Future National Parks in Scotland Possible Governance Models · FUTURE NATIONAL PARKS IN SCOTLAND...

A paper discussing some governance options that could be applied to future National Parks in Scotland.

REPORT 02 / AUGUST 2015

Future National Parks in ScotlandPossible Governance Models

Author : Graham C. Barrow BA(Hons) MSc MPhil for the Scottish Campaign for National Parks (SCNP) and the Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland (APRS).

APRS

1.1 ThisshortsummarypaperhasbeenpreparedbyGrahamBarrowfortheScottishCampaignforNationalParks(SCNP)andtheAssociationfortheProtectionofRuralScotland(APRS)andisthesecondinaseriesofpapersbeingpublishedbySCNP/APRSfollowingtheproductionof‘UnfinishedBusiness–ANationalParksStrategyforScotland’in2013.

1.2 AfteradebateandnegotiationspanningmanydecadestwogeographicallylargeNationalParkswereestablishedinScotlandundertheNationalParks(Scotland)Act2000.ThesewereforLochLomondandtheTrossachsandfortheCairngorms.TheseparksandtheirgovernancesystemsarelargelysimilartothoseoftheNationalParksestablishedinEnglandandWalesthroughthe1949NationalParksandAccesstotheCountrysideAct,althoughourScottishNationalParkshavesomesignificantdifferences,particularlywithregardtotheirroleinsupportinglocalcommunitiesandhelpingruraleconomicdevelopment.

1.3 ThispaperreviewssomedifferentmanagementmodelsthatcouldbeappliedtonewNationalParksofdifferentscalesandcharacteristicsthatmaybeestablishedinScotlandinthefuture.TherelativelycomplexandcostlyarrangementsthatapplyinthetwoexistingNationalParksmaynotnecessarilyberequiredwhenconsideringsmallerorlesspopulatedareasasfutureNationalParks.

1.4 TheNationalParks(Scotland)Act2000definestheaimsofaNationalParkinScotlandas:

• Toconserveandenhancethenaturaland culturalheritageofthearea

• Topromotesustainableuseofthenatural resources

• Topromoteunderstandingandenjoymentof thespecialqualitiesoftheareabythepublic, and

• Topromotesustainableeconomicandsocial developmentofthearea’scommunities.

1.5 VariousschedulesattachedtotheNationalParks(Scotland)Act2000describethelegalconstitution,generalpowers,functions,staff,propertyandliabilitiesofNationalParkAuthorities.Theseprovidesignificantscopeforavarietyofapproachesandflexibilitytobeapplieddependingonthecharacterandneedsoftheareainquestion.

1.6 OfparticularnotearethepotentialalternativeapproachestotheplanninganddevelopmentcontrolfunctionsofanewNationalParkAuthority.TherelevantsectionoftheActstatesthatanewNationalParkdesignationordermaymakeprovisionforaparkauthority:

• TobethefullplanningauthorityfortheNational Park

• TobetheplanningauthorityfortheNational Park,butonlywithregardtotheproductionof adevelopmentplan,or

• Tohavewhateverplanningfunctionsthe designationordermayspecify.

1.7 SignificantemphasisisoftengiventotheplanningfunctionsofNationalParksintheUK,possiblyattimesdivertingattentionfromthepositiveandvaluableworkthatNationalParkscancarryoutinhabitatandlandscapeenhancement,publicaccessimprovements,interpretationandeducation,localsustainablebusinessdevelopment,trainingandtourismdevelopmentandmarketing.ButthecontrolofinappropriatedevelopmentinNationalParksisclearlyfundamentaltotheirlong-termwellbeing.

1.8 TheSCNP/APRS‘UnfinishedBusinessReport’suggestssevenareasthatshouldbeconsideredforfutureNationalParkdesignation(seemap–page03)andthesevarysignificantlyinsizeandcharacterwithmostnotbeingofthescaleorcomplexityoftheexistingtwoNationalParksinScotland.Considerationmustthereforebegiventoadoptinggovernancearrangementsappropriatetoeachparticularcircumstance.

1.Introduction

THESCOTTISHCAMPAIGNFORNATIONALPARKSANDTHEASSOCIATIONFORTHEPROTECTIONOFRURALSCOTLAND

01

FUTURENATIONALPARKSINSCOTLANDPOSSIBLEGOVERNANCEMODELS

1.9 InEnglandandWalesthereare,inadditiontoNationalParks,manyareasofnationallyimportantlandscapethathavebeendesignatedasAreasofOutstandingNaturalBeauty(AONB).ThesearegenerallysmallerthantheNationalParksandwerenotatthetimeofdesignationseenashavingthesamepotentialforoutdoorrecreation.Toensuretheirpropercare,however,theyhavesincetheCountrysideandRightsofWayAct2000enjoyedthebenefitsofmanagementcommittees,withasmallstaffanddedicatedbudgets.Theyhaveproducedandimplementedmanagementplans,althoughplanninganddevelopmentcontrolmattershaveremainedwiththelocalauthorities.ThemostrecentlydesignatedNationalParkinEngland,theSouthDowns,haditsoriginsinaconsortiumofsuchAONBcommittees.

1.10 InScotland40NationalScenicAreasweredesignatedin1980onabroadlysimilarbasistoAONBs,andagainwithoutanexplicitrecreationalpurpose.DespiterecommendationsmadeinareportbySNHin1998,however,theyhaveneverbeengivenequivalentmanagementstructuresorfunding(seesection4).


