Social Impacts Research for Marine Protected Areas and Priority Marine Features Management in Scottish Waters

Appendix 3.0 Engagement Methods

Drop-in Sessions

Drop-in sessions were held in each location to enable engagement with a broad cross-section of the local community. As far as possible, local community organisations’ knowledge of their locality was drawn upon to decide the most appropriate place and time for the drop-in session. Drop-in sessions were held in the evening, to enable attendance by community members who might be working during the day. To increase awareness and attendance, local organisations were asked to contact their members working in the area, via their normal communications channels. Advertisements in local newspapers, and flyers/posters, were used to increase awareness of the sessions. Marine Directorate approached regional and national organisations such as fishing or environmental organisations to encourage them to let their members know about local events.

Information was provided about the types of measures proposed and the reasons for them. It should be noted that the specific fisheries management measures were not available. Only the sites where measures might be introduced, and the gear types that might be affected, were provided to stakeholders. Visitors, including organisations and individuals, were invited to comment on the aspects of their community and location they valued, and how the measures might impact them personally and things they valued. These often included way of life, community cohesion, wellbeing and sense of place. Engagement through the drop-in sessions was intended to be broad and shallow: providing an opportunity to talk to a range of people and organisations and elicit information about social values from local stakeholders and community members.

The drop-in sessions consisted of a set of engagement stations which visitors could look at independently and provide comments on, either verbally or in writing. At each station a team member of Eunomia, Marine Directorate, ABPmer or University of Strathclyde (UoS)¹, were present to explain the activity and answer questions. Participants were encouraged to move between the stations in a specific order as they were placed in the room (clockwise). A semi-structured approach was taken for the drop-in events, with a member of the team welcoming local stakeholders and residents as they arrived, explaining how the information is presented and how they can provide their input.

These stations were:

1. Map of location as a prompt to engage in conversation with participants.

2. What do you value in your local community: Six posters were laid on the table, with the following titles:

• Environment, land and seascape
• Family life and community
• Jobs, employment and local economy
• Health, education and housing
• Being involved, decision making and politics
• Culture and heritage

Participants were encouraged to write down what they cared about within the local area or community. This took the form of tangible concepts such as: buildings, meeting places and the natural environment; and intangible concepts which included: local services, culture and social relations. Participants were asked to note any things they valued but felt were missing or should be improved upon within the local area and community. A summary sheet was also provided, with participants invited to choose three things they valued most out of a list covering: Family life, Jobs/Employment; Transport and Communications; Health; Education; Housing; Local shops and businesses; Community / being involved; Socialising / leisure; Culture and heritage; Environment and land/seascape; Politics / decision-making. They marked their choices with dots. They also had the option to choose ‘Other’ and write their own comment. This provided a visual summary of values.

3. MPAs with Proposed Fisheries Management Measures and proposed PMF Management Areas: an information station presenting maps² of the sites/areas for which the measures were proposed and information about the protected features. Marine Directorate and NatureScot personnel were at this station to answer questions and receive feedback.

4. What effects might the proposed fisheries management measures have on the things you value in the local community?³ A station providing an opportunity for visitors to write comments under the same titles as used in the second station. Participants were asked to describe any effects, both positive and negative, that they thought the proposed fisheries management measures might have on things they value in the local community.

Survey

To take account of the wide area covered by the management measures and the challenge that some stakeholders may have in attending meetings in person, a short survey was provided. If stakeholders were unable to attend a meeting, they were offered the option to provide input online. Stakeholders were sent a link to the survey via email. Those who attended drop-in sessions were also encouraged to answer the survey, which was available in both print and online versions.

The survey was conducted as an additional way to gather feedback. The survey was anonymous and did not require any identifying information, but respondents were asked to provide demographic details such as gender, age, profession, and area of residence. This helped to better understand the types of respondents who completed the survey. Full details of the survey responses are provided in Appendix 1.

Workshops

Stakeholder workshops were held in each of the six locations (plus an online event for stakeholders from Barra who could not attend the event in Stornoway⁴). The workshops were held on the day after the drop-in session and were attended by up to 16 participants. These were structured to explore the framework of social values and understand how they are prioritised in different locations and in what ways these could be impacted by the measures proposed.

The workshop programme drew on information about levels and focus of interest from the stakeholder mapping and earlier Marine Directorate engagement with stakeholders to focus on building a picture of the local community characteristics, key activities and social values, based on the input of participants. The programme included practical activities and discussions in small groups (groups of 8) to allow more time for discussion.

The objectives for each of the workshops were:

• Describe the key characteristics of the coastal communities where the research is undertaken (using the headings from the drop-in sessions).
• Describe and explore the aspects of local communities that are valued by people who live and work there, including social, cultural and economic relations, activities and infrastructure.
• Share information about existing MPA and PMF management areas and potential fisheries management measures with participants.
• Identify the range of potential socio-economic effects – both positive and negative – of the proposed measures for different stakeholders in coastal communities.
• Understand the scale and significance of the potential effects in relation to the social values identified.

The workshops were divided into two distinct sections; the first section centred on discussing social values, while the second section focused on presenting the sites with proposed fisheries management measures and discussing the potential impact of them on the local community. Each workshop began with a presentation that introduced the purpose and process of SEIA. The first individual exercise required each participant to reflect on the things they care about (including both tangible and intangible things). Using a worksheet with an image of a person in the centre of three circles, they were asked to write or draw on the template, using the circles as signifiers of importance. This was followed by a group discussion (in two groups) on what the participants value in the local community, what features of the local community the group value most and what is missing or should be improved.

The second section of the workshop began with a presentation from Marine Directorate about the proposed fisheries management measures for the sites in the local area. They discussed proposed management measures and explained where the workshop fits into the process of designing and approving these measures. This was followed by a Q&A session. Each discussion group had access to printed maps of the MPAs and PMF areas where measures are being developed. The maps presented at the events can be accessed through Marine Directorate’s Information site^[48]. The group discussions were structured around the questions:

• What could be the positive effects of the possible measures for the local community?
• What negative effects could there be for the local community?
• Are there any intangible effects which are not linked to a specific location? What are these?
• How do you feel about these changes?
• What could be done to ensure that positive effects are realised and negative effects are avoided?
• Should anything be done to address the distribution of costs and benefits between different groups?

Each workshop concluded with a plenary review of the small group discussion, summarising the potential effects identified and their importance to the community.

The workshop programme was virtually the same for each location, to facilitate comparison across the locations. Two changes were made during the engagement, to clarify the role of the socio-economic engagement and the fisheries management measures being considered:

• After the Peterhead engagement, a short presentation by Marine Directorate was added, to explain the process of developing the MPAs and clarify that the engagement was part of a new process developed by Marine Directorate with stakeholders;
• After the Peterhead and Lerwick engagement, maps of the sites where measures may be proposed were grouped by gear type rather than by designation type, to provide more appropriate reference material for stakeholders.