Supporting Scotland's transition - land use and agriculture: consultation analysis report

3. Long term future

The Just Transition vision for land use and agriculture

Q1: The draft vision provides me with an understanding of the ambition of a just transition for land use and agriculture. Do you:

33 respondents provided reasons for their answer. These are summarised below:

Clarity and practicality of the Vision

Many respondents felt the draft vision was too abstract, lacking concrete examples, measurable outcomes, and actionable steps. It was suggested that clarity was needed around what was meant by land use, and for more detail around the interface between land and the marine environment. Calls were made for clearer definitions and alignment with existing frameworks such as the Land Use Strategy and Local Development Plans. It was also suggested the Vision does not:

“…fully balance climate ambition with food security and rural economic resilience”

Food security and agricultural sustainability

Concerns were raised about protecting agricultural land to ensure domestic food security and reduce reliance on imports. Support was expressed for local food systems, agroecology, and regenerative practices, with calls for policy support and investment.

“Without clear pathways, timescales and measures of fairness, there is a risk that the benefits of transition will not be shared equitably, and that farmers will lack the certainty they need to act.”

It was also suggested reference should be made to the integration of nature and biodiversity into agriculture systems.

Equity, inclusion and land access

Respondents highlighted the need to support small-scale producers, address concentrated land ownership, and empower communities through inclusive decision-making and equitable access to land. They also suggested the Vision should address the:

“…heterogeneity of rural Scotland and the power imbalances within.”

Environmental stewardship and ecosystem diversity

Calls were made to broaden the focus beyond forests and peatlands to include diverse ecosystems and natural resources. Respondents emphasised nature-positive outcomes, biodiversity, the inclusion of cultural and historic landscapes and the value of land for recreation.

Economic viability and rural prosperity

The vision was praised for its ambition to empower rural communities and foster collaboration, but respondents stressed the need for funding, infrastructure and recognition of sectoral contributions such as those from forestry and sheep farming.

Governance, accountability, and delivery

Respondents urged the government to move beyond vision statements to detailed plans with timelines, responsibilities, and key performance indicators (KPIs). Cross-sector collaboration and alignment across Just Transition plans were emphasised.

The long-term Just Transition outcomes

For each of the four sectoral Just Transition themes, we presented a series of draft outcomes considered necessary to achieve a Just Transition within the land use and agriculture sector. These outcomes are provided in full in Annex B.

Q2: The outcomes for jobs, skills and economy provide an accurate description of what will be needed to achieve a just transition. Do you:

32 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Clarity and specificity of outcomes

Many respondents felt the outcomes were too high-level and aspirational, lacking concrete actions and measurable indicators. There was a call for clearer definitions, (for instance with respect to ‘rural economy’), and SMART^[1] objectives to guide implementation.

Support for existing sectors and rural economies

Concerns were raised about the potential neglect of traditional sectors such as livestock farming, forestry, and food processing. Likewise, that the value that comes from the historic environment and recreation should not be overlooked. Respondents emphasised the need to safeguard existing jobs and ensure equitable support across rural communities.

Skills development and training

There was strong support for investment in training, particularly in agroecology, organic farming, heritage skills, and nature-based solutions. Peer-to-peer learning and farmer-led knowledge exchange were highlighted as vital. It was argued that the outcomes should be broadened to better reflect the labour market realities within the whole supply chain.

Infrastructure and accessibility

Respondents stressed the importance of rural infrastructure, including housing, transport, broadband, and community facilities. These are seen as essential for enabling job creation and economic resilience.

Inclusion and equity

Calls were made to ensure that outcomes reflect the needs of small-scale farmers, crofters, migrant workers, and new entrants. Land access and ownership reform were identified as critical to achieving a just transition.

Integration with broader policy frameworks

Respondents urged better alignment between the outcomes and other strategic plans such as the Land Use Strategy, the National Just Transition Planning Framework, and climate adaptation strategies.

Recognition of cultural and historic contributions

The role of the historic environment and heritage skills in supporting rural jobs and tourism was emphasised. Respondents advocated for a holistic view of the environment that includes cultural assets.

Economic diversification and local empowerment

There was support for community-led enterprises, market gardening, and circular economy initiatives. Respondents highlighted the need for local ownership and control to ensure lasting benefits. It was pointed out that local authorities will play a critical role in supporting local economies to achieve these outcomes.

Q3: The outcomes for environment and adaptation provide an accurate description of what will be needed to achieve a just transition. Do you:

34 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Clarity and specificity of outcomes

Respondents noted that the outcomes are high-level and aspirational, lacking concrete actions, measurable targets, and timelines. There is a need for clearer definitions and SMART indicators to guide implementation and assess progress. It was suggested the outcomes need strengthening and widening, given the important role environment and adaptation play within the Plan. The focus on agriculture was also questioned, with the suggestion that forestry be given equal prominence.

Integration of biodiversity and ecosystem services

There was strong support for integrating biodiversity, soil health, water quality, and air quality into land use and agriculture systems. Respondents emphasised the importance of diverse ecosystems beyond peatlands and forests, including wetlands, grasslands, and coastal habitats.

Role of existing land-based systems

Stakeholders highlighted the environmental contributions of traditional practices such as sheep farming, conservation grazing, and agroforestry. These systems support carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and climate resilience, and should be recognised and supported.

