Scottish Marine Recovery Fund: consultation analysis report

10 Overarching Themes

10.1 Consultation Process

10.1.1 The responses indicate that, while the consultation process involved a broad array of stakeholders - including representatives from the Offshore Wind Sector, Public Sector, and Environmental NGOs - there was felt to be insufficient detail and clarity in the consultation documents. Respondents felt that insufficient information and transparency limited the ability of stakeholders to provide robust and reasoned feedback on details of the proposed Scottish MRF. Many emphasised that, to build trust and ensure accountability, ongoing engagement is necessary not only in the fund’s initial design and governance but also throughout its delivery. The feedback highlighted that sustained, clear, and inclusive consultation is central to ensure developers are appropriately incentivised to apply to the Scottish MRF and for the overall delivery of ecological enhancement.

10.2 Co-benefits of the Scottish MRF

10.2.1 Several respondents recognised the Scottish MRF’s potential to deliver significant co-benefits for developers, nature and communities. The fund was seen as a way to strategically coordinate compensation measures at scale, thereby unlocking synergies across multiple projects that individual developers might find challenging to achieve. Respondents noted that the MRF could streamline processes and support broader strategic outcomes in Scotland, but noted that further detail and work would be required to ensure the delivery of these outcomes. Overall, the MRF is viewed as a positive mechanism for integrating various policy goals and achieving wider benefits across economic, environmental and social domains.

10.3 Cross-jurisdictional Responsibilities

10.3.1 A significant number of responses highlighted the complexities of managing cross-jurisdictional responsibilities within the context of the Scottish MRF. Respondents discussed the importance of clear delineation of roles for consenting authorities, developers and SNCBs, particularly where responsibilities overlap and where impacts are predicted in jurisdictions beyond the project location. There was a strong emphasis on ensuring effective coordination between devolved administrations and the UK Government to avoid duplication and gaps in the implementation of compensation measures. The need for collaborative frameworks was identified as crucial for the Scottish MRF’s success and recommendations for a UK-wide library of compensation measures and centralised mechanism to track compensation delivery across the UK were put forward as potential solutions to these issues.

10.4 Integration with Existing Consenting Regimes

10.4.1 Stakeholders frequently raised the theme of aligning the Scottish MRF with existing consenting regimes to maximise its effectiveness, including Section 36 consents, Marine Licences, HRAs and local authority consent. The responses revealed a consensus that the Scottish MRF should complement, rather than duplicate, current regulatory and planning frameworks. Respondents suggested that integration would streamline environmental compensation and reduce administrative burdens for developers and consenting authorities. There was also recognition that such alignment would help ensure consistency and transparency in decision-making across the offshore wind sector.

10.5 Fee Timelines and Payments

10.5.1 The consultation identified the importance of a clear and competitive fee structures for the Scottish MRF, with respondents from the Offshore Wind Sector in particular stressing the need for cost-effectiveness compared to bespoke compensation measures. Timely payment of funds was noted as essential for maintaining confidence in the scheme and ensuring the delivery of environmental compensation at scale. Respondents also advocated for transparent processes to manage fees and allocate resources, supporting both accountability and the Scottish MRF’s long-term sustainability. Flexibility in timelines and payments was seen as necessary to adapt to changing project needs and environmental conditions.