02


Isle of Raasay

National Parks recommended by SCNP and APRS 2013

MapreproducedbypermissionofOrdnanceSurvey,licencenumber100053751.*ForlayoutpurposestheShetlandIslandsarenotshowninthecorrectgeographicalposition.


04


2.1 WhenconsideringtheestablishmentofthefirstNationalParksinScotlandSNHcommissionedareportin1998–ModelsofNationalParksbyBishop,GreenandPhillips(publishedasSNHReviewNumber105).ThisextensivereportreviewedthemanagementarrangementsforNationalParksinanumberofcountries,includingvariousmodelsbeingappliedinEnglandandWalesaswellasineightother,mainlyEuropeancountries.

2.2 ThereportidentifiedfourmainmethodsusedtoprotectthelandofNationalParks:

1. Publicownershipoftheland–suchasapplies inIreland,theNetherlandsandSwedenaswell

asinNorthAmerica

2. Legallyenforceablelistsofprohibitedactions– asappliesinAustria,FranceandItaly(andalso onUKNationalNatureReservesandSSSIs)

3. Regulationthroughlanduseplanning–as appliesintheUKNationalParks

4. Positivemanagementworks(althoughitis unclearfromtheconsultants’reportwherethis applies).

2.3 Itisuniversallyregardedasapre-requisiteofanyeffectiveNationalParkfortheretobeacomprehensiveandprofessionallypreparedNationalParkPlanandaNationalParkManagementPlan.

2.4 TheexistingtwoNationalParksinScotlandoperateagovernancemodelstronglyinfluencedbytheirEnglishandWelshpredecessors,withLochLomondandtheTrossachsNationalParkhavingfulllanduseplanninganddevelopmentcontrolpowersandwiththeCairngormsNPhavingplanmakingpowers,withapowerofcall-infromthelocalauthorityinrelationtoplanningapplications.BothNationalParkshaveaboardconsistingofamixtureoflocalelectedmembers(somedirectlyelectedtotheboardsoftheparks)andofthoseappointedbycentralgovernment.Thelocallyelectedmembersarerequirednotleasttosatisfytheneedfordemocraticaccountabilityfordecisionsundertheplanninglegislation.

2.5 Asthe NationalParkshavesomesignificantlysizedsettlementswithinthem,suchasAviemoreandGrantownonSpeyintheCairngormsandBallochandCallanderinLochLomondandtheTrossachs,theparkplanningcommitteeshavetodealwithasignificantandvariednumberofplanningapplications.Remoterareaswithonlysmall settlementsandfarmsandextensivesemi-naturalvegetationwouldhavefarfewerplanningapplications–althoughsomedevelopmentscouldstillbepotentiallydamagingtothelandscapeortonaturalhabitats.

2.6 In1999SNHpublishedNationalParksforScotland–itsadvicetotheScottishGovernmentregardingNationalParks–andrecommendedtheestablishmentofthefirsttwoparksandthefurtherconsiderationofotherNationalParks.Whenconsideringmanagementmodelsthereportstates:

“ToachievetheproposedpurposesofNationalParks,SNHisconvincedoftheneedtoestablishanewNationalParkBodyforeacharea.Atoneextremesuchabodycouldhaveextensiveexecutivepowerstransferredtoitfromnationalandlocalbodies–ineffecttobecomeanewformofpublicauthoritywithalargestaffandmanyfunctions.Attheotherextreme,itcouldhavelimiteddirectfunctionsandwouldconcentrateonintegratingandco-ordinatingtheeffortsofothersthroughtheNationalParkPlan.”

2.GovernancemodelsappropriatefornewScottishNationalParks

2.7 ThisclearlyindicatesthatSNHconsideredatthattimethatdifferentgovernanceandmanagementmodelsshouldbeconsideredfordifferenttypesofNationalParkarea.LaterinthereportSNHstatedthatanynewNationalParkbodyshouldhavepowersinthefieldsof:

• Conservationandenhancementofthenaturalandculturalheritage

• Enjoymentandunderstandingofthenatural andculturalheritage

• Townandcountryplanning,and

• Landandwatermanagement.

2.8 SNHsuggestedthatoneoptioncouldbeasharingofplanningpowerswiththeexistinglocalauthoritiesandstatedthat:

“EngagementbytheNationalParkBodyinallaspectsofplanningisunlikelytobenecessarytoachievetheobjectivesoftheNationalParkPlan.WethereforeremainunconvincedthattheNationalParkBodyneedsnecessarilytobetheplanningauthoritywiththefullestrangeofdevelopmentplanning,controlandenforcementpowers,asisthecaseinEnglandandWales.Instead,weproposeaverysignificantroletortheNationalParkBodywhichinvolvesasharingofplanningfunctionswith

localauthorities”.

2.9 InthelightofexperienceinthetwoexistingScottishNationalParks,SCNP/APRSseethisstatementasneedingsomequalification.RecenthistoryhasshownacrosstheUKthatlargeandcomplexNationalParksdorequirefullplanningpowerstoeffectivelyprotectthem.

2.10 ThesharingofplanningpowersbetweentheCairngormsNationalParkAuthorityanditsfiveconstituentlocalplanningauthoritiesoverthelast12yearshasproveningeneraltobeconfusingandunhelpfulforallinvolved,includinglocalresidents,developers,NGOs,thelocalauthorities,theParkboardandotherpublicbodies.Smaller,lesspopulatedareasthataredesignatedasNationalParksinthefuturemay,however,notnecessarilyneedthisapproachtotheirplanning.