Historic environment and circular economy

The historic environment was identified as a key component of environmental stewardship. Respondents advocated for reuse, repair, and maintenance of heritage assets, (the historic and existing built environment), as part of the circular economy and climate adaptation strategies.

Nature-based solutions and natural capital

There was broad support for nature-based solutions, but concerns were raised about the governance of natural capital markets and the risk of exacerbating inequalities. Respondents called for inclusive, place-based approaches and safeguards to ensure equitable benefits.

Climate adaptation and resilience

Respondents stressed the need to embed climate resilience into land use decisions and to support communities in adapting to climate impacts. This includes investment in knowledge, infrastructure, and nature restoration to reduce vulnerability.

Justice and equity in environmental outcomes

Concerns were raised about procedural and distributive justice, particularly in relation to peatland restoration and land access. Respondents emphasised the need for inclusive decision-making and support for small-scale and stock-free farmers.

Agricultural emissions and livestock

Several responses highlighted the disproportionate contribution of livestock to agricultural emissions. There were calls for compensatory support for farmers to reduce livestock numbers and adopt low-emission practices. It was also suggested we should investigate alternative crops, such as hemp, to help address climate change and add resilience.

Q4: The outcomes for communities and place provide an accurate description of what will be needed to achieve a just transition. Do you:

30 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Clarity and practicality of outcomes

Respondents noted that the outcomes are aspirational and lack concrete actions and measurable indicators. There is a need for clearer definitions and SMART objectives to guide implementation and assess progress. It was suggested the outcomes should reflect the importance of achieving balance between the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social and economic.

Community empowerment and participation

There was strong support for community-led decision-making and ownership in land use and food systems. Respondents emphasised the importance of devolving powers to local levels and ensuring meaningful participation in governance. However, there was recognition that this can be challenging:

“Community led ownership/management is a nice idea in principal, but in reality often becomes unwieldy and people lose interest very quickly.”

Local economies and infrastructure

Support for local food infrastructure, such as community processing hubs and abattoirs, was highlighted as essential for job creation and economic resilience. Investment in housing, transport, and digital connectivity was also seen as critical.

Recognition of cultural and historic assets

The historic environment was identified as central to community identity and place-making. Respondents advocated for its inclusion in land use planning and for support in managing cultural landscapes.

Equity and inclusion

Concerns were raised about structural inequalities in land ownership and access. Respondents called for stronger rights and support for small-scale farmers, crofters, and new entrants to ensure equitable benefits from the transition.

Climate resilience and environmental stewardship

There was a call to embed climate resilience into community planning and land use decisions. Respondents emphasised the need for nature-based solutions and sustainable practices that benefit both people and the environment.

Rural depopulation and island communities

The challenge of rural depopulation was highlighted, with recommendations for targeted support to fragile and island communities, and for this issue to perhaps have a standalone outcome. Ensuring access to services and opportunities was seen as vital to reversing population decline.

Holistic and inclusive approaches

Respondents urged for integrated approaches that consider natural, cultural, and economic dimensions of place. Access to land for recreation is not just for visitors’ wellbeing but benefits local people too. Community wealth building should include social, mental, and environmental benefits, not just financial metrics.

Q5: The outcomes for people and equity provide an accurate description of what will be needed to achieve a just transition. Do you:

27 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Clarity and actionability of outcomes

Respondents appreciated the ambition of the outcomes but noted that they are often too broad and aspirational, and sometimes contradictory. There is a need for clearer, actionable steps and SMART indicators to ensure meaningful progress and accountability.

Equity in land access and ownership

Structural inequalities in land ownership were widely acknowledged. Respondents called for reforms to improve access for small-scale farmers, crofters, and new entrants, and to address the concentration of land ownership. Redistributive payment systems and removal of barriers such as minimum land thresholds were recommended.

“This inequality, however, is upheld and exacerbated by existing support structures.”

Inclusive support for diverse stakeholders

Support must extend beyond farmers and crofters to include migrant workers, seasonal labourers, and food system workers. Tailored support for underrepresented groups, including women, older farmers, and those in isolated areas, was emphasised. In contrast, there was a view that the emphasis should be on empowerment rather than support.

Mental health and wellbeing

The mental health of land-based workers was highlighted as a critical issue. Respondents advocated for support systems that address emotional wellbeing, especially in sectors like livestock farming where stress and trauma are prevalent.

Empowerment through infrastructure and training

Empowerment was seen as key to equity. Investment in local infrastructure, such as abattoirs and food hubs, and support for peer-to-peer training and farmer-led knowledge exchange were identified as essential for building resilience and reducing dependency.

Recognition of historic and cultural contributions

The historic environment was recognised as integral to community identity and wellbeing. Respondents urged its inclusion in land use planning and just transition strategies.

Fair distribution of costs and benefits

Concerns were raised about how the costs of transition will be shared. Respondents called for approaches that do not disproportionately burden small producers and that ensure fair access to financial and policy support.

Integration with broader policy frameworks

Calls were made for better alignment with the Fourth Land Use Strategy (LUS4) and the National Just Transition Planning Framework. Respondents emphasised the need for integrated, cross-sectoral approaches.