs. What skills, training, and qualification provisions will be most important in a net zero future and what more could be done to support them?

Most respondents to this question did not directly address it. Instead, the most common theme regarding skills, training, and qualifications was the need for financial support to help workers adapt their existing skills to new green roles. It was suggested that monetary support would be essential in ensuring that jobs lost during the transition could be effectively absorbed into emerging market demands. Respondents also emphasised the importance of apprenticeships and funded training opportunities, as undertaking such training alongside existing work commitments is otherwise financially challenging.

Funding for specific training programmes in the college sector, as announced in the Plan, is necessary; but until the funding cuts for that sector are reversed the sector as a whole will struggle to be able to respond to increased employer and student demand. The most conspicuous gap in this regard is the absence of proposals for tailored support for workers who are made redundant in industries affected by decline in fossil fuel extraction and use. […] [Organisational response]

Among respondents identifying specific skills, most emphasised retrofit skills needed to ensure the effective installation, integration, and maintenance of renewable energy systems. This was closely linked to the need for greater renewable‑energy expertise in rural areas, where limited access to such skills often drives up the cost of transitioning to renewable technologies. Respondents also highlighted related construction and building skills, noting the need for renewed training and qualifications for engineers, architects, construction workers, electricians, heat engineers, and mechanics to ensure the transition is delivered and sustained effectively.

Investment in apprenticeships for renewable sectors this includes mechanics who can work on EV. Most garages are still only maintaining current vehicles so it is difficult to find anywhere to get an EV fixed. Having training and jobs across Scotland not just based in centers. Use local colleges to provide the skills training but encourage employers to open up local businesses. [Individual response]

There should be more skills training in renewables, especially for those who are responsible for fitting new technologies into domestic dwellings. There should be more oversight of these workers and traders in order to build confidence among their potential customers. [Individual response]

The next most common theme was the need for more holistic climate education from an early age. Respondents believed this education should focus on climate change and the everyday behavioural skills required to reduce, reuse, and recycle - embedding these practices within Scottish culture. This was a particularly prevalent theme among young people responding in consultation events.

Public education not necessarily linked to paid employment should also be prioritised as: 1. many of the skills and behaviours needed for a just transition to net zero are around day-to-day life (e.g. around “home economics” such as DIY home improvements and behaviour to improve energy efficiency, growing food and cooking) and 2. public attitudes can affect feasibility of steps towards net zero - (i.e. a well educated population is important for more reasons than enhancing employability and “economic productivity”). [Organisational response]

Another, less frequently mentioned theme was the value of cycling‑related training, including suggestions that driving licence requirements should incorporate basic cycling skills. Respondents felt this would help make roads safer for people who travel actively.

Specific consultation event insights

Most engagement events did not address this question. Of those that did, there was a further suggestion to enhance pathways to green skills employment. Participants at one event noted limited awareness of green jobs and advocated for more accessible career pathways and entry-level opportunities in this sector.

Question 3

The Plan will bring opportunities and challenges for businesses and employers. How can we best support employers across the private, public, and third sectors to make the changes needed and seize the benefits of net zero?

The most frequently cited form of support needed from the government was financial assistance. Respondents, particularly SMEs, though not exclusively, stressed that access to funding must be less bureaucratic and more straightforward, with some calling for sector‑specific and size‑specific criteria to ensure no business is left behind. Respondents emphasised the need for both short‑term and, crucially, long‑term financial support to maintain continuity in just transition efforts. Suggested forms of assistance included, but are not limited to, tax reductions, low‑ or no‑interest loans, funding for training, upskilling and apprenticeships, and financial support for specific retrofit projects.

We recognise that governments cannot fix all of these issues, but commitments to projects which are in the national interest and in line with the objectives of international legal agreements should not be subject to short term funding or easily undone as a result of election outcomes. [Organisational response]

Grant funding with understandable application processes and clear eligibility and scope criteria. [..]. [Organisational response]

The second most common theme was the need for clear and enforceable policies that account for sector‑specific challenges, something respondents felt the Plan currently lacks. Respondents argued that the absence of coherent, aligned policies undermines confidence and makes it harder for businesses to plan for meaningful progress. This concern was often linked to the view that the Plan sets out broad expectations without providing a clear framework for how each industry should adapt its business models or implement the changes required to realise the benefits of net zero.

Businesses need clear, consistent, and enforceable legislation. Vague commitments allow for business as usual; the government must provide a framework that penalises high-polluting practices while rewarding net-zero innovation. [Organisational response]

The most important thing that businesses need to support the transition to a net zero economy is confidence. Businesses must be sure what will be expected of them over the short, medium, and long term (both by virtue of consistent policy and regulation, and by consumer demand), and must be confident that projected demand for specific skills or interventions will materialise. [Organisational response]

The next most frequently raised theme concerned the transfer of knowledge between those involved in the transition process. Respondents emphasised the importance of inter‑sector knowledge exchange to build a holistic understanding of the interconnected impacts of transition measures. This, in turn, highlighted the need for greater collaboration and improved communication to support smoother transitions across industries, with some suggesting the use of dedicated hubs. These requests also extended to strengthened partnerships between local authorities, businesses, colleges, and universities.

Access to a network of shared knowledge, know-how and shared practices for the just transition facilitated by the Scottish government. This needs to identify, support and promote good practices already leading the transition, to incentivise sharing the created knowledge, This could be facilitated by the Scottish Government’s ‘Climate Hubs. [Organisational response]

Other, less prevalent, themes included the need to improve the communication of the Plan’s benefits to employers, as well as calls for greater government action to localise production so that these benefits become more visible to businesses.

From what I read in this plan I think a very loud campaign has to be launched to get the message across. I've observed that people are doing exactly the opposite of what you are aiming for. [Individual response]

Question 4

Our approach recognises that some of the Plan’s impacts will have greater implications for particular regions of Scotland. What are your views on our approach to supporting places where the transition presents particular regional impacts?

Overall, the majority of respondents indicated they support the approach that provides additional protections to regions expected to experience greater impacts from the Plan’s enforcement. However, these respondents also raised several concerns about areas for improvement in the Plan’s approach.

The most common theme was the need to provide additional financial protection and support for communities most affected by the transition. Suggestions for specific support measures included reducing energy costs, ensuring savings from renewable energy reach the communities, investing in transferable skills, and diversifying local economies.

Agree with this and noted the aim to avoid the economic and social impacts of de-industrialisation in the past. Proper analysis, however, should be carried out to determine impacts and opportunities, if any, from the transition to net zero in such regions. For example, a number of jobs in the oil and gas industries may not transfer to the renewables industry. Such regions may require to significantly diversify their economies in order to retain employment and population levels, whereby, analysis can be used to help them prepare and tailor the support for this. [Organisational response]

The second most common theme was improving communication with local communities . Respondents believed there should be more clarity about the expected impacts of the Plan on people’s everyday lives, while others suggested facilitating feedback loops to identify the needs and concerns of communities and other government bodies. Some respondents in this theme also requested a stronger public information campaign.

Listen to locals and don't make any plans before participation has been achieved. The government always has a very hard time obtaining meaningful consent from the governed, and tends to create a plan in collaboration with powerful lobbies before speaking to the citizens, which results in the citizens who disagree with the plans of the powerful being labelled as a challenge to be managed away to preserve the original plan. Co-creation must be more than a buzzword in order for public cooperation to be possible. [Individual response]

Greater emphasis should be placed on empowering local authorities, community organisations and regional partnerships to co-design solutions that respond to local needs and opportunities. Strengthening links between national policy, regional planning and community-led initiatives will be essential to ensuring that the transition is fair, inclusive and regenerative, and that no region is left behind as Scotland moves towards a net zero future. [Organisational response]

The next most prevalent theme was the need for a coherent, cross-country approach. While respondents recognised the distinct needs of rural communities that experience direct effects from the implementation of the Plan, they emphasised the need to support people who will experience the secondary effects of this transition outside those regions as well. Respondents highlighted that the need to identify and address place-specific needs would be applicable throughout Scotland, not only in areas directly affected by the Plan. For example, concerns included calls to prioritise less affluent areas, recognising that individuals face intersectional barriers regardless of their proximity to the affected areas. There were also requests to ensure protections for people with mobility difficulties and other disabilities, including those outside a cross-Scotland protective approach.

[Organisation] recognises the importance of place-based approaches but raises concern that locally driven initiatives may lead to inconsistent standards across Scotland. For disabled people, consistency is critical. Variations in transport accessibility, charging infrastructure design, or service delivery create uncertainty and reduce confidence to travel. National coordination and standardised accessibility requirements should underpin any place-based delivery model. [Organisational response]

Support must also be extended to urban areas where intergenerational poverty is high, areas that may not host a "major polluter" but suffer from high fuel and transport poverty. […] [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

Engagement with young people uncovered concerns primarily around public transport accessibility and effectiveness. Participants suggested that the Government should invest in public transport, especially in rural areas, to incentivise reduced car use. Furthermore, young people highlighted that new job openings will need to be created to mitigate the job closures in the oil and gas sectors. Other suggestions included financial support to combat fuel poverty, clean and accessible community spaces, honest and clear communication, and cross-party transition plans.

“We need better public transport to encourage more people to drive less”

“Getting rid of the oil industry could mean thousands of jobs being lost and that’s a lot of people’s livelihoods”

Section 2: Sectoral contributions, Policies and Proposals

The following questions concern the Sectoral contributions, policies, and proposal sections of the Plan.

Buildings (Residential and Public)

Question 5

How can we decarbonise homes and buildings in a way that is fair and leaves no one behind?

The most common theme was requests to increase funding and financial support, through both long-term and short-term grants, to decarbonise homes and buildings and reduce energy costs. Suggested forms of compensation included fully-funded transition schemes, subsidies for essential equipment (such as batteries), and reforms to Council Tax. Respondents stated that financial support should be prioritised for those already economically disadvantaged to avoid further marginalisation. Respondents also raised concerns about the eligibility criteria for economic support, particularly for lower‑middle‑class households and older individuals who may not qualify based on income but would still face significant financial strain if required to self‑fund the transition. Others also viewed the eligibility requirements and pathways for submitting funding applications as unclear.

Eligibility criteria should be reviewed regularly to ensure the most vulnerable can access sufficient grants. [Organisational response]

Free batteries for qualifying households (low income, pension credit etc.) so that excess energy generated when windy/sunny can be stored and used later when renewables can't keep up with demand. [Individual response]

The second most common theme was the need to prioritise a “Fabric First” approach, where proper insulation and building improvements take precedence over financial support for installing renewable energy technologies. Respondents stressed the importance of improving insulation in rural areas in particular, though not exclusively. They also highlighted the need to ease regulations on retrofit requirements, such as restrictions on installing double‑glazing units in heritage buildings.

A Fabric First approach needs to be considered as an integral part of the process under the proposed bill so people don’t just switch out fossil fuel boilers to heat pumps without addressing the insulation levels and air tightness of their properties. Consideration needs to be given to the positive impact that energy efficiency measures can have on emissions and priority should be given to reducing demand for energy in the first instance. [Organisational response]

The third most common theme was that stricter guidelines should be implemented and enforced for the decarbonisation of all new buildings and developments. Most respondents did not mention the New Build Heat Standard, but stressed the importance of the Scottish Government implementing stricter policies to ensure new developments meet the necessary infrastructure and renewable energy requirements, thereby reducing energy consumption and waste. This suggestion was accompanied by calls for all public buildings to switch to renewable energy, both to support decarbonisation and to reinforce public messaging. A related common concern was the lack of clear guidelines and a structured regulatory framework to ensure policy coherence. Respondents requested a more consistent monitoring system, with increased inspections and equivalent reporting.

I am extremely concerned that new homes are currently being built which do not as standard include energy generation sources such as solar panels. Where huge new developments are under construction I see no evidence of community energy generation technologies. This is a failure of legislation which allows less than optimal buildings being built for ongoing private company profits. [Individual response]

Another commonly mentioned theme was the need for effective advice centres and highly trained professionals to support the installation of renewable energy systems. Respondents highlighted a particular lack of expertise in rural areas. They noted that insufficient training and the absence of specialist knowledge not only create financial burdens but also cause psychological stress when installation errors occur.