2.11 WhenconsideringthegovernanceofproposedNationalParksSNHstatedthat:

ThebalanceofrepresentationontheNationalParkBoardwillbeequallycrucialtothesuccessorfailureofaNationalPark.WeconsiderthatthemainoptionsforrepresentationinthegoverningstructureofeachNationalParkBodyare:

• Localgovernmentcouncillorsorappointees frombothwithinandoutwiththeNationalParkarea

• Communitycouncillorsorspeciallyelected communityrepresentatives

• Selectednationalappointees.

2.12 RegardingmembershipofanynewNationalParkAuthority,Schedule1oftheNationalParks(Scotland)Act2000requiresthat:

• Thenumberofmembersmustnotexceed25 (butnominimumsizeisgiven)

• Locallyelectedmembersmustcompriseat leastonefifthofthetotalnumberofmembers

• TheremainingmembersareappointedbytheScottishMinisters,ofwhichhalfarenominatedbylocalauthoritiespartofwhoseareaiswithintheNationalPark.


05


2.13 Table1showsthecurrentmembershipofthetwoexistingNPauthorities.Italsosetsout,forillustrativepurposesonly,threesmalleroptionswhichalsocomplywiththeAct,butwhichmightbemoreappropriateforfutureNPswithsmallerpopulationsorareasandwhichonlycoverpartsofoneortwolocalauthorityareas.Othercompliantoptionsarealsopossible.

2.14 IndecidingonthebestgovernancemodelforfutureNationalParksinScotlandtherelativeimportanceofdevelopmentpressures,landandwatermanagement,recreationaluseandecologicallandusemanagementshouldbetakenintoaccount.Justhowprominenteachofthesefactorsislikelytobeintheoverallprogrammeofactionneededtoachieveparkpurposeswillbeakeydeterminantofthegovernancemodelthatshouldbeadopted.

2.15 IfanewNationalParkwasorientatedmoretowardsinfluencingthebehaviourofprivatelandownersandthealignmentoftheprogrammesandexpenditureofrelevantpublicagencies(andnotsomuchtowardstheexerciseofstatutoryplanningpowers)thenaratherdifferentmixofprofessionalbackgroundsandinterestswouldbeappropriateamongsttheboardmembersthanappliesintheexistingNationalParks.

2.16 TheissuesinScotlandregardingthegovernanceofNationalParksalsorelatetoanumberofkeypointswhichcanbesummarisedas:

• Theneedtobalancelocalandnationalinterests–theissueofdemocraticaccountabilityatlocaland nationallevel

• Theplanninganddevelopmentissuesandwhopreparestheplansforanareaandwhodecides whatdevelopmentscanbepermitted

• Influencinglandmanagementactivitiestoprotectandenhancethehabitatandlandscape

• HowandwhopromotestheNationalParkforrecreationandtourismandsustainableeconomic development

• HowtheNationalParkcancontributetodesirablelandusethatreflectsthenationalLandUseStrategy

• Theleveloffinancialresourcesthatcanbejustifiedandappliedtotheplanningandmanagementofthearea.

2.17 ItisvitalthatNationalParksshouldasakeymatterofprinciplegiveprioritytoboththenationalinterestandtolong-termthinkingovershort-termismandpotentiallynarrowerlocalinterests.Werecognisethatthiscanofcourseleadtotensionsovercertainissuesandthatiswhyarobustandopengovernancemodelisimportant.

2.18 Thefollowingtable,table2,summarisestherangeofmanagementmodelsthatcouldbeappliedtodifferentsizesandcomplexitiesoffutureNationalParksinScotland.


06


MemberType CNPA LLTNPA Option1 Option2 Option3 Locallyelected 5 5 3 3 2

Appointedby 7 6 5 4 3localauthorities

Appointedby 7 6 5 4 3ScottishMinisters TotalMembers 19 17 13 11 8

Table1

Table2isofferedtostimulatethinkingabouttherangeoftypesandscalesofNationalParkandtheirpotentialgovernancemodels.ItisnotaproposedclassificationforfutureNationalParks.

2.19 Table2suggestsfourbroadtypesandscalesofgovernanceandparkstaffing,butallcombinelocalviewswithsomenationallyappointedexpertsonamanagementboard/committee.SCNP/APRSstronglybelievethatthisnationalviewofandexpertiseonhowthelandshouldbemanagedandwhatisappropriatesustainabledevelopmentinthenationalinterestisvitalinallgovernancemodelsforNationalParks.ThispointmustbefullycomprehendedbyallthoseassociatedwiththemanagementofourNationalParksandwiththeirfutureprotectionandsustainabledevelopment.

GOVERNANCEFORNATIONALPARKSINSCOTLAND


07


Table2

NB.Notallofthepostsreferredtoincolumn7(minimumnumberofstaffrequired)needbenewjobsassomecouldbefilledbysecondmentsortransfersfromexistingbodies.

CharacterofArea ResidentPopulation AreaRange: Exampleofpotential Emphasisofroleof Possible PossibleMinimumrange sqkms NationalPark NationalParkbody Park Numberofstaff

Governance requiredforPark Model

1.Areawithonly 0–100 200–500 GlenAffric Ecologicaland ParkCommittee– 6–12isolatedbuildings landscapemanagement possiblyaandhamlets. andenhancement. sub-committee Publicaccessand oftheLocalAuthority management withspecialist Interpretation membersappointed. andEducation. Landuseissues.