Providing a transition salary that allows people to retrain in retrofit and construction would address both the housing and employment challenges simultaneously. Without direct financial support and a clear, accessible pathway communicated to those most affected, there is a real risk that many people will be left behind — living in cold, costly homes, with limited prospects and no realistic means to participate in the transition. [Individual response]

Specific consultation event insights

Young people who attended consultation events highlighted that there are currently many cold, damp, and overcrowded flats in Scotland. It was suggested that any discussion regarding buildings should seek to address these issues first, prioritising insulation, repairs, and heating.

“Mum keeps getting letters saying the price is going up again. It makes her panic.”

Additionally, a few other event attendees called for prioritising work in the poorest homes first, along with a better understanding of regional differences and the feasibility of mass retrofitting in areas with unique building types.

Question 6

How can clean heating systems (such as heat pumps) be made more affordable for everyone?

The most common theme was the need to subsidise heat pump installation, as the high upfront costs are perceived as a key barrier. Respondents suggested means-tested government grants, including options for upfront payments, alongside zero or low-interest loans and other financing mechanisms that spread costs over time and avoid large upfront investments. A few also suggested that energy providers could offer support through contractual arrangements. Regarding the recipients of subsidisation, most participants emphasised that support should focus on low-income households, as these groups have the least capacity to absorb upfront costs and potential short-term bill impacts. A smaller group argued that programmes should prioritise the most suitable homes first, targeting the portion of the housing stock that is most “retrofit-ready” to achieve early wins and build momentum.

Make grants and loans income / savings dependent (means tested) but generous for those on lower incomes / without savings. [Individual response]

Gain momentum by retrofitting such systems on all public buildings and local authority housing first – a higher demand for the products should increase supply at a lower price, making it more affordable for private home-owners. [Individual response]

The second most frequently mentioned suggestion was providing support for running costs. High electricity prices were seen as undermining the financial case for electric-based clean heating, including heat pumps, even where installation support exists. Several respondents argued that electricity prices should better reflect production costs and be decoupled from gas pricing. Some respondents also highlighted that running costs vary depending on building efficiency, occupant behaviour, and system performance, and that heat pumps are only cost-effective when all these factors are appropriately addressed. Guidance on the proper usage of heat pumps was expressed as a complementary lever for financial support.

The price balance between electricity and gas must change, so that heat pump heating is no more expensive than mains gas heating. At the moment, it is more expensive than gas to run, and has the highest installation capital cost, so heat pumps are unattractive for most. At the moment, heat pumps are not an attractive alternative to oil. [Individual response]

The price of electricity should reflect its production cost and be decoupled from gas pricing. [Individual response]

An additional driver for higher costs for low-carbon heating is that users do not understand how to use this new technology efficiently. Efficient use approaches for heat pumps, for example, will be very different to what works best for gas central heating. Education and support are needed so that households and businesses can understand how to best utilise new technologies, and we would suggest that all retrofits be accompanied by a “home user manual.” [Organisational response]

The third most common suggestion was that clean heating cannot be made affordable without first undertaking a “deep energy retrofit”^[2]. Respondents argued that heat pumps should only be installed after substantial insulation and building fabric improvements, as poorly insulated or damp homes lead to high running costs and reduced comfort. A small number of respondents connected deep retrofit to on-site renewables and storage. Pairing heat pumps with rooftop solar PV, small-scale wind turbines, and home batteries was seen to lower running costs, reduce exposure to volatile energy prices, and cut emissions over the system’s lifetime.

Implementing house retrofitting measures—such as insulation, draught-proofing, site wind barriers, and other low‑cost passive heat improvements—reduces the amount of energy required to warm the home. As a result, any clean heating system installed afterwards, such as a heat pump, can be smaller, cheaper, and more affordable. [Organisational response]

By integrating solar PV and battery storage into the "clean heat" framework, the government can further extend the emissions savings and significantly reduce running costs for homeowners as they switch from gas electricity for their heating….Solar and storage are technologies that protect households from volatile energy prices and ensure that the transition to electrified heat is seen as an economic opportunity rather than a financial burden. A "fabric-first" and heat-pump-only approach risks creating unsustainable peak loads. However, distributed solar and battery storage can act as a buffer, facilitating self-generation and self-consumption that reduces grid strain. [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

Feedback from the engagement events echoed the themes discussed above. An additional concern was raised regarding the usability of heat pump systems in harsh weather conditions.

Heat pumps may be ineffective in harsh, windy conditions and electricity costs remain high.

Transport

Question 7

Which of the following would be most effective in enabling you to transition your vehicle(s) to zero-emission alternatives? Please rank your choices from highest to lowest priority, where 1 is the highest priority. Please only give one ranking to each option:

If you’re responding for an organisation, you may want to consider car fleets as well as HGV fleets.

1. Cost of new zero-emissions vehicles needs to come down

2. Cost of used zero-emissions vehicles needs to come down

3. Reliable infrastructure for vehicles (such as fuel or charging networks)

4. Noticeably cheaper running costs (including electricity, maintenance, and insurance)

5. Convenient access to public charging infrastructure

6. Ensuring an adequate number of trained mechanics available to perform essential maintenance and repairs

7. Access to funding support/low-cost finance

8. All of the above

9. Other (use box below)

Quantitative analysis

Table 2 presents the relative share of each priority by rank. For example, the results suggest that among all first priorities, 30% were “reliable infrastructure for vehicles.” The “Other” option was the second most common first priority (23%), followed by “cost of new zero-emissions vehicles needs to come down” (22%). Appendix C includes two graphs showcasing both the prevalence of options in each rank, as well as how each individual option was ranked by respondents.

Table 2. Prevalence of each priority by rank

Rank	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
Cost of new zero-emissions vehicles	22%	13%	12%	12%	11%	8%	11%	19%
Cost of used zero-emissions vehicles	7%	17%	11%	16%	9%	12%	19%	11%
Reliable infrastructure for vehicles	30%	24%	17%	7%	7%	10%	4%	3%
Noticeably cheaper running costs	7%	9%	19%	21%	20%	15%	6%	4%
Convenient access to public charging infrastructure	4%	21%	17%	22%	21%	10%	6%	4%
Ensuring an adequate number of trained mechanics available	1%	3%	14%	11%	15%	27%	24%	11%
Access to funding support/low-cost finance	5%	10%	10%	11%	16%	16%	24%	10%
Other	23%	3%	1%	0%	2%	3%	6%	39%

Thematic analysis

Among respondents selecting the “other” option, most used the open-text field to expand on their views, instead of suggesting other factors that would enable a transition to zero-emissions transportation alternatives.

The most common theme was a request for affordable, public charging stations and a more extensive grid for EVs.

Specifically (part of #4 above)- the cost of public charging, given many people are unable to benefit from home charging It is good to see proposals in the plan to 1- reduce the cost of public EV charging and 2- make home charging possible for more people and would be great to see these being firmed up more [Organisational response].

The second most common theme was requests to support the purchase of EVs and ensure their sustainability. Respondents clarified that this could be achieved through grants, tax cuts, or low/zero-interest-rate loans, the strengthening of the second-hand market, and the provision of trained mechanics who would ensure the longevity of the vehicles. Respondents also expressed concerns about the ability of HGVs to cover long distances, urging for additional research and investment.

Regarding the question, however, we think tactics outlined such as such as Early investment in HGV infrastructure and support with vehicle replacement are successful. We suggest further exploration as well on supporting buy back schemes that support the recycling of old cars and provide credit for the purchase of new EV's. [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

Participants in the engagement events expressed concerns about the high cost of purchasing an EV, the limited charging infrastructure nationwide, and potential pedestrian safety issues due to the vehicles’ quiet operation.

Long-range EVs are costly; cheaper models have limited range.

Question 8

How can the Scottish Government support communities to participate in the planning of local sustainable infrastructure (such as walking, wheeling, and cycling routes)?

The most frequent theme was the need to proactively communicate and foster collaboration with local communities through regular meetings, actively involving them in the development of Local Place Plans, and ensuring inclusion and accessibility for all. Examples include holding sessions in schools, community groups, and public forums. Some respondents also suggested strengthening existing community-led tools, such as Local Place Plans and Community Councils, and argued that the Scottish Government should consult these bodies more proactively while supporting them in developing their own plans for sustainable infrastructure. A few respondents also saw Community Hubs as trusted intermediaries that can bridge local communities and the public sector, enhancing awareness of and dialogue around active travel options.

Supporting communities to undertake Local Place Plans – with adequate community development support would allow communities to identify and commission local sustainable infrastructure. The local knowledge on where people need to make connections would enable walking, wheeling and cycling routes to be developed that make sense for local people as well as possible tourism. [Organisational response]

Communities should be resourced to develop Local Place Plans and these should be used to inform infrastructure planning as a tool in a process of co-design with communities for infrastructure projects. [Individual response]

On a related note, respondents mentioned that communities face several constraints that can make participation in planning processes challenging, including limited time, confidence, and technical knowledge. A few also highlighted the need for regional-level assessment, observing that deprivation is often linked to underactive councils and weaker local representation. Accessibility and inclusion were emphasised, with a focus on holding meetings in venues that accommodate a range of mobility aids and sensory needs. Early engagement of developers, operators, and network businesses alongside local authorities was seen as a way to clarify feasibility and prevent delays, ensuring that community input can be effectively incorporated.

Communities frequently face time challenges, confidence and access to technical information when participating in infrastructure planning. The Scottish Government could enable more meaningful participation by funding community‑led workshops, ensuring that community groups and other organisations are involved from the earliest design stages, and offering technical advice to help communities understand the implications of different infrastructure choices, and planning requirements. [Organisational response]

The second most frequently discussed suggestion was to embed participatory and co-design approaches in planning a sustainable local infrastructure. Respondents argued that communities should be treated as active partners from the outset, ensuring that local knowledge informs both the objectives and the operational details of projects, rather than relying on ad hoc consultation. Several respondents highlighted the value of co‑design methods, such as participatory mapping, budgeting, community‑led planning initiatives, and tailored consultation platforms.

Engagement should be undertaken at concept, design, implementation and post-delivery evaluation stages to reflect lived-experience and encourage buy-in to proposals. Adopting co-design approaches and clearly demonstrating how community input shapes decisions will build trust and incentivise community participation in planning and ultimately to use sustainable infrastructure. [Organisational response]

Require and fund participatory design processes for local transport and public realm schemes, with specific efforts to engage children, disabled people and under‑represented groups. Provide design guidance and toolkits for local authorities on co‑design, inclusive design and place‑based approaches. Support long‑term community capacity (e.g. local forums, community councils and anchor organisations) to engage in planning beyond single consultations. [Organisational response]

The next most common theme was enabling communities to participate with practical tools. A prominent example cited was Experimental Traffic Regulation Orders, which provide a mechanism to trial new routes and cycling infrastructure, allowing ideas to be tested in the real world and adapted based on ongoing community feedback. Several participants also stressed that co-design must be inclusive and place-sensitive, providing funded support so people can take part, and designing engagement methods that reflect local realities and constraints. Respondents also called for training and support from the Scottish Government, so that people can engage confidently with the requirements of active participation in decision-making.

Trial new routes and cycling infrastructure using Experimental Traffic Regulation Orders (eTROs) and consult communities to improve the design as the trial continues. [Organisational response]

The Scottish Government could support communities in planning local sustainable infrastructure by providing funding, guidance, and tools to enable meaningful engagement. This could include support for community-led planning initiatives, participatory mapping, consultation platforms, and training to help residents and local groups contribute effectively to identifying new and improved walking, wheeling, and cycling routes. [Organisational response]

It is worth noting that respondents often focused on issues related to local infrastructure itself, rather than how the Scottish Government could support communities in participating in its planning. This included suggestions for improving cycling facilities, area connectivity, and public transport quality. These topics are formally addressed in the following question.

Question 9

What action by the Scottish Government would be most helpful in supporting you to live a more climate-friendly lifestyle?

The vast majority of respondents answered this question through the lens of transportation.

The most frequently discussed theme was that the Scottish Government promote a more climate-friendly lifestyle by making public transport the default option for everyday travel. Respondents argued that as long as flying and private‑car use remain cheaper, faster, and more convenient, many people will continue to rely on them. As a result, respondents requested bus and train services that are affordable, run on time, provide consistent timetables, and connect well nationwide, especially for rural areas.

Public transport infrastructure and affordability should be prioritised as the primary decarbonisation pathway for groups with protected characteristics, with free or low-cost fares maximising access. [Organisational response]

The price of trains needs to come down so that I am incentivised to get the train instead of fly or drive. The scrapping of peak fares between Glasgow and Edinburgh for example is great and more of this should be done. [Individual response]

Transforming travel and connectivity. The current price disparity between high and low-carbon travel is a major barrier to behavioural change. It is unacceptable that flying to London remains significantly cheaper than taking the train. [Organisational response]

The second most prevalent area of suggestions related to active travel infrastructure. Many respondents stressed the need for improved infrastructure to enable people to continue or adopt more active modes of travel. Feedback focused primarily on cycling, with respondents pointing to a need for a more extensive and higher-quality cycling network across Scotland. Safety was identified as a major concern, and many respondents advocated for safer, dedicated cycling routes. In addition, a few respondents suggested improvements to the pedestrian environment to encourage more walking. These included measures to improve safety within city limits with the introduction of lower speed car restrictions and additional infrastructure, such as seating, to allow for rest during journeys. This was a particularly prevalent theme among young people participating in consultation events.

Money for active travel must be used for creating high- quality cycling routes, which help people to switch to cycling. Too many are badly designed, and actively dangerous to use: crossing bus stops, directed between pavements and parked cars, or the worst, token cycle lanes that only travel a couple of hundred yards before stopping at a kerb with a give way for traffic. [Individual response]

As a cyclist I sometimes feel as if the streets have been designed to make me feel like a second-rate citizen, especially because I am more vulnerable than motor vehicles. [Individual response]

I like walking to town (2 miles). As I get older, I can see that being more of a challenge. There should be 10 x more seats on common walking routes in cities so people, especially elderly, could have a short rest. [Individual response]

The third most frequently discussed area of suggestions concerned the introduction of restrictive measures aimed at discouraging carbon-intensive behaviours, specifically on the use of indirect disincentives for flying and private vehicle use, as well as more direct restrictions on car usage. Regarding indirect disincentives, respondents argued that making flights more expensive and less convenient would encourage greater uptake of rail travel within the UK. Suggestions included higher flight tariffs, airport parking taxes, reduced flight hours, and the reallocation of revenue toward rail infrastructure. Regarding direct restrictions on car use, respondents suggested measures designed to make driving within cities less attractive. These included road pricing, a reduction in the number of parking spaces, higher parking charges, and stricter speed limits. In addition, a small number of respondents proposed setting explicit targets to reduce car use in Scotland, alongside the gradual phase-out of petrol-powered vehicles.

Make polluters pay more and use that to invest in active travel. Invest in rail and public transport instead of building more trunk roads. Do not expand airports but make this more expensive (this may not be Scot Gov but for example parking fees/fines are something that you can influence). Build fewer car parks and more cycle storage and cycle ways. Improve pavement access. [Organisational response]

There are currently no “sustainable aviation fuels” which live up to their name. Introduce Scottish flight taxes to fund improvements in rail and bus services, as well as supporting both rail and sea freight routes. [Organisational response]

Reduce the number of cars in cities - less parking places; more restrictions - make it less attractive and easy to use a private motor vehicle. [Individual response]

Suggestions that were not focused on transport fell into two main areas. One concerned the promotion of a more local way of life, including local food consumption and more sustainable living practices. Suggestions in this area included the development of shorter supply chains and local markets to reduce emissions from food distribution logistics, as well as fostering more self-sufficient local communities that require less travel to meet basic needs, such as healthcare and education.

From a farming and rural perspective, action should prioritise local, nature-friendly food systems through public procurement, shorter supply chains and local markets, with local food partnerships acting as practical facilitation hubs. [Organisational response]

The other area of suggestions focused on enabling behaviour change across all aspects of environmentally friendly living by more effectively communicating its benefits. This included initiatives to influence public perceptions through awareness campaigns, closer collaboration with local communities, and a reframing of the plan’s language: from one that is restrictive and punitive to one that emphasises positive outcomes and benefits.

Government messaging must shift from a narrative of "sacrifice" to one of "opportunity and health". To counter negative rhetoric, government messaging should highlight the co-benefits of climate action, such as better air quality and improved public health outcomes. [Organisational response]

The Scottish Government can best help individuals live climate-friendly lives by removing barriers and adding positives. We need to remove the hassle, confusion, and extra cost associated with greener choices, and add convenience, incentives, and inspiration. This twin approach of making sustainable options convenient and affordable, and encouraging a cultural shift through education and community empowerment, may support people across Scotland to change habits and routines in line with climate goals. [Organisational response]

Waste

Question 10

Are there any additional proposals to support waste sector emission reduction that should be considered across the following five areas:

• Strengthen the circular economy
• Reduce and reuse
• Modernise recycling
• Decarbonise disposal
• Other emission sources (including wastewater and anaerobic digestion)

Regarding proposals to support emissions reduction in the waste sector, suggestions varied extensively across different categories. Accordingly, the themes are presented in each of the five areas in question, sorted by their frequency in responses. We begin with reduce and reuse, followed by recycling, then circular economy measures, and finally the decarbonisation of waste disposal.

Suggestions for reducing/reusing

Suggestions to reduce waste and increase reuse focused primarily on restrictive measures that place greater responsibility on producers, alongside stronger regulation of packaging and supportive measures on cultivating repair and reuse skills among the general public.

Most suggestions for this area called for extended producer responsibility, arguing that manufacturers should be legally responsible for the full lifecycle of their products, including durability, repairability, and end-of-life management. Stronger producer obligations were seen as an effective means for reducing waste at source and avoiding placing disproportionate responsibility on consumers.

Manufacturers should be responsible for a designated lifetime of a product. Trading standards should ensure products have minimum sealed units and can be easily repaired with a requirement to supply spare parts for a designated period. [Organisational response]

Respondents also highlighted the need for stricter regulation of packaging, particularly plastic packaging. Suggestions included reducing unnecessary packaging, mandating loose produce options, taxing plastic food packaging, and requiring large retailers to significantly cut plastic use.

Stop the huge amount of packaging on products. Everything whether it be food or toys comes wrapped in plastic which is immediately put in the bin as not all of it can be recycled. Force supermarkets to have more food especially fruit and veg that is loose with paper bags. [Individual response]

Finally, respondents stressed the importance of training and support for repair and reuse, including funding for repair hubs, integrating repair skills into education, and enabling community-based initiatives. Apart from reducing waste, these measures were seen as a way to create local employment and make sustainable choices more affordable and accessible. This theme was also prevalent among young people attending consultation events.

We need more training so that more people could be involved and training in repairing and upgrading old laptops, computers, TV's, radios, home white goods and furnishings. Those trained could enter into reasonably paid employment and repair shops which should be available for all communities. [Individual response]

Suggestions for modernising recycling

Several respondents called for the modernisation of recycling systems, although few provided a detailed explanation. Among those who elaborated, the most frequent proposal was for greater central involvement in the collection process across local authorities. Respondents highlighted the need for stronger end-to-end oversight of council-led recycling operations, with some expressing scepticism about whether household recyclables reach recycling facilities.

Make sure that everything that is recycled by homes actually makes it to a recycling centre. I know that only 25% of that is actually recycled, ridiculous. [Individual response]

The council-led recycling collection in my area is sporadic and haphazard. -- There is little/no transparency regarding the final destination of our recyclables. [Individual response]

Respondents also called for consistent Scotland-wide recycling rules, with uniform bin colours, accepted materials, and sorting rules across all local authorities to simplify recycling. Inconsistent council collection methods were criticised for creating confusion and making recycling more difficult.

There is too much confusion created by different sorting systems in local authorities – can this be rationalised and improved? [Organisational response]

There were also calls to reintroduce bottle return schemes as a measure to reduce plastic and glass litter, although no rationale was provided.

Urgent reintroduction of a Deposit Return Scheme. [Individual response]

The glass bottle deposit system needs to be introduced. [Individual response]

Circular economy suggestions

Many respondents expressed support for circular economy practices, highlighting the need for dedicated funding and clear participation imperatives for local authorities, as well as resources for communications and behaviour change.

Ensure local authorities have clarity on their roles in delivering circular economy strategies, especially regarding product stewardship and local action. Secure funding and support for local authorities to develop necessary infrastructure for waste management and circular initiatives. [Organisational response]

Respondents also called for incentives for businesses and charities to adopt circular practices, such as repair, reuse, sharing, and leasing models. Respondents in this theme also stressed the importance of sector-specific approaches, including standardised recycling and take-back schemes in care settings, and the use of recycled or renewable materials.

Ensure local authorities have clarity on their roles in delivering circular economy strategies, especially regarding product stewardship and local action. Secure funding and support for local authorities to develop necessary infrastructure for waste management and circular initiatives. [Organisational response]

A few respondents also highlighted the importance of supporting local food production and supply chains. Suggestions included expanding home and community growing spaces and incentivising safe redistribution of surplus food to staff or community organisations - reducing transport-related emissions and retaining materials and economic benefits within Scotland.

It would be good to see more to support home/community food growing and compost so reducing green waste (including where not disposed of properly), and single use food packaging while delivering wider benefits. [Organisational response]

While current rules prevent preferential treatment of local goods, national policy could explore mechanisms that support Scottish industry and reduce transport related emissions without contravening procurement law. [Organisational response]

Suggestions for the decarbonisation of waste

A few respondents crossed on the topic of decarbonising waste. Amongst them, the most prominent suggestion was maximising energy recovery from waste through improved Energy-from-Waste facilities, ensuring that incineration generates electricity efficiently. While this is covered under the Energy section of the Plan, respondents used this question to offer related suggestions.

Decarbonising disposal – Proposals geared at reducing carbon emissions linked to the Energy from Waste (EfW) process would be beneficial. This would be underpinned by technological improvements to machinery/equipment used in this process. [Individual response]

Another suggestion was related to a wider landfill ban, extending beyond biodegradable municipal waste to other streams that should not be landfilled, alongside stricter diversion targets and financial disincentives.

References within the Climate Change Plan (CCP) to the landfill ban’s 2025 implementation date require updating. The failure to meet this milestone is disappointing and highlights the need for further work on defining the role of landfill as a genuine “disposal route of last resort.” This includes addressing orphaned wastes, unplanned outages at treatment facilities, and waste streams that fall outside the current scope of the ban. [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

Feedback from the engagement events echoed the themes discussed above. Regarding reducing and reusing, some participants called for greater awareness of food storage and meal prepping. For recycling, suggestions included using technologies such as colour coding and tracking systems to monitor waste disposal, improving recycling literacy, increasing the frequency of bin collections, and enhancing food waste recycling processes.

Energy Supply

Question 11

What are your views on Scotland generating more electricity from renewable sources?

The sentiment towards generating more electricity from renewable sources was generally positive, with the vast majority of responses either expressing a positive stance or offering suggestions for improving feasibility. Responses mainly focused on approaches to implementation and technical aspects.

The most frequently discussed topic was concerns regarding Scotland’s operational readiness to ensure energy sufficiency with the current infrastructure. Many respondents emphasised that rising electricity demand from the electrification of heat and transport will require a more resilient and flexible grid, capable of managing diverse renewable energy sources, addressing delays in generator connections, and reducing high transmission costs. Respondents also noted that Scotland often produces excess renewable energy that cannot be used effectively due to insufficient storage capacity, resulting in wasted energy. Expanding renewables without viable large-scale or household-level storage was seen as a significant limitation.

The increased use of electricity to heat homes will contribute to accelerating electricity demand. It is critical that the electricity grid is properly maintained and updated to be able to cope with these increases. [Organisational response] Scotland has excess energy on some days. Free batteries for qualifying households (low income, pension credit etc.) so that excess energy generated when windy/sunny can be stored and used later when renewables can't keep up with demand. [Individual response]

The second most common topic was the fair distribution of benefits and impacts from renewable energy. Concerns often had a regional dimension, including comparisons between Scotland as a whole and other nations, between local areas hosting generation infrastructure and the wider Scottish population, and communities directly affected by the installation of power plants that might require compensation. Many suggested that local communities should receive tangible benefits, such as reduced local energy costs and investment in local services, particularly for those hosting or affected by generation infrastructure. Others advocated for community ownership of the energy infrastructure, ensuring direct access to the resulting benefits.

[…] Scotland should be a world leader in generating electricity from renewable sources, this should also be reflected in energy exports and household energy bills. [Individual response]

It is important that communities that will be impacted by generation or transmission infrastructure are fairly compensated through mandatory community benefits or other mechanisms. We also feel that when communities are paying a price from renewable developments, pylons, battery storage sites and wind farms, then they should be seeing a significant community benefit in the form of lower energy bills and money to invest in other local infrastructure and services. [Organisational response]

Given the huge increase in demand for electricity in the future the emphasis was on national production of energy in the CCP whereas there is also huge potential in community energy production. When this is done well and run by communities they see financial benefits from having wind turbines, solar panels etc in their communities and this can help reduce opposition to infrastructure and helps Scotland to generate the renewable energy needed. [Organisational response]

The third most discussed topic was the need for diversification of the energy supply mix. Many respondents emphasised the importance of incorporating a variety of renewable technologies alongside traditional sources, including wind, solar, tidal power, nuclear generation, and hydrogen. Respondents stressed that a diversified energy portfolio, including emerging options such as geothermal heat, green hydrogen, and tidal power, was seen as essential to enhance long-term energy security, self-sufficiency, and resilience.

Renewables are key energy sources of the future. The further diversification of the energy supply in combination with developing a range of storage solutions is essential to build long term energy security, self-sufficiency/sovereignty and resilience against extreme climate events, conflict or other. [Organisational response]

A diversified renewable portfolio, incorporating electricity alongside other sources such as geothermal heat, green hydrogen and other emerging technologies, would help mitigate risks related to grid constraints, price volatility and potential overreliance on any single energy vector. [Organisational response]

The fourth most frequently discussed topic highlighted the negative environmental impacts of energy production and the need to balance renewable deployment with nature protection. Respondents raised concerns about negative impacts on biodiversity, advocating for ecological assessment to be conducted before the installation of any renewable energy infrastructure. There were also concerns about the effects on natural landscapes, particularly in relation to onshore wind farms, including visual impacts, noise, and broader alterations to the surrounding environment.

Renewable infrastructure carries risks and opportunities for restoring Scotland’s biodiversity. Strategic planning of renewables must be based on the mitigation hierarchy to minimise harm and maximise benefits for biodiversity. The risks include Impacts on peatlands and moorlands from onshore wind farms; Impacts on species-rich grasslands from land-based solar arrays; Impacts on temperate rainforests, river systems and other biodiversity from hydroelectric schemes. Full site-based ecological assessments must be carried out at early stages of planning, including field surveys of vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens and fungi. [Organisational response]

Specific consultation event insights

Feedback from the engagement events echoed the themes discussed above. An additional point not mentioned earlier relates to the indirect benefits of renewable energy infrastructure development. Participants at one event specifically highlighted that changes in energy infrastructure, such as wind farms, could positively impact their area by creating employment opportunities and fostering local development.

Business and Industrial Processes

Question 12

What support do industries need to reduce their carbon emissions while remaining competitive?

The most common theme among respondents was the need for financial support. This included securing lower electricity costs while reducing carbon emissions, as the transition at current cost levels would jeopardise competitiveness and workforce development. This concern was particularly prevalent among small and local businesses, which often face competition from larger organisations that can absorb transition costs more easily. Respondents called for support through various channels, including tax reductions, subsidies, and grants for transition installations, and preferential treatment in procurement for government projects.

It is essential that there is a clear, coordinated and consistent financial framework that encourages de-carbonisation of those industries that are not intrinsic CO2 emitters. Changing heat source will be a big investment and will not happen in a climate of uncertainty. It is quite possible that sustainable, climate-friendly manufacturing will be more expensive than unsustainable manufacturing. Maintaining competitiveness then requires a balance of subsidy and tariff protection, the latter paying for the former. [Individual response]

The second most frequent theme was the need for clear and consistent regulations that would provide stability and enable industries to adjust and plan appropriately. Respondents claimed that the ambiguous expectations also created opportunities for companies to evade their responsibilities, hence harming industries adhering to the Plan and jeopardising the Government’s objectives.

It is essential that there is a clear, coordinated and consistent financial framework that encourages de-carbonisation of those industries that are not intrinsic CO2 emitters. [Individual response]

The next most frequently raised theme concerned the need for guidance and support on best practice for implementing the practical changes industries must make to meet the required changes. Hubs promoting knowledge sharing were also viewed favourably, as well as extracting knowledge from past successfully implemented projects.

Business Energy Scotland offer practical and financial support to businesses but it appears to be under resourced, and businesses have to wait a significant period of time to engage with an adviser. More resources for BES to allow more speedy intervention would be welcomed. [Organisational response]

Advisory services and technical support should be expanded to guide businesses through complex compliance requirements and identify cost-effective solutions. Collaboration with research bodies can accelerate adoption of emerging technologies, such as methane. [Organisational response]

Other, less common, themes included support for a carbon tax to incentivise reduced emissions and public investment in the electric grid to ensure that all industries have access to clean energy.

Specific consultation event insights

Participants mentioned that soft skills like adaptability and flexibility will be important in the transition to a net zero future. Suggestions to support workers and businesses included affordable training programmes and stronger collaboration between government, industry, and education providers.

Agriculture and Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)

Question 13

How can the Scottish Government encourage sustainable land use that is also productive for local communities?

The most frequent theme was the suggestion for greater involvement of local communities. Most respondents raising this theme believed that land should be community-owned, highlighting that this is a tried and tested model of sustainable land use. Other respondents in this theme suggested proactive co-design of any land use strategies with the local communities, and ensuring that part of the resulting benefits would flow back to communities. This theme was particularly prevalent among young people participating in consultation events, where they highlighted that they should be meaningfully involved in the design and delivery of nature restoration projects.

Local involvement is critical: communities should have a voice in land-use decisions and benefit directly through jobs, local supply chains, and ecosystem services. [Organisational response]

The second most common theme was the suggestion that the Scottish Government should incentivise and ensure proper use of land based on its characteristics. Respondents raising this theme highlighted that each piece of land is suited to different uses and that this should be taken into account. For instance, respondents mentioned that wind and solar parks should only be built on barren land that is not fit for agriculture or grazing.

Stop covering good agricultural land with solar farms, these should be relegated to areas of unproductive land. [Individual response]

The third most frequently raised theme was the need for financial support for farmers. Respondents in this theme expressed several suggestions for the appropriate form of support, such as lowering taxes, ensuring a fair price for their products, and receiving protection from international competition.

Our farmers require our full support. They should be assured of a fair price for their products and not pushed into lower their prices by supermarkets. They should not be subjected to competition from cheaper imports of poor quality products. [Individual response]

We need more farmers markets, veg box schemes and local deliveries. [Individual response]

Other less common suggestions included supporting local biodiversity, promoting multifactorial land use, encouraging regenerative and organic farming, creating monitoring tools and indicators to track progress, reducing meat consumption, and discouraging monocultures.

Our community aims to build relationships with local farmers in order to create multi-functional landscapes that are good for recreation, active travel, production, climate adaptation and biodiversity e.g. multifunctional woodland rather than monoculture plantations. [Organisational response] Plant mixed forests, not fast-growing evergreen monocultures that suffocate wildlife. [Individual response]

Specific consultation event insights

Additional suggestions in the participant events highlighted how transforming vacant and derelict land can tackle climate issues, boost local economies, and improve wellbeing, while creating connected, nature-based spaces that integrate farming, forestry, and community use.

Question 14

What do you think about our proposals for planting trees and restoring natural habitats like peatlands?

The most common view regarding the proposals for planting trees and restoring natural habitats was general agreement. In particular, most respondents to this question highlighted that the proposals were good and a much-needed change; however, they did not offer any justification or elaboration on their views.

Excellent idea [Individual response]

We strongly support the Scottish Government’s proposals for tree planting and the restoration of natural habitats, including peatlands. These measures are vital for sequestering carbon, enhancing biodiversity, and improving ecosystem resilience. [Organisational response]

The second most frequently mentioned theme was agreement with the proposals, if certain conditions were met. Most respondents raising this theme advocated for a “right tree in the right place” approach. This approach consists of (i) planting mixed, native trees instead of invasive monocultures and (ii) a careful selection of land for planting trees, ensuring that food-production land is not affected. The second most mentioned condition was adequate, long-term financial support, mostly mentioned in relation to crofts. Other, less frequent conditions included community involvement in decision-making, scaling up, and fast-tracking the proposal, and ensuring new forests would be public.

We therefore call for a greater proportion of new tree planting to focus on mixed native woodlands. This would deliver dual benefits for biodiversity and climate, while also enhancing ecosystem resilience and habitat connectivity at a landscape scale. [Organisational response]

ORGANISATION emphasizes that tree planting must follow ecological design principles, ensuring the right species are planted in the right locations, and that areas of existing high ecological value, such as species-rich grasslands, wetlands, or ancient habitats are protected and not converted. [Organisational response]

Funding opportunities to restore peatland and plant trees often favour larger-scale landholdings. This not only leaves crofters behind but also contradicts the nation's commitments towards land reform and a just transition. [Organisational response]

New woodland creation needs to at least double to meet targets, and there is a pressing need to work at scale. [Organisational response]

However, nature-based solutions such as these are particularly well-suited to community-owned land where long-term stewardship, local accountability and place-based decision making can deliver durable climate and nature outcomes alongside social and economic benefits and this is something that should be more evident within the Draft Plan, particularly due to the emphasis placed on co-benefits and just transition principles [Organisational response]

The third most frequently mentioned theme was various suggestions on how the Plan could be improved. The suggestions included the introduction of new monitoring and enforcement tools or improving existing ones, developing partnerships across organisations, promoting multifactorial land use, better livestock management, enforcing the UK Forestry Standard, and aligning with wider government priorities and programmes. Unlike the previous themes, most respondents in this one did not explicitly state their agreement or disagreement with the proposals.

However, to do this requires local delivery and to effectively do this we suggest that Plan needs to: (i) Commit to ongoing funding to Local Authorities through the Nature Recovery Fund. (ii) Supporting cross boundary programmes like the emerging Climate Forests approach to tree planting. (iii) Develop sustainable support Regional Climate Adaptation partnerships, a key component of the Scottish National Adaptation Plan. [Organisational response]

Large scale finance is required but the mechanisms and auditing needed to convince investors needs work. SG could help with providing support for nature finance through establishing the criteria and supporting initial planning and verification. By generating high quality data partnerships of landowners will be able to demonstrate the value of investments. [Organisational response]

The next most cited theme was protecting natural habitats. In particular, most respondents expressing concerns highlighted that the effectiveness of the Plan would be hindered by the installation of more solar panels and wind turbines. Respondents in this theme viewed these two aims as contradictory and suggested that efforts should be focused on preventing the damage to natural habitats caused by solar and wind farms, instead of investing in restoring them. Other, less common concerns included the overreliance on private funding, the effectiveness of carbon credits, and the overall clarity of the Plan.

The vast amounts being destroyed to build industrial windfarms is highly concerning and questionable, given that these are priority habitats under Scottish and UK policy. Peatland restoration typically takes centuries, not decades. It is somewhat perverse, that in order to save the planet, we must destroy the environment. [Organisational response]

Constantly monoplanting and clear felling work disrupts peat, but even more damaging is cutting and laying miles of access tracks and digging up thousands of tonnes of peated soils to pour in thousands of tonnes of concrete for the bases of giant turbines and the huge amount of disturbance and destruction caused by the tsunami of renewable energy projects being foisted upon the rural Highland landscapes and habitats and the massive heavy loads and huge number of diesel HGV journeys in these landscapes. [Individual]

Specific consultation event insights

Additionally, some participants at an engagement event noted that peat is used both for agriculture and as fuel, which damages peatlands and releases carbon. They advocated for support for those who rely on peat, so that environmental harm is reduced while communities continue to have access to fuel, addressing both climate and local needs simultaneously.

Shetland’s agriculture is one of the biggest reasons for Peatlands decline in Shetland, as well as fuel, so if the plan would help support people who are in need of using the peat, that would solve two problems at once, leading to less carbon being released due to the peat being cut and dried, and also, people having more fuel, which will help the community and the environment.

Question 15

How can the Scottish Government support farming to become more climate-friendly while continuing to support food production and improve biodiversity?

The most common theme was providing additional financial support to farmers. Respondents believed that farmers should be supported to make the transition through a variety of measures, such as subsidies, protection from international competition, or ensuring a minimum “fair” price for their products.

Supporting farming should be treated as a national security issue and should be receiving significant subsidies to ensure climate-friendly and sustainable food production. [Individual response]

Support local farmers and stop unhealthy imports! [Individual response]

The second most prevalent theme was the suggestion to offer training and education for farmers. Respondents raising this theme highlighted that a sustainable transition of farming requires deep knowledge of developments in renewable energy and the impacts of climate change, as well as hands-on training with practical issues, such as operating new technologies and using environmentally friendly products.

Fund education programmes especially on fertiliser use. Farmers still believe pouring more fertiliser on will give a better crop. Educate on paddock grazing systems and producing smaller animals with less input but maximum profits eg easy care sheep. [Individual response]

The third most frequently mentioned theme was the need to ensure that good farmland is reserved for food production, instead of being repurposed for forests or wind and solar farms. Respondents were concerned that renewable infrastructure would ultimately undermine its intended aim of protecting the environment and may also pose threats to food security.

[…] We should not be turning over prime agricultural land to wind farms and solar panels. […] [Individual response]

The next most common theme was encouraging better cooperation across sectors and ensuring alignment of the Government’s policies. Respondents highlighted that the goals outlined in the Plan can only be achieved through cooperation across departments and sectors, including alignment with the NSA Next Generation Programme, the Land-Based Partnership Scheme, the Regional Land Use Partnerships, and the Scottish Biodiversity Partnership. Some respondents expressed concerns that the Plan largely ignores the emissions from livestock and industries such as aviation, hence any reductions from farming would be negligible.

Supporting farming to become more climate friendly while maintaining strong food production and enhancing biodiversity requires a combination of targeted incentives, regulatory flexibility and long term partnership between government, farmers and public bodies. [Organisational response]

Any enforced changes should be proportionate to other net zero activities, for example on air travel. Disproportionate action on small family businesses is likely to work against our overall net zero ambitions. [Organisational response]

Other suggestions included the reduction of meat production and consumption, completing additional research, supporting agroforestry schemes, incentivising farm diversity, promoting organic farming, and tailoring support to each local area.

Specific consultation event insights

Event participants stressed that farmers and landowners have the expertise to manage land sustainably and make strategic decisions, such as where trees or crops grow best. They called for long-term, locally-led planning that values traditional methods, supports local food systems, and avoids one-size-fits-all remote directives.

Section 3: Impact Assessments

The following questions concern the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA), Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA), Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA), Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA), and Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment (FSD). The purpose of these impact assessments is to understand the effects of government policy on specific groups, including children and young people, island communities, businesses, and equality groups.

Question 16

Which groups or communities do you think will be most affected by the transition to net zero, and in what ways?

Overall, the majority of respondents believed that the impact of the transition would be negative. The thematic analysis below presents the groups or communities most commonly highlighted as being negatively affected. Among those who identified potential benefits, most highlighted that children and young people would benefit from reduced climate impacts and living in a healthier environment.

The most common theme was negative effects for rural areas, especially for the Islands and the Highlands. Respondents primarily noted that these populations, and particularly those living close to planned developments, would be negatively affected by new infrastructure due to reduced tourism, loss of land to renewables, and the cost of upgrading to clean energy alternatives for transportation and heating.

Rural communities, which will see major land-use change from largely agricultural to hosting substations, pylons and renewable infrastructure. It is not just the impacts once constructed, it is also the impacts during construction, for example heavy HGV use of minor roads, hedgerow removal, blocking of informal access routes and the sense of disempowerment through the challenges of engaging with the planning and consent process. [Individual response]

The second group most commonly cited as negatively affected was low ‑ income households. Respondents noted that these groups would be most affected by rising living costs, such as higher bills and heating expenses, as well as the costs associated with retrofitting.

Those who cannot afford to make the transition which due to the cost of living will be the majority of the population eg families, unemployed, elderly, those working but not in high paid jobs. They will not be able to make the changes to their homes or buy EV. [Individual response]

The third most frequently mentioned group were people connected to fossil fuel industries, either through employment or financial dependence. Respondents noted that this group may be affected by unemployment, difficulties in transitioning to new roles, and the need for reskilling.

The poorest in society and Fossil fuel worker will be most affected. Fuel poverty is a major issue and fossil fuel workers may well become unemployed with not all able to retrain. [Individual response]

Workforce impacts: For the oil and gas workforce, the transition brings acute uncertainty. As demand for fossil fuels declines, many roles are at risk of displacement or transformation. Industry analysis has suggested that, without coordinated intervention, job losses could accelerate throughout the decade, creating instability for workers and supply chain SMEs. Workers also express concerns that new roles may not match existing jobs in terms of pay, stability, or long-term security. [Organisational response]

The next most prevalent theme was people with protected characteristics and marginalised groups being negatively affected. Respondents suggested disabled people, ethnic minorities, older people, and those with long‑term health conditions would be negatively and disproportionately affected by the requirements of the transition, and stressed the importance of ensuring a just transition that accounts for all potential inequalities that may arise or be exacerbated by the process.

Communities already at risk in society are most likely to be impacted by the transition to Net Zero. Those experiencing issues such as poverty, discrimination or prejudice will likely see these issues exacerbated by the impacts or not be able to fully engage in the transition and the opportunities it presents due to these issues. Therefore climate justice work and the focus of the Just Transition cannot solely be on employment, skills and the workforce, but we need to ensure that action is taken across all areas of society to remove barriers, enable participation. [Organisational response]

Respondents who identified positive benefits highlighted that children and young people would benefit from reduced climate impacts and living in a healthier environment.

Specific consultation event insights

When asked about the likely impacts of the transition on them, young people attending consultation events identified the loss of future career opportunities in the oil and gas sectors due to CCP, air and water pollution from climate change, and access to reliable public transportation. The respondents suggested prioritising climate education, supporting communities and networks for young people who want to take climate action, setting interim targets in the CCP, sharing progress against targets more regularly, and naming young people in low-income families as priority groups in the CCP.

Question 17

How do you think the Climate Change Plan aligns with existing local, regional, or national priorities that you are aware of or involved in?

Overall, sentiment regarding the alignment of the Climate Change Plan with existing local, regional, and national priorities was negative. The majority of respondents stated that the Plan does not fully align with these priorities, although many did not provide further explanation. The main concern was misalignment with local priorities, followed by regional priorities. Very few respondents expressed negative views about alignment at the national level.

The most frequently discussed topic was the concern that a “one size fits all” Plan overrides local needs. Many felt that nationally driven targets and operational decisions, particularly for renewable energy, were imposed with limited regard for local development plans, community needs, or local democratic processes. This was viewed as problematic in rural and island areas, where transport, heating, and infrastructure solutions often require different approaches. Overall, respondents called for greater flexibility, stronger alignment with local and regional policies, and more meaningful community involvement to ensure that climate action reflects local realities.

The climate change plan infrastructure ignores the local development plans of many areas. It brings no financial benefits to local, regional and national organisations. Community benefit is small compared with what the landowners and developers receive as the only beneficiaries. There is little alignment with anything that exists. No consideration of tourism, a major part of the rural economy is considered in the plan. Communities are being divided. [Individual response]

Given that I'm seeing local and national policies being overridden in favour of e.g. windfarm developments and significant denial of local democracy, all sacrificed on the altar of the Climate Change faith, I suggest there is little if any alignment. [Individual response]

The second most frequently discussed topic was the need for stronger alignment between the Climate Change Plan and regional frameworks. Respondents noted that national climate policies are not always well-aligned with Local Development Plans, regional land-use strategies, or local authority priorities, creating gaps in delivery. Inconsistent planning approaches across regions were seen as undermining effective implementation. Respondents argued that closer coordination is needed to ensure national climate ambitions are translated into regionally appropriate actions and to reduce delays, conflicts, and duplication in delivery.

There are practical misalignments; land-use pressures from carbon and nature markets are not yet well integrated with rural community priorities, and local development plans and regional land-use priorities can lag behind national climate ambition. [Organisational response]

At a local authority level, there are growing gaps between local / regional policies towards the delivery of renewable energy infrastructure, with policies also differing in each region from a planning and social values perspective. The Scottish Government could play a more active role in ensuring that local and regional policies align with and enable national policy – otherwise Scotland’s climate ambitions will be at risk of being missed or delayed. [Organisational response]

Out of the respondents who indicated general alignment with priorities, most referred to national alignment. They stated that the Plan aligns well with the existing policy frameworks, citing consistency with Scotland’s statutory net zero targets, agricultural and biodiversity strategies, and broader objectives around economic transformation, health, wellbeing, and resilience. At the local and regional level, a few respondents highlighted alignment with council net zero plans and ongoing work on EV infrastructure, clean energy, circular economy initiatives, and community engagement. The Plan was also seen as broadly consistent with priorities around fairness, inclusion, and ensuring that communities most affected by climate impacts can participate in decision-making. However, respondents often emphasised that while strategic alignment exists in principle, successful delivery will depend on clearer operational integration across national, regional, and local policies.

The Draft Climate Change Plan aligns closely with Scotland’s wider national, regional and local policy priorities, but further integration and operational clarity will be essential to ensure coherence across the whole system.

Alignment with national priorities At the national level, the Plan supports Scotland’s statutory target of achieving net zero emissions by 2045 and complements the Scottish National Adaptation Plan (2024–2029), which emphasises resilience, wellbeing, and systemic preparedness. [Organisational response]

Strong alignment with local priorities around fuel poverty, warm homes, energy affordability, health and wellbeing, and community resilience. Aligns with community priorities on fairness, inclusion, and ensuring communities most affected by climate impacts can participate in decisions. [Organisational response]

Question 18

If you identified there could be negative impacts of the Climate Change Plan, are there any ways you think we could reduce that negative impact, and if so, what would you recommend?

Overall, the majority of responses identified negative impacts associated with the Plan without offering direct suggestions for mitigation. The negative impacts identified largely reiterated points raised in earlier responses. These reflected both calls to reconsider the Plan in its entirety, as well as specific concerns, such as the financial burden placed on citizens and businesses and doubts about the effectiveness of certain approaches, including the push for electrification and reliance on renewable energy without adequate storage.

Below, we present the most common themes among the respondents who offered suggestions on how the identified negative impacts could be mitigated.

The most common suggestion for reducing the negative impacts of the Plan was a stronger focus on community empowerment. Respondents called for earlier, ongoing, and more meaningful consultation of affected communities throughout the delivery of the Plan. This included clearer communication, co-design of solutions, and mechanisms to ensure that communities receive benefits and appropriate mitigation for any negative financial and non-financial consequences they might face. Respondents also highlighted the importance of local flexibility. They stressed the need to strengthen community participation, improve transparency, and prioritise local value creation by supporting community-led and small-scale initiatives, and aligning developments with local and regional priorities.

There needs to be thought through mechanisms to consult communities throughout the process of design and construction of the infrastructure and companies need to ensure that there are benefits to local communities based on best practice. [Individual response]

We aren’t doing enough small scale- communities should be allowed to develop local solutions and encouraged to apply for funding for this. [Individual response]

The second most frequent recommendation was to apply Just Transition principles to the implementation of the Plan. Respondents advocated that fairness must guide delivery to avoid worsening inequality or undermining social cohesion. Many highlighted the importance of embedding a “polluter pays” principle to ensure costs are distributed more equitably. Others called for targeted support measures, including financial assistance, clear guidance, digital inclusion, and cost-of-living mitigations for vulnerable groups. They also stressed the need for early information, job security, skills development, and reskilling support for workers and sectors affected by the transition.

Fairness needs to be a guiding principle otherwise there is a risk of exacerbating inequality and generating resentment and anger and societal breakdown - this is an issue wider than purely climate transition impacts. For example: is it fair that those driving heavy people carriers which use greater resources and cause greater road damage pay the same road tax as those in small vehicles?...... 'Polluter pays' needs to be embedded as a principle. [Individual response]

To reduce negative impacts, the Plan should ensure targeted support for low-income and rural communities, including tailored funding and technical assistance. Clear guidance and resources for digital inclusion are needed so vulnerable groups are not left behind. [Organisational response]

The third most frequent recommendation was to strengthen communications around the Plan. Some respondents believed that clear, honest, and consistent messaging on progress, outcomes, and the risks of inaction would help build public understanding and would consequently build trust and encourage wider support. Some called for a national conversation on the climate emergency, supported by accessible education and engagement delivered through community spaces, schools, and trusted partners. Respondents also highlighted the importance of communicating the co-benefits of climate action, including improved health and wellbeing, reduced inequality, job creation, and environmental improvements. Framing action in terms of benefits for communities and future generations was viewed as an important step to sustaining public support and countering misinformation.

Greater involvement in consultation will increase understanding, greater need for education in accessible formats available in community spaces, through trusted partners. Clearer messaging around co-benefits available for everyday changes. [Organisational response]

Honest and consistent public messages about the necessity and desirability and fairness of climate plans is absolutely necessary. Negative messages and climate denial must be confidently tackled. Well planned education in schools will be key to communicating key messages widely and in harder to reach communities. People could be helped to understand that contributing to necessary climate action is a demonstration of their love for their children, as they are doing it for their children. [Individual response]

Specific consultation event insights

Engagement with young people at consultation events uncovered concerns regarding the impact of the Plan on low-income families. The concerns centred around increased energy costs, job losses, and deepening existing inequalities. To mitigate these risks, young people suggested funding retraining schemes and apprenticeships, ensuring regeneration and “green improvements” come with protections against displacement, writing the CCP in plain English and languages spoken by the local communities, and subsidising new heating systems and retrofits.

“It feels like the rules hit poor people first.”

“We want climate action, but not if our parents lose jobs and bills go higher.”

Question 19

Please share any other quantitative data or sources of this to assist in developing the impact assessments.

Most responses to this question did not include any additional quantitative data or sources to assist in developing the impact assessments. Out of the respondents offering evidence, most cited fuel poverty statistics. A complete list of evidence cited is presented in Appendix A.

Question 20

Are there any previous examples or case studies we should consider when assessing potential impacts?

Most respondents to this question did not offer any previous examples or case studies for assessing potential impacts. A list of the most commonly mentioned evidence is included in Appendix A.

Question 21

Can you think of any further positive or negative impacts that are not covered in the impact assessments, which may result from the Climate Change Plan?

Overall, most respondents focused more on the Plan’s potential negative impacts than on its positive effects. The discussion centred on the unintended consequences of the Plan’s implementation for rural areas, as well as the risk of imposing a greater financial burden and thereby increasing inequalities throughout Scotland.

The most frequently discussed topic was the disproportionate impact of the Plan on rural and island communities. Respondents raised concerns that national climate targets and the large-scale renewable energy developments to meet them could impose significant local costs while benefits are delivered elsewhere. These concerns included the displacement of productive grazing land through afforestation and peatland restoration, speculative land purchases that price out farmers, and the loss of cultural and ecological value associated with traditional land uses. Other issues raised included rising rural housing costs due to energy-efficiency improvements, disruption to workforce mobility from limited public transport, pressures on small businesses and tourism SMEs, and the potential loss of local reuse and recycling capacities.

Additional impacts could see an increase in rural housing which may impact on their affordability due to the improvements undertaken to address energy ratings and workforce mobility may be impacted if improvements to public transport particularly in rural areas is not addressed, and how these are likely to create additional financial constraints on the transition. [Organisational response]

The second most discussed topic was the risk of leaving communities behind, particularly vulnerable groups. Respondents highlighted that the Plan could raise household costs through higher energy bills and taxes, while placing additional strain on public services and local economies. Specific concerns included wage pressures from competing labour market demands, barriers faced by disabled individuals, renters, and ethnic minorities in accessing low-carbon technologies in housing, and challenges for older people on fixed incomes in retrofitting their homes.

It will cost every consumer a significant amount through their electricity bill and taxes. Scotland must work with the UK government to influence the 'right' decision to benefit all four nations. [Individual response]

Intersectional vulnerability: People who are both disabled and renting, or from ethnic minorities in flats, face compounded barriers. A disabled ethnic minority person in a rented flat faces three separate barriers to heat pump adoption (rental restrictions, flat structure, non-economic barriers); the current "one-size-fits-all" policy design fails these groups. [Organisational response]

Additionally, a few participants stated concerns about the reliance on technologies perceived as unproven, particularly Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS). They believed that heavy dependence on CCUS could divert finance and attention away from more immediate and proven actions, such as energy efficiency and retrofitting. Concerns were also raised about the lack of empirical evidence for CCUS’s long-term effectiveness and potential environmental risks.

The Plan also relies heavily on Carbon Capture and Storage to reach net zero, yet it fails to address the lack of empirical evidence for its long-term effectiveness and the associated environmental risks. The Scottish Government must move beyond high-level optimism and include these specific, evidence-based risks in its impact assessments. [Organisational response]

Finally, the participants who mentioned positive impacts of the Plan focused on economic, health, and community cohesion benefits. On the economic impacts, respondents noted the Plan’s contribution to generating jobs and skills, retaining value in local supply chains, and contributing to a just transition through the polluter-pays principle. Health benefits included improved air quality, increased active travel, better-insulated homes, and enhanced mental wellbeing from greener communities. Positive community impacts were also highlighted, with stronger cohesion and social capital arising from community-led initiatives, including local energy schemes, repair and reuse projects, and nature restoration initiatives.

Increased local economic resilience through retention of value in local supply chains, job creation and skills development. [Organisational response]

One positive impact not fully covered is the public health gains from climate action. For example, cleaner air due to reduced fossil fuel use and more active travel will improve respiratory health and could reduce NHS costs. Greener communities (more green spaces, tree planting, better insulated homes) can also enhance mental wellbeing and quality of life.

Stronger community cohesion and social capital arising from community-led projects such as energy schemes, repair and reuse initiatives, and nature restoration. [Organisational response]

Section 4: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

The following questions concern the SEA. There is a legal requirement to consult on the SEA Environmental Report (Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005). The purpose of the SEA is to assess the likely environmental effects of government policy, considering how negative impacts can be avoided or minimised and ways that positive effects can be enhanced.

Question 22

What are your views on the accuracy and scope of the environmental baseline set out in the environmental report? Are you aware of any further information that could be used to inform the assessment findings?

Most of the respondents offering views on the accuracy and scope of the environmental expressed broad satisfaction with calls for further improvements. Respondents noted that the environmental baseline covers a broad range of areas and is a useful first step in understanding Scotland’s environmental conditions and associated risks. Nevertheless, several gaps were highlighted by some respondents. Greater detail on agricultural soils, crofting, and grazing systems, and on-farm biodiversity would strengthen the baseline, as would finer spatial resolution for sensitive ecosystems, such as peatlands, coastal zones, and blue carbon habitats. A few also suggested expanding coverage of indoor environmental quality in settings like care facilities, where factors such as ventilation, air quality, and access to daylight can significantly affect wellbeing.

The baseline is comprehensive but could be strengthened by incorporating more granular local data, such as Aberdeenshire’s biodiversity monitoring, local climate impact profiles, and community-level emissions inventories. [Organisational response]

Baseline is broadly comprehensive, but agricultural soils and on-farm biodiversity remain comparatively data-poor. Strengthen baseline detail for high nature value farmland, crofting systems, rough grazing and catchments affected by land-use change. [Organisational response]

The next most discussed topic was the need for more regionally specific environmental data. While the baseline was deemed broadly comprehensive at the national level, respondents highlighted that Scotland’s diverse landscapes require finer spatial resolution. Suggestions included the incorporation of local peatland and blue-carbon mapping, region-specific biodiversity and heritage constraints, and cultural landscape data. Stronger integration of regionally collected data was also recommended to better capture cumulative and regional impacts.

The baseline appears comprehensive for national-level assessment, but we note that the Highlands & Islands (with highly sensitive peatland, coastal, marine, island, and habitat features) may require finer spatial resolution baseline data (peat-depth mapping, blue-carbon habitat mapping, island-specific biodiversity/heritage constraints, cultural landscapes). Use of more detailed regional data (e.g. from NatureScot, local authorities, HIE-commissioned studies) would improve the environmental assessment and avoid unintended negative impacts. [Organisational response]

While recognising that the report is written at a very high level, the SEA should also consider regional environmental baselines, given the highly varied nature of Scotland. [Organisational response]

The third most discussed topic reflected concerns about the environmental baseline. A few respondents questioned its reliability, arguing that it underestimates the speed and systemic nature of ecological change. A few also noted that much of the data is based on historical or incremental indicators, which can create a misleading sense of stability. These responses called for a baseline that more explicitly accounts for accelerating climate impacts, biodiversity thresholds, energy constraints, and non-linear environmental changes. Others also noted that the baseline does not acknowledge the contradiction between the urgent need to enhance biodiversity and protect landscapes, and the damage caused by inappropriate renewable energy developments and associated infrastructure in sensitive locations.

Much of the available baseline data is still framed around indicators that reflect past conditions or incremental change. Given the accelerating impacts of climate change and ecological degradation, there is a risk that this creates a false sense of stability against which future impacts are assessed. The assessment could be strengthened by more explicitly integrating information on physical limits and systemic trends, such as carbon budgets, energy constraints, biodiversity thresholds and climate tipping points. [Individual response]

In our view the environmental baseline contains a lot of fine words, but little, if any, recognition of the contradiction between the urgent need to enhance biodiversity, protect landscapes, etc and the damage to both caused by unsuitable renewable energy (together with massive associated infrastructure) developments in inappropriate locations. [Organisational response]

Question 23

What, in your view, are the most significant environmental effects that should be taken into account as the Draft Climate Change Plan is finalised?

The most common theme was the need to consider the risk of further environmental damage from the Plan’s proposals. Respondents raised concerns about habitat disturbance linked to new infrastructure and the ineffective implementation of restoration measures. To mitigate these risks, respondents emphasised the importance of careful management in the development of renewable energy sources and the need for close monitoring of land‑use changes, particularly in relation to increasing competition for land.

While restoration activity offers significant climate benefits, inappropriate development or poorly designed mitigation risks permanent loss of irreplaceable habitats and associated carbon stores. [Organisational response]

Large scale tree planting, renewable infrastructure and land use change can fragment habitats or displace species if poorly sited. [Individual response]

The second most common theme was the potential positive environmental effects of the Plan. Responses mostly focused on the benefits of reducing emissions (such as carbon dioxide, greenhouse gases, and methane) on air and soil quality, and of natural restoration on health and wellbeing. The respondents highlighted that these benefits are conditional on carefully planning place-based developments, engaging related groups and communities in planning and delivery, considering habitat connectivity and constant climate fluidity, and ensuring a just transition.

The Plan has the potential to deliver strong positive environmental outcomes if implementation is aligned with these frameworks. Measures such as peatland restoration, woodland creation and nature-based solutions can reinforce the objectives of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act, National Planning Framework 4 and Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy, delivering both emissions reduction and biodiversity recovery. [Organisational response]

Positive effects: Reductions in emissions and improvements in air quality. Nature restoration benefits from peatland, woodland, and habitat improvements. [Organisational response]

The third most frequently raised theme concerned the need to consider extreme weather events and climate change impacts. Respondents urged adaptation and ensuring the Plan is resilient to such events. Weather-related and climate change impacts of particular concern included flooding, heatwaves, drought, wildfires, storms, coastal erosion, and sea-level rise. Other less frequent mentions included the focus on the preservation of wilderness, management of water sources, vehicle emissions, and pollution.

The government should be alert to the risk of a faster than expected and nonlinear acceleration of climate impacts. A step change in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather could place significant pressure on transport infrastructure and services, with the subsequent impact on supply chains, access to services and other fundamentals of day to day life. [Organisational response]

Question 24

What are your views on the predicted environmental effects as set out in the environmental report? Please share any other useful sources.

The most prevalent theme was broad agreement with the predicted environmental effects , while emphasising the need for further improvements. Many respondents felt that the predicted effects were accurate, sufficient, and consistent with likely outcomes. However, they also highlighted the need to enhance these predictions by placing greater emphasis on specific areas. In particular, respondents called for a greater focus on land‑use change impacts, effects on rural areas, and place‑based approaches that reflect the diversity of the Scottish landscape. They also stressed the importance of paying increased attention to biodiversity, water systems, and cumulative impacts, especially in locations facing multiple developments.

The predicted environmental effects outlined in the report capture key themes, but they risk oversimplifying the complexity of land use and farming systems. While afforestation and peatland restoration are presented as universally positive, the report underestimates potential negative impacts such as loss of productive grazing land, land abandonment, and biodiversity decline if traditional grazing systems are displaced. These effects would undermine rural economies and Scotland’s cultural landscapes. [Organisational response]

[…] predicted environmental effects provide a sound high-level assessment, but that greater use of regional evidence, improved treatment of cumulative impacts and stronger links to adaptive management would enhance confidence that environmental outcomes can be delivered effectively and equitably across all parts of Scotland. [Organisational response]

The second most common theme was conditional agreement with the predicted environmental effects. Respondents raising this theme agreed with the predictions, but noted that their accuracy depends on timely and effective delivery, robust risk mitigation, and transparent communication about the level of uncertainty associated with the predictions.

The predicted effects are broadly accurate, but greater emphasis should be placed on monitoring unintended consequences, such as habitat fragmentation or increased pressure on local infrastructure. [Organisational response]

The third most frequently mentioned theme concerned the uncertainty about the accuracy of the predicted environmental effects. Respondents in this group expressed doubts arising from what they saw as inaccurate or outdated data, as well as environmental risks that they felt had been overlooked in the predictions. Others were concerned that the actual impacts may be underestimated and that the environmental effects could be more severe than those presented.

Real time effects will be much worse than predicted for the Scottish people. [Individual response]

Question 25

What are your views on the proposals for mitigation, enhancement, and monitoring of the environmental effects set out in the environmental report?

Overall, the respondents expressed broadly positive views regarding the Plan’s proposal to mitigate, enhance, and monitor the environmental effects set out in the environmental report. However, these respondents did not elaborate on their answers. Below, we summarise the main themes among respondents who offered specific suggestions for improving the proposals.

The most common theme was that the Plan needs to be more specific on the actions taken and how they will be carried out in practice. Respondents in this theme believed that the Plan’s proposals were too vague and would not lead to meaningful change without converting the aspirations included into specific steps and actions. These concerns were closely tied to doubts about the financial and practical feasibility of the Plan, with respondents questioning whether the proposals could realistically be delivered.

The proposals for mitigation, enhancement, and monitoring set out in the environmental report are well-intentioned but lack sufficient detail to ensure they are practical and proportionate. While mitigation measures such as tree planting and peatland restoration are highlighted, there is little emphasis on integrated approaches—for example, shelterbelt planting—which deliver biodiversity and carbon benefits without displacing productive grazing land. [Organisational response]

The second most common theme was agreement on the need for further encouragement of nature–based approaches. Respondents in this theme welcomed the proposals’ nature-based approaches and suggested going further to ensure effective implementation of green and nature-positive infrastructure, such as sustainable drainage and the resulting biodiversity gains.

Enhancement should prioritise nature-based solutions that deliver multiple co-benefits. [Organisational response]

Environmental enhancement measures, such as green infrastructure, nature‑based solutions, and whole‑place design, can positively support healthier estates, improved drainage, and climate resilience which directly benefits tenants. [Organisational response]

The next most common theme was the suggestion to consider place-specific approaches to ensure that mitigation, enhancement, and monitoring account for the unique circumstances of each local area. Respondents in this theme expressed opposition to “one-size-fits-all” approaches and advocated for the flexible implementation of the Plan.

Mitigation and enhancement measures must be sufficiently place-based, proportionate and enforceable to address the scale and concentration of impacts likely to arise from renewable energy development, grid infrastructure, land use change and waste and industrial activity. [Organisational response]

We support mitigation plans and recommend place based monitoring with island and rural indicators, and the integration with local programmes to maximise positive effects. [Organisational response]

Section 5: Monitoring emissions reductions

The following questions concern the reporting of annual emissions reductions.

Question 26

What are your views on the proposed approach to reporting annual emissions output and how this could support public understanding of Scotland’s progress toward achieving our Carbon Budgets?

Overall, most respondents expressed positive views on the proposed approach to reporting annual emissions outputs without offering additional details, while some highlighted the general importance of reporting emissions without showing agreement or disagreement with the proposed plan.

Out of the respondents offering views, most respondents called for transparent, timely, and frequent reporting. Respondents in this theme emphasised that any reporting should clearly outline the covered year, area, and groups to promote public understanding and confidence in the data. Furthermore, more frequent data collection and reporting were believed to enable more robust and impactful analysis of progress. Some respondents also highlighted that delays in publication should be shortened, as currently there is a significant lag between the year of emission and publication.

Emissions need to be reported more frequently, at least quarterly and preferably monthly. They need to be reported very clearly showing trends (comparing each month/quarter with the same month/quarter in previous years). [Individual response]

The second most prevalent theme was the importance of simple and accessible dissemination of information. The respondents in this theme highlighted that the general public does not have the technical skills, scientific knowledge, or expertise to correctly interpret monitoring data. As a result, the Scottish Government should ensure that all reports are clearly written, have minimal technical jargon, and are in line with accessibility requirements.

Transparent, timely and accessible reporting is essential for public trust and effective governance. The proposed approach to annual emissions reporting should be expanded to emphasise granularity, accessibility, independent verification and narrative context so that citizens, communities and decision makers can understand not just the numbers but the drivers, distributional impacts and policy levers. [Individual response]

The third most common theme was a suggestion to report emissions by sector. The respondents expressed concerns that current reporting may be misleading, as it omits important industry-specific context and tries to aggregate progress into a single comparable indicator. Instead, it was believed that sector-specific reports would promote public understanding of progress and would allow for the use of tailored indicators.

The proposed approach to reporting annual emissions output is welcome for improving transparency, but its success in supporting public understanding depends on how the data is communicated. Current reporting often focuses on headline figures, which can oversimplify sectoral contributions and create misconceptions—particularly around agriculture. For example, while farming accounts for 7.5 MtCO₂e, emissions have already fallen 12% since 1990, demonstrating progress rather than failure. [Organisational response]

Question 27

How useful do you think reporting emissions statistics at a more detailed level (including at the sub-sectoral level) would be in helping people understand key sources of emissions and our progress in reducing them?

Many respondents answered positively to this question, believing that reporting emissions statistics in more detail would be useful. Only a small number expressed negative views, questioning how such reporting would lead to behavioural change or whether it would represent good value for money. The following three themes outline how respondents expect this information to be useful.

The most frequently mentioned benefit was that more detailed statistics would help drive meaningful change. Respondents highlighted that policymakers and delivery partners need detailed, transparent emissions data to prioritise actions, sequence interventions effectively, and ensure carbon budgets are met. They also noted that detailed reporting would help drive action and build public trust, making it easier to understand how proposed measures contribute to emissions reductions and reducing scepticism about their effectiveness. In addition, geographic and sector-specific data were seen as particularly valuable for the general public, as they make the information more relatable.

This could aid transparent and accountability for delivery partners if information is relevant, timely, contextualised and when linked to distributional impacts and outcomes that matter to people and places. [Organisational response]

Makes it more personal to where they live. There will always be some people who want to understand the detail, particularly as it relates to their geographical area or their area of interest. Absence of data could generate suspicion. [Individual response]

The second most frequently mentioned benefit of detailed reporting was its role in enabling effective monitoring of progress towards decarbonisation. Respondents stated that more granular emissions data would help improve understanding of the key sources of emissions and where it is more challenging to reduce them. Sub-sectoral and regional breakdowns were deemed useful as enabling policymakers, communities, and stakeholders to identify where emissions remain high, where interventions are falling short, and where targeted action or additional support is required. Respondents also noted that detailed reporting helps demonstrate where positive impacts are occurring, increasing confidence in the effectiveness of policies.

Sub-sectoral and regional/sub-regional breakdowns (e.g. by region, rural/remote rural/island vs urban, energy supply, heat, transport, land use) allow policymakers, communities and stakeholders to identify where emissions remain high, where interventions succeed (or fail), and where targeted action is needed. [Organisational response]

If it is honest and detailed, people would be more able to believe that what is being implemented actually helps to reduce the emissions of human activity. [Individual response]

The third most common suggestion focused on the use of detailed reporting for the general public, noting the importance of making information accessible and engaging. Some respondents were concerned that overly complex or technical reporting could be overwhelming for the majority of the public. To avoid this, respondents emphasised the importance of presenting data in a digestible format, helping people understand emissions impacts at a human and local level and supporting informed public engagement. They suggested using visuals, infographics, and summaries to make the data easier to understand and interpret.

Consideration must be given to the audience for the information when determining how it is presented and how it is connected to other published information in order to be meaningful. [Organisational response]

The key is to present the data in an accessible format (visuals, infographics) so it’s not overwhelming. Done correctly, more detailed reporting will empower the public with a clearer understanding of Scotland’s emissions profile and progress. [Organisational response]

Question 28

How might the use of timely indicators, as proposed, help people to understand what needs to be delivered to achieve our Carbon budgets and to understand whether progress is on track?

The most commonly identified benefit was the use of detailed reporting as an early warning. Respondents supported the use of indicators that track real-world delivery, such as technology uptake, infrastructure readiness, or sector-specific activities, to flag when progress is falling behind expectations. Timely indicators were seen as particularly valuable for enabling early intervention, allowing course corrections before delays become entrenched or targets are missed. Respondents noted that such updates can show whether delivery is keeping pace with carbon budget requirements, helping to identify risks and gaps earlier than annual emissions inventories, which are published with a three-year time lag.

Timely indicators help in two ways: (1) they make delivery tangible, and (2) they allow early intervention before failures become entrenched. For islands, timely indicators should be used to flag early‑warning signs such as repeated stranded materials, back‑haul disruption, or rising reliance on unpaid volunteer labour. [Organisational response]

Their usefulness increases significantly when they highlight early signs of delivery bottlenecks, rather than only reporting outcomes after delays have already occurred. For example, data on grid connection lead times for social care sites can reveal constraints that may delay low‑carbon heating; and tracking public charging availability near care facilities can show whether the infrastructure needed to support zero‑emission fleets is keeping pace with expectations. [Organisational response]

The second most frequently discussed benefit was that timely indicators can make action more tangible. Respondents noted that timely indicators help maintain momentum, inform decision-making, and sustain public and stakeholder engagement throughout the transition. By focusing on metrics that are easier to understand, rather than historical emissions totals, respondents felt that progress becomes more tangible. This approach was seen as helping people better understand the practical delivery required to meet carbon budgets.

These indicators should also help develop an understanding of what must be delivered to achieve Scotland’s carbon budgets and whether progress is on track Regular indicators, annual or quarterly, linked to visible, local achievements such as tree planting or peatland restoration areas would make progress more tangible for communities and encourage wider public engagement Indicators that track local delivery capacity, participation, affordability and distributional impacts can help to ensure that anticipated benefits are realised and potential harms or emerging unintended consequences minimised. [Organisational response]

The third most frequently discussed benefit was that detailed reporting can support accountability and enhance transparency. Respondents noted that time-based indicators, when linked to specific responsibilities, help establish clear ownership of emissions reductions and facilitate informed discussions about them.

They support accountability, allow early corrective action, and provide transparency which is especially important in remote regions where delivery risks are elevated. [Organisational response]

This can support more informed public discussion, enable earlier course correction, and improve accountability across all levels of government. [Organisational response]

Several respondents raised concerns about the usability of such indicators, reflecting broader scepticism about carbon budgets. A few described these targets as restrictive, expressing worries that they could limit personal freedoms or impose financial burdens, particularly on lower-income households. Others anticipated that the indicators would have limited overall reach, while a few questioned their overall value for money.

Most people are more interested in their daily experiences than carbon budgets. If alternatives to driving a car are available, they might use them if cost effective. The same goes for most things including heating, food and material goods. The ambition is high, and you will get support, if cost and convenience is part of the deal. I am a keen environmentalist but being poor, cold and isolated has little appeal. Environmentalism is seen as a luxury of the rich. It needs to become the staple of all. [Individual response]

Section 6: Monitoring Just Transition

The following questions concern the following 14 proposed indicators for monitoring and evaluation of the Climate Change Plan.

• Participation in decision-making
• Community energy
• Community benefits
• Changes to places
• Fuel poverty
• Transport affordability
• Socio-economic impact on oil and gas communities
• Impact on household finances in oil and gas communities
• Access to training for offshore oil and gas workers
• Green jobs
• Impact of energy prices on small businesses
• Air pollution
• Woodland creation
• Peatland restoration

Question 29

Please detail any specific changes that would improve any of the 14 proposed indicators, including any data sources not currently included within this framework that could provide a useful indicator of progress towards a just transition in Scotland on an annual basis.

The most commonly cited changes related to Transport Affordability (Indicator 2.2). The respondents in this theme expressed concerns about this indicator, arguing that it does not accurately capture connectivity and reliability. Some respondents requested that the indicators be disaggregated by mode of transport and income level, while others requested a dedicated indicator for accessibility, particularly for people with disabilities.

We would not support the use of a composite metric for transport poverty as this conflates issues of availability, reliability, affordability, accessibility and safety. If a single measure is required, focusing on availability may be most useful. [Organisational response]

The second indicator most frequently commented on was Green Jobs (Indicator 3.2) . Respondents stated that this indicator needs to include employment history information to accurately identify people who have transitioned from the oil and gas industries. Other suggested changes to this indicator included breakdowns by region, wage, and career stability, as well as clarifying the definition of what Green Jobs may include.

While a Scotland-wide metric for green jobs is useful – and tells us something about the wider shifts in our economy – what it does not tell us is whether these jobs are taking place in areas that need them most. If these jobs are all concentrated in areas with low deprivation, high skills, and highly educated people, then even a staggering increase in green jobs does not equate to a just transition. Instead, it merely represents a shift in employment for those already employed – a trend which is likely to happen anyway. By measuring total green jobs, the data merely affirms that these jobs are increasing, when the real policy interest should be on extending the benefits of those new jobs to overlooked communities, and using these new industries as ways to regenerate communities, rather than concentrate more wealth and opportunities in areas that already have it. Data should be broken down into more granular geographical areas (smaller than LA level), that enable us to highlight which areas are benefitting most (or the least) from new jobs. [Organisational response]

The third most commonly discussed indicator was Participation in Decision Making (Indicator 1.1) . The respondents suggested that the indicator should track the number of engagement activities, who participates in these events, and whose voices are being heard. Additionally, respondents believed that in-person engagement is more beneficial to active decision-making compared to survey-based consultations. As a result, they suggested that the indicator should also capture engagement activity modes.

This indicator could be strengthened by capturing not only the number of consultations but also the diversity and representativeness of participants, including rural, island, and marginalised communities. [Organisational response]

The final indicator with the most suggestions was Fuel Poverty (Indicator 2.1). Respondents stated that this indicator should better capture inequality levels, potentially through absolute poverty metrics, and with a specific emphasis on regional disparities. There were also requests for the indicator to be dynamic and capture changes in fuel poverty throughout time, as well as expanding the coverage to account for building quality.

These should capture both absolute levels and inequality, showing whether low-income and vulnerable households are disproportionately affected. [Organisational response]

Some respondents offered broader suggestions. These included marine, coastal, and wetland indicators, general biodiversity restoration indicators, health impact indicators, and requests to break down the indicators according to regions, people’s financial capability, gender and sex differences, and vulnerability status.

Question 30

What are the most appropriate indicators for judging whether we are achieving meaningful public participation in decisions related to the climate? This includes both the quality of the participatory process itself and the impact of that participation on the decision-making process.

The most common theme was using diversity, inclusion, and representativeness as indicators for measuring meaningful public participation in decisions related to climate. Respondents raising this theme often emphasised the importance of equality of opportunity to participate and accessibility for all groups. They highlighted that hard-to-reach groups and minorities are often underrepresented in consultations and public engagement. It was suggested that the Scottish Government should ensure engagement with a sample representative of each area's population profile, as well as those most likely affected by the proposed changes, such as employees in the coal industry.

Diversity of participants compared to local demographics: Measures whether groups typically under represented in climate decision making (e.g., low income households, young people, disabled people, minority ethnic communities, rural residents) are participating. Accessibility of participation opportunities. [Organisational response]

The second most frequently suggested indicator was the number and extent of programmes or policies impacted by public participation. The respondents in this theme emphasised that systematically tracking the policies or programmes influenced by public participation and evidencing how and to what extent they were adapted based on the feedback would provide tangible evidence of meaningful public participation. Some respondents proposed that the results should be disseminated widely, with a clear link between public input and policy outcomes, in the form of “you said…, we did…”

Degree of influence participants have on final decisions, measured through follow-up reporting or documented changes resulting from public input. [Organisational response]

The third most commonly cited indicator of meaningful public engagement was participants’ perception and behaviour changes. Respondents in this theme suggested that any form of meaningful engagement with the public should lead to lasting changes in participants’ perceptions of climate change, understanding of the evidence base, and incorporation of climate-friendly actions in their daily lives.

Changes in public confidence in climate policies following engagement: Participation should strengthen legitimacy and acceptance. [Organisational response]

Evidence of decision/behaviour changes resulting from participation. [Organisational response]

Other, less common suggestions included participants’ self-reported satisfaction with engagement, the number of community groups and climate hubs engaged, the proportion of projects co-designed, and whether participants are more likely to respond to follow-ups and new engagement opportunities.

Sustained engagement over time, not one-off consultations, showing ongoing dialogue with communities. [Organisational response]

Question 31

What indicator would provide the best measure of the impact of net zero development in local communities across Scotland? For example, the impact of the installation of renewable energy infrastructure or other land use changes (e.g., through peatland restoration or tree planting).

The most commonly cited indicator for measuring the impact of net zero development in local communities was 1. Communities and place. Most commonly, respondents expressed support for indicator 1.3 Community Benefits, highlighting that the local communities should benefit financially from net zero developments, as a form of compensation for losing land to renewables. Less frequently, respondents cited indicator 1.4 Changes to Places, while some also highlighted the importance of community-owned installations and were thus in favour of indicator 1.2 Community Energy.

The impact of net zero development in local communities should be measured by the extent to which communities experience tangible, long-term benefits, including reduced energy costs, improved local infrastructure, increased community ownership or influence over assets, and reinvestment of benefits into local priorities. Indicators should capture both the distribution of benefits and the quality of community involvement, particularly in areas experiencing inequality. [Individual response]

The second most prevalent theme was a general agreement with indicator 3. Jobs, Skills, and Economic Opportunities. In particular, respondents expressed support for using data on the number of jobs, wages, and training, without making specific reference to any of the constituent indicators.

Track the proportion of revenue, jobs, and training opportunities generated by renewable energy projects and land use changes (e.g., peatland restoration, tree planting) that remain within local communities. This could include Employment Metrics: Number and quality of green jobs created locally. o Community Investment: Share of project profits reinvested in local infrastructure or services. Skills Development: Uptake of training programmes linked to net zero initiatives. [Organisational response]

The third most commonly held view was that a single indicator or a list of them would not be adequate to capture the true impact of net zero transition. Instead, respondents believed that a composite indicator is needed, combining elements across the suggested indicators and accounting for both quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Multi-dimensional indicators are needed capturing economic, social, and environmental impacts in host communities. [Organisational response]

The next most commonly suggested indicator was 2. People and equity.

Respondents in this theme most often expressed support for measuring the impact of the transition through energy prices in each local area, in line with indicator 2.1 Fuel Poverty. Other respondents were in favour of indicator 2.2 Transport Affordability, while some suggested tracking the prevalence of different modes of transport. These two indicators (sometimes along with air pollution) were believed to capture the most tangible impact of the transition on people’s daily lives, and thus the degree of success of the transition.

Fuel poverty. This is important and relates to the general level of poverty and impacts on health. We need to lift people out of fuel poverty and onto Net Zero energy and lighting solutions at the same time. Indicator 6: Transport affordability We would also like to see a measure of people walking and cycling more as an indicator. [Organisational response]

The following most frequently raised theme was a general agreement with indicator 4. Environment and Biodiversity. Most respondents raising this theme expressed overall support for monitoring the impact of the transition on the environment without making specific proposals. Of those who made references to the constituent indicators, most expressed positive views towards using indicator 4.1 Air Pollution.

Install air pollution monitors throughout the country in residential areas and publish their findings both individually and by area and region. [Individual response]

Question 32

Ensuring positive outcomes for workers who have transitioned from jobs within high-carbon industries is central to delivering a just transition. What specific data or indicators could we use to monitor the extent to which workers in high-carbon industries are securing alternative employment?

The most commonly mentioned data to monitor if workers in high-carbon industries are securing alternative employment were the unemployment rate and the time until reemployment. Most respondents believed that the Scottish Government should monitor the unemployment rates of the impacted workers at regular intervals after the transition, such as on a monthly, semi-annual, or annual basis.

To monitor outcomes for workers leaving high-carbon industries, you should track re-employment and job quality. Useful indicators include: Re-employment rate: the percentage of workers from, say, oil and gas sectors who have found new employment within a year of job loss. [Organisational response]

The second most frequently cited indicator was the quality of new employment. Respondents in this theme highlighted that the number of jobs or the time until reemployment does not adequately capture the complexity of the labour market. Instead, the Scottish Government should also monitor the wages, progression, and retention of workers in the new green jobs compared to their previous employment.

Monitoring should focus on outcomes workers recognise as success rather than job counts alone. Indicators should include re employment rates at six and twelve months, earnings and hours relative to prior employment, job quality metrics such as contract security and progression, and training access and completion linked to employment outcomes. [Individual response]

The third most prevalent view was the importance of the geographic distribution of new employment opportunities. Respondents in this theme believed that the green jobs created by the transition should be proportionately distributed throughout the country, allowing workers to transition within their local area.

Geographic spread: are workers staying in local community or forced to relocate? (measure of community stability) […] [Organisational response]

The next most prevalent theme was carrying out new primary research to explore employment trends and the transitions’ impact across regions and occupations. Respondents in this theme highlighted that the current data infrastructure would not allow for sufficient tracking of employment outcomes beyond unemployment. As a result, it was deemed important for the Scottish Government to fund longitudinal surveys to track different cohorts and their outcomes over time.

One of the only (and best ways) to do this would be to commission a longitudinal study that seeks to track employment opportunities (along with the wider functioning of the community) for those transitioning away from high-carbon industries. There is no fast-and-easy way to assess whether the long-term impacts of this transition are harmful or not; […] would like to see a concerted effort to study this in a way that seeks to understand the impact of these transition on both people and their wider community. [Organisational response]

Other, less common suggested data or indicators included a Scotland-wide reporting platform, the number of college entrants, and information collected through close collaboration with trade unions and the Council Employability Surveys.

[…] a mechanism for monitoring positive outcomes for workers who have transitioned from jobs within high-carbon industries. This could include: (i) A Scotland-wide reporting platform for individuals / organisations to feed data into on current and past employment. (ii) Surveys for industry to explore pathways into employment opportunities. (iii) Working with Council Employability Services to track the number of people supported into work. (iv) Tracking college entrant numbers for upskilling or reskilling courses. [Organisational response]

Question 33

What specific data or indicators could we use to meaningfully monitor the impact of the transition to net zero on the environment and biodiversity across Scotland on an annual basis?

Most respondents to this question did not suggest specific data or indicators that could be used to monitor the impact of the transition to net zero on the environment and biodiversity. Instead, most mentioned areas where data collection should be focused.

Most respondents suggested that data should be collected on the number of different species. Examples included birds and insects, salmon and trout, predators such as wolves, and pollinators.

Biodiversity index: an annual wildlife index (such as bird or pollinator population trends) to see if biodiversity is improving as we decarbonise. [Organisational response]

We can measure inputs of hectares of native woodland planted, or peatbogs restored, but meaningful monitoring will only be valid if the species count after the event is up and by how much and how varied. [Individual response]

The second most prevalent theme was that the Government should use data on the extent of natural habitats restored and their state. Respondents raising this theme highlighted the importance of woodlands, peatbogs, wetlands, grasslands, and uplands.

Habitat extent and condition – hectares of priority habitats (peatland, native woodland, species rich grassland) restored or lost; condition scores based on standard ecological assessments. [Individual response]

The third most frequently raised theme was monitoring the quality of farmlands, soil, and waterways. Respondents in this theme emphasised the importance of arable land in securing a successful transition and proposed the inclusion of indicators on soil and water quality.

Changes in soil health (erosion, groundwater replenishment) and water quality (runoff patterns from large-scale panel cleaning or turbine foundations) should be monitored, as should disruption to private water supplies […] [Organisational response]

Out of the respondents mentioning specific data and evidence sources, the most common examples included NatureScot, LiDaR mapping data, Tree Equity Score, Nature Restoration Fund, ICLEI Regions with Nature, and annual emission report data.