2.Areawithhamlets 50–250 400–1000 Cheviots Landscapeand ParkBoard– 12–20andsmallvillages ecological withspecialistand/orscattered enhancement. memberssettlement. Accessand appointed Interpretation. nationally. Adviceto LocalAuthority onplanning.

3.Areawithsmall 250–5000 750–1500 CoastalandMarine Adviceto ParkBoard– 15–30townsandvillages NationalPark LocalAuthority withspecialistand/orscattered (Mull,Coll, onplanning memberssettlement. Tireeetc…) matters. appointed Landscape nationally. enhancement. Preparationof Accessand ParkPlan. Interpretation. Tourismdevelopment.

4.Extensivearea 5000+ 1500+ Galloway Planningand PlanningAuthority 30+witharange DevelopmentControl. Preparationofofsettlement Accessandtourism ParkPlan.sizes. matters. FullPark Visitormanagement. Committeewith Sustainableeconomic localandnational development. members.

SuchaPlancoulddealmorethoroughlywithecologicalandlandscapemanagementmattersforthewildertypesofNationalPark(similartoaNationalNatureReserveManagementPlan)

St Cyrus National Nature Reserve

2.20 AlsoitisimportantthataNationalParkPlanispreparedandapprovedbothatlocalandnationallevelforeveryNationalPark.SuchaPlancoulddealmorethoroughlywithecologicalandlandscapemanagementmattersforthewildertypesofNationalPark(similartoaNationalNatureReserveManagementPlan)butcoverlanduseplanningmattersforaparkwithsignificanthumanhabitationandpotentialdevelopmentpressures.

2.21 ThefourbroadcategoriesofNationalParkgovernancesuggestedintable2are:

1. ANationalParkManagementCommitteewithrepresentativesofthepublic,privateandvoluntarylandownersoftheareawhoprepareamanagementplanthatisadoptedbytheLocalAuthorityandbyallthestatutoryagenciesconcernedwithlandmanagement.ThiscouldapplytoaTypeANationalParkintable2.

2. ANationalParkCommittee,whichcouldbeasub-committeeoftheLocalAuthoritybutchairedbyanappointedexpert.Itwouldhavesomelocalrepresentativesandsomeappointedexperts.AppropriateforTypeBNationalParks.

3. ANationalParkBoardwithacombinationoflocalelectedmembersandmembersappointednationally.ItcouldbeseparatefromtheLocalPlanningAuthoritywithlocalelectedmembersandadditionalappointedmembers.AppropriateforTypeCNationalParksin

table2.

4. APlanningAuthorityNationalParkBoardwhichwouldbeaseparateplanningauthorityandhavelocalelectedmembersandnationallyappointedmembers.TheNationalParkPlantheyapprovedwouldalsobetheplanninganddevelopmentcontroldocumentfortheNationalPark.ThiswouldapplyinTypeDNationalParksasintable2,aswiththetwoexistingNationalParksinScotland.



08


09


3.1 NationalScenicAreas(NSAs)weredesignatedbothtoidentifythefinestsceneryofthetypeconsideredmostcharacteristicofScotlandandtoensuretheirprotectionfrominappropriatedevelopment.Thislimitedmeasureofprotectionisachievedthroughthelocalauthorityplanningsystem.ScottishNaturalHeritagehassurveyedalltheNSAsandproducedanup-to-datelistofthespecialqualitiesthatjustifyeacharea’sdesignationasScotland’sfinestlandscapes.(seeTheSpecialQualitiesofNationalScenicAreas,2010).

3.2 ApartfromthoseNSAssubsequentlyincludedwithintheboundariesofthetwoNationalParks,NationalScenicAreashaveneverreceivedsignificantpublicityorpublicrecognitionandhavenotgenerallybeenthesubjectofmanagementplansorstaffappointedtomanageorenhancethem.AlthoughtheLocalAuthoritieswereencouragedtopreparemanagementstrategiesfortheirNSAs,onlythreehavebeenpreparedtodate–allinDumfriesandGalloway.ThisisinstarkcontrasttotheAONBsinEnglandWalesandNorthernIreland–allofwhichhaveapprovedmanagementplansandstafftohelpimplementthem.

3.3 InarecentreviewofallprotectedareadesignationsintheUKtheIUCNNationalCommitteefortheUKconcludedthattheNationalScenicAreasinScotlanddidnotmeetthecriteriaforinclusioninanyoftheIUCNcategoriesforprotectedareas.Theystatedthat“evidence that the effectiveness of protection of nature in planning policy is insufficient”.ThiscontrastsstarklywithitsconclusionthatAONBsinEnglandandWalesshouldcontinuetoberecognisedasCategoryVProtectedLandscapes.(PuttingNatureontheMap,2014).

3.4 NSAsinScotlanddonothaveapurposeofpromotingaccessandrecreationorsustainableruraldevelopmentandassuchhavelimitedvalueinassistingthedevelopmentoftheirareas.Neitherhavetheybeenthesubjectofanysubstantiallandscapeorhabitatimprovementefforts(excepttosomeextentinthethreeDumfriesandGallowayNSAs).

3.4 WhilstSCNP/APRSrecognisethevalueoftheextradevelopmentcontrolvigilancethatNSAsprovide,wefeelthattosomeextenttheirexistencehasdeflectedthinkingfromthedesignationoffurtherNationalParksinScotland.WefeelthereforethatthereisaneedforathoroughreviewofhowScotlandprotectsandsustainablyutilisesitsfinestlandscapeswhichwouldtakeintoaccountboththeexistingNationalParks,theNSAsandtheideasandproposalswithinthe‘UnfinishedBusiness–ANationalParksStrategyforScotland’report.

3.5 WenotethatinWalesthereviewoftheirprotectedlandscapeshasrecently(2015)addressedtheissueofthetitleofboththeirNationalParksandAreasofOutstandingNaturalBeautyandhasconcludedthatbothshouldcontinuetoberecognisedasnationallyimportantandshouldbegivenasimilarsetofobjectives.

3.NationalScenicAreas

4.1 ThestaffinglevelsandassociatedcostsforanynewNationalParkscouldbeexpectedtovaryconsiderablywiththeirsize,character,functionsandprecisestyleofoperation.IntheAppendixtothisreportweseektoillustratethisbyreferencetofourexistingprotectedlandscapes,twoinEngland,oneinFranceandonestraddling

theborderbetweenWalesandEngland. Thesecasestudiesshowthatthestaffnumbers

forevenalargeAONBinnorthernEnglandarenomorethan16andthatthesmallestEnglishNationalParkemploysfewerthan50staff.

4.2 ThecostofrunningNationalParksofcomparablescaleandcomplexityinScotlandcouldthusbeconsiderablylowerthanthoseassociatedwiththetwoexistingParks–possiblyintherangeof£1.5to3mperannum.GiventhevalueoftheeconomicactivitythatParkshaveshownthemselvescapableofgenerating(seeourseparatereportonthesocio-economicbenefitsofNationalParks),thiscanbeseenasanexcellentinvestment.

4.Costs


10


4.3 Werecogniseneverthelessthatinthepresentclimateoffinancialausterityanyadditionalpublicspendingwillbedifficulttosecure.Toourminds,however,thisshouldnotforanumberofreasonsprecludeinitiatingatthisstageaprocessdesignedtoaddtoScotland’scurrentlyverysmallnumberofNationalParks.Thesearethat:

1. NationalParksinevitablytakesometimetoidentify,designateandestablish

2. ExperienceelsewheredemonstratesthecapacityofNationalParkstogeneratefundingfromsourcesotherthanmainstreamgovernmentprogrammes,especiallyforcapitalandprojectworks;and

3. TherearepotentialwaysinwhichthecostsofoperatingamorecomprehensivenetworkofNationalParkscouldbecontainedbypoolingresources.

Weexaminethislastpossibilityinthenextsection ofthispaper.

Loch Lomond


11


5.1 IntheSCNP/APRSreport‘UnfinishedBusiness–ANationalParksStrategyforScotland’wesuggestthataNationalParksServiceforScotlandshouldbeconsidered.ThoughradicalinaUKcontext,suchastepwouldbefarfromunprecedented.SuccessfulparkserviceshavelongoperatedateitheranationalorregionalscaleinanumberofothercountriessuchastheUSA,Canada,Norway,NewZealandandvariousstatesinAustralia.

5.2 InScotlandsuchabodycouldemploythestaffeitherforalltheNationalParks,buildingupontheco-operationthatalreadyexistsincertainareasofactivitybetweenthetwoexistingParks,orforanumberofthesmallerNationalParks.ThiswouldoffertheprospectofbothloweroverheadsandacommonlyavailablesourceofspecialistexpertisewhichindividualParksmightnotbeabletojustifyorafford.ThiscouldbemadeavailablenotjusttotheNationalParksthemselvesbuttoanyothernationallyprotectedlandscapes,suchasthoseNationalScenicAreasthathadnotbeensubsumedintoNationalParks.

5.3 TheroleofaScottishNationalParksServicewouldbetoserveandsupporttheleadauthorityforeachoftheindividualParks,nottodirectthemasiftheywereasingle,nationalentity.Inparticularitwouldbevitaltoensurethattheresponsibilityfordecision-makingonplanningmattersremainedwithaclearlyidentifiable,locallyaccountableforum.ANationalParksServicecouldbeanindependentbodyoralternativelycouldbeattachedtoanexistingorganisation,withScottishNaturalHeritagebeingtheobviouscandidate.

5.ANationalParks ServiceforScotland

Volunteer Information Assistants Canyon Rim Visitor Centre – USA


12

6.1 ThemanylandscapesacrossScotlandthatwouldonthestrengthoftheirqualityjustifydesignationasNationalParksvarywidelyinextentandcharacter.Demographically,someareverysparselypopulated,somecontainsizeablesettlements.Somestraddlecurrentadministrativeboundaries;othersliewhollywithintheterritoryofasinglelocalauthority.If,aswebelieve,furtherNationalParksshouldbeestablishedinScotlandforthefullrangeofenvironmental,socialandeconomicbenefitsthattheycanbring,theirgovernancearrangementsshouldunquestionablyreflectthisdiversityofcircumstances.FortunatelythosewhocraftedScotland’snationalparklegislationrecognisedthisandtheNationalParks(Scotland)Actallowsforthefunctions,powersandgovernanceregimesforindividualparkstobegearedtolocalconditions.

6.2 Thispaperseekstoillustratetherangeofgovernanceoptionsthatmightbejudgedappropriateacrossthismultiplicityofcircumstances.Theunderlyingprincipleisthatofadequateaccountabilityforthefunctionsdischarged–bothtolocalpeopleandtothenationasawhole.Anothermajorconsiderationiscost:itisvital,especiallyinthecurrentandforeseeablefinancialcontext,tokeepoverheadstotheminimumcompatiblewitheffectiveoperationandtransparent,democraticcontrol.ThecasestudiespresentedfromelsewhereintheUKandbeyondaredesignedtoindicatethescaleofexpenditurethatmightbeinvolvedinrunningNationalParksinthesortsofareashighlightedascandidatesfordesignationinour‘UnfinishedBusiness’report.

6.3 Theideasandinformationpresentedareintendedtostimulateandfeeddiscussionnationallyaboutthecosts,practicalitiesandimplicationsofafurtherprogrammeofnationalparkdesignation.Evenmoreimportantly,wehopethattheywillhelpindividualsandcommunitiesinpartsofthecountrywherethereisinterestinthepossibilityofNationalParkdesignationtoexploretheissuefurtherandtodeveloptheirownthoughtsandproposals.

6.Conclusions

Some experience from elsewhereNORTHPENNINESAONBPARTNERSHIP

APPENDIX

Thereare46AONBsinEnglandWalesandNorthernIreland.Designationseekstoprotectandenhancenaturalbeautywhilstrecognisingtheneedsofthelocalcommunityandeconomy.Thisincludestheprotectionofflora,faunaandgeologicalaswellaslandscapefeaturesincludingtheconservationofarchaeological,architecturalandvernacularfeaturesinthelandscape.

TheplanningandmanagementapproachineachindividualAONBcanvaryconsiderably.Overallresponsibilityofcarelieswiththerelevantlocalauthorities.However,mostAONBsfallwithinmorethanonelocalauthorityarea(city,districtand/orcounty).Toencourageconsistentpoliciesandpositivecoordination,AONBshave:

• Formedjointadvisorycommittees,jointcommittee orconservationboards.Theseinclude representativesofnotonlythedifferentlocal authorities,butalsooflandowners,farmers,residents andconservationandinformalrecreationinterests

• AppointedAONBofficersandstafftocoordinatelocal managementoperation

• PreparedastatutoryManagementPlan.

AONBs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

TheNorthPenninesAONBisoneexampleofanAONBandisdescribedbelow.

TheNorthPenninesAONBPartnershipisanallianceofstatutoryagencies,localauthoritiesandvoluntary/communityorganisationswhichcareabout,andfor,thearea.TheAONBPartnershipisthebodyresponsibleforco-ordinatingeffortstoconserveandenhancetheNorthPennines.TheworkofthePartnershipiscarriedoutthroughtheAONBStaffUnit,employedthroughitsaccountablebody,DurhamCountyCouncil.ThePartnershipmeetstwiceayear,toconsiderimportantissuesrelatedtotheconservationandenhancementofnaturalbeautyintheNorthPenninesAONBandtheGlobalGeopark.AnExecutiveGroupmeetsthreetimesayeartoprovidesupporttotheStaffUnitonoperationalmatters.ThePartnershipalsoholdsanAnnualForum.

TheworkoftheAONBPartnershipanditsStaffUnitof16ftestaffisguidedbytheNorthPenninesAONBManagementPlan2009–14.ThisstatutoryplanwasproducedbytheAONBPartnershiponbehalfofthearea’sfiveLocalAuthorities–whosedutyitistojointlyprepare.

North Pennines – Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty


13


14

NORTHPENNINESAONBPARTNERSHIP

TheStaffUnitoperatesfourWorkingGroups:

• AccessandRecreation• SustainableTourism• HistoricEnvironmentand• TheGeoparkAdvisoryGroup.

Thesegroupsmeetthreeorfourtimesayear,theirpurposebeingtosupportprojectdevelopmentandtheimplementationoftheAONBManagementPlan.Theyallhave‘TermsofReference’andareanimportantpartoftheAONBPartnershipstructure.

TheAnnualForumoftheAONBPartnershipisdesignedtocommunicatetothewidercommunityissuesimportanttotheconservationandenhancementofthenaturalbeautyoftheNorthPennines.SpecificallyitisanopportunitytocommunicatetheactivitiesoftheAONBPartnershipanditsStaffUnit.Itisalsoamechanismtoreceivethethoughts,guidanceandadvicefromthewidercommunity.Abroadrangeoforganisationsandindividualsareinvitede.g.ParishCouncils,theAONBPartnershipanditsfourWorkingGroups,communitygroups,partneragencies,LocalAuthorities,MPsetc.

TheAONBPartnershipincludesrepresentativesfromthefollowingorganisations:

TheChairoftheAONBPartnershipisanelectedmemberfromDurhamCountyCouncilandtheViceChairisanelectedmemberfromNorthumberlandCountyCouncil.

• CarlisleCityCouncil• CumbriaCountyCouncil• DurhamCountyCouncil• EdenDistrictCouncil• NorthumberlandCountyCouncil• NaturalEngland• CouncilfortheProtectionofRuralEngland• NorthumberlandAssociationofLocalCouncils• CountyDurhamAssociationofLocalCouncils• EnglishHeritage• ForestryCommission• FriendsoftheNorthPennines• MoorlandAssociation• CountryLandandBusinessAssociation• NationalFarmers’Union• BritishGeologicalSurvey

APPENDIX

• RSPB• VisitCountyDurham• NorthumberlandTourism• DurhamWildlifeTrust• NorthumberlandWildlifeTrust• CumbriaWildlifeTrust• CumbriaAssociationofLocalCouncils• CumbriaTourism

PlusthechairsoftheAccess&RecreationWorkingGroup,theHistoricEnvironmentWorkingGroup,theGeoparkAdvisoryGroupandtheTourismWorkingGroupIn2013/14theexpenditurebudgetwas£1.73millionwithsome£882,000beingstaffcosts(16ftestaff).Themainsourcesofincomewere£329,000fromDEFRA,£87,500fromthelocalauthoritiesplussignificantgrantsof£345,000fromtheHeritageLotteryFund,£87,000fromNaturalEngland,£50,000fromtheEnvironmentAgencyand£13,000fromtheEuropeanLeonardoFund.

Thereare45RegionalNaturalParksinFrance.Theycover13%ofitsterritoryinvolving3,706communes,oversevenmillionhectaresoflandandhavemorethanthreemillioninhabitants.

ARegionalNaturalParkisaninhabitedruralarea,recognisedatnationallevelasbeingofmajorvalueintermsofheritageandlandscape,yetisfragilebothenvironmentallyandeconomically.Itisorganisedaroundafocussedsustainabledevelopmentproject,basedontheprotectionanddevelopmentoftheheritage.Theprotectionanddevelopmentofaparkisguidedbyacodeofpracticecommittingthepublicauthoritiesatbothregionalandnationallevel.

Thegoalsdescribedbylawtoguidetheactionsoftheregionalparks,inadditiontoheritageprotectionandmanagementandlanddevelopment,includeeconomicandsocialdevelopment,withtheaimofensuringqualityoflifeintheareasconcerned.Theparkspromotethegeneralpublic’scontactwithnature,inaneducationalstrategytoraiseawarenessofenvironmentalissues.Theparksalsoparticipateinresearchprogrammes,andundertakenewproceduresandmethodsforaction.

Theparkmanagementisbasedonthreeelements:• Landefficiency,basedonacharterwitharenewable twelveyearterm

• SharedauthoritybetweentheStateandtheregions

• Thewilltoconvinceratherthancompelpeopleto changetheirbehaviour,throughinformation,activities andawarenessraising.

OneexampleistheLivradois-Forez‘ParcNaturelRegional’whichislocatedintheAuvergneinsouthcentralFranceandwascreatedin1984.Theareahasundulatinghills,pasturesandforestswithlargeagricultura1plains.Theparkismadeupofseveraldistinctdistricts,eachwithitsownhistoryandtradition.Agriculture,forestryandstrongcrafttraditions,withtheirrootsdatingfromtheMiddleAges,arethebackboneofthisbeautifulNaturalRegionalPark.

LIVARDOIS-FOREZNATURALREGIONALPARK,FRANCE

APPENDIX

Regional Natural Parks in France

Some experience from elsewhere


15


16

LIVARDOIS-FOREZNATURALREGIONALPARK,FRANCE

APPENDIX

Livardois-Forez Natural Regional Park

TheParkis303,457hectaresinareaandthereisaresidentpopulationofsome112,000livingin166communities.TheParkismanagedbyaBoardconsistingof25Mayorsfromlocalcommunities,6regionaladvisorsand12generalortechnicaladvisors.

ThePark’screationcameaboutnotonlybecauseitsresidentsrealisedthatitwasanoutstandingareawithuniquefeaturesbuttheyalsorecognisedthattheareawasrapidlydeterioratingandthoughtthatthecreationofa‘parcnaturalregional’wouldhelpwithregeneration.AnoverallcommonobjectivewasagreedandThePark’sCharterwassignedbyanofficialrepresentativeofeachparticipatingcommunityandadoptedatthetimeofthePark’sofficialcreation.ThePark’sboundariescorrespondtotheparticipatingcommunitiesboundaries.TheLivradois-ForezCharterbasicallydefinestheterritory,theconservationgoals,theeconomicdevelopmentandculturalobjectivesforaperiodof10years.Italsospecifiesthemanagementstructureandhowmucheachlevelofgovernmentwillcontributefinanciallytotheprojectmanagement.

Theannualoperatingbudgetapproximately£1.5millionwithitsrevenuescomingfromthefollowingsources:

• £40,000pafromataxpercapitapaidbythe communities

• £315,000pafromtheDepartmentalGovernment,on thebasisofapprovedprojects

• £500,000pafromtheRegionalGovernment,onthe basisofapprovedprojects

• £380,000pafromtheNationalGovernment,onthe basisofapprovedprojects.

Expenditureisconcentratedinthefollowingareas:21%forenvironmentalconservation21%fortourismdevelopment20%forculturalactivities24%forsupportingcraftsandnewbusinessesand14%forforestmanagementanddevelopment.

TheNorthumberlandNationalParkwasestablishedin1956.ItisoneofthethirteenNationalParksinEnglandandWales.TheNorthumberlandNationalParkAuthorityseekstoconserveandenhancethenaturalbeauty,wildlifeandculturalheritageoftheNorthumberlanduplands–405squaremilesofhillsandvalleysstretchingfromHadrian’sWallnorthwardstotheCheviotHillsontheborderwithScotland.Italsopromotesopportunitiesfortheunderstandingandenjoymentoftheareabythepublic.Theparkhasasmallresidentpopulationof2,200withtheparkboundaryexcludingmostofthevillageswhichsitjustoutsidetheparkbutbenefitfromitsprotectionandpromotion.

TheParkreceivesanestimated1.7millionrecreationalvisitsperannumwithavisitorspendofaround£190million.

TheNationalParkismanagedbyacommitteeconsistingof22memberswith6beingLocalAuthorityappointees,6beingSecretaryofStateappointees,fromtheParishesand10beingnationalappointmentsbytheSecretaryofState.RecentlyithasbeensuggestedthatthelocalmembersshouldbedirectlyelectedtotheNationalParkCommittee.

TheNorthumberlandNationalParkhasthesmallestbudgetofalloftheNationalParksinEnglandandWalesatalittleunder£2.8millionin2013/14.Thestaffnumberaround48withmostbasedinHexham,outsidetheparkboundary.

ThestatutorypurposesoftheNationalParkare:

• Toconserveandenhancethenaturalbeauty,wildlife andculturalheritage;and

• Topromoteopportunitiesfortheunderstandingand enjoymentofthespecialqualitiesbythepublic.

Intheinterestsofmaintainingthecloseconnectionsbetweenlocalcommunities,economiesandenvironmentalconservationEnglishNationalParkAuthoritieshaveanadditionalstatutorydutyto:

• Seektofostertheeconomicandsocialwell-beingof localcommunitieswithintheNationalPark.

TheNorthumberlandNationalParkAuthorityhasadutytoprepareaNationalParkManagementPlanastheframeworkforthedeliveryoftheNationalParkstatutorypurposesandduty.TheManagementPlanisthesinglemostimportantdocumentfortheNationalPark,settingouttheguidingprinciples,vision,objectivesandactionsformanagingtheNationalPark.

TheParkAuthorityguideandcontrolnewdevelopmentwithintheNationalParkandthisincludesnewbuildings,extensionstobuildings,mineralsandwastedevelopment,andtheuseoflandandbuildings.ThebuiltenvironmentofNorthumberlandNationalParkmakesamajorcontributiontothespecialqualityofthearea.TheBuildingDesignGuideSupplementaryPlanningDocumenthelpsensurethatnewdevelopmentreflectsthisandcontributestothearchitecturalheritageofthearea.

NORTHUMBERLANDNATIONALPARK,ENGLAND

APPENDIX

Northumberland National Park



17


18

TheWyeValleyAreaofOutstandingNaturalBeautyisaninternationallyimportantprotectedlandscapestraddlingtheborderbetweenEnglandandWales.ItisoneofthemostdramaticandsceniclandscapeareasinsouthernBritain.TheAONBdesignatedin1971coverspartsofthecountiesofGloucestershire,HerefordshireandMonmouthshire,andisrecognisedinparticularforitslimestonegorgesceneryanddensenativewoodlands,aswellasitswildlife,archaeologicalandindustrialremains.

TheAONBJointAdvisoryCommittee(JAC)comprisesofrepresentativesfromthefollowingorganisations:

Local Authorities:

• ForestofDeanDistrictCouncil(2councillors)

• GloucestershireCountyCouncil(2councillors)

• HerefordshireCouncil(4councillors)

• MonmouthshireCountyCouncil(4councillors).

Co-opted members – umbrella organisations:

• HerefordshireAssociationofLocalCouncils(HALC)

• GloucestershireAssociationofParishandTownCouncils (GAPTC)

• OneVoiceWales

• CountryLand&BusinessAssociation

• NationalFarmersUnion

• Threevoluntaryconservationsectorrepresentativesfor Gloucestershire,HerefordshireandMonmouthshire.Non-voting co-opted members:

• ArepresentativeofthelocalWildlifeTrusts

• WyeValleySociety

• RiverWyePreservationTrust

• ARecreationinterests’representative

• ATourisminterests’representative.

TheJACissupportedbyaTechnicalOfficersWorkingParty(TOWP),whichcomprisesleadofficersfromthefourlocalauthoritiesandarangeofGovernmentagencies,including:-CadwCapitalRegionTourism(Cardiff&SouthEastWales),EnglishHeritage,EnvironmentAgency,ForestryCommission,HistoricEngland,NaturalEnglandandNaturalResourcesWales.

WyEVALLEyAONB(WALESANDENGLAND)

APPENDIX

Wye Valley – Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty


TheAONBUnitisanestablishedteam,currentlywithfivefulltimecoremembersofstaff.ThelocalauthoritieshavecommissionedtheAONBPartnershiptooperateasacross-bordercoordinatingbody,engagingwithlocalcommunitiesandotherpartnerseffectivelytodevelopanddeliverbothlocalisedprojectsandAONBwideinitiatives.TheAONBUnitstaffreporttotheJACandareemployedthroughthelocalauthoritiesandworkonbehalfoftheAONBPartnershiptocarryoutthepreparationandreviewoftheManagementPlan,toadvocateitspoliciesandworkinpartnershiptodeliverarangeofactionsdescribedintheActionPlan.

ThebudgetfortheAONBin2012/13was£333,400with£56,000fromthelocalauthorities,£141,000fromDEFRA,£56,000fromtheCountrysideCouncilforWalesand£70,000fromSustainableDevelopmentFundWales.TheAONBUnithasinthepastbeensuccessfulinattractingsignificantextraexternalfundingsuchasalargeHLFLandscapePartnershipprojectof£2.8million.

Short Case Studies

APPENDIX

WyEVALLEyAONB(WALESANDENGLAND)


19

Unfinished Business – A National Parks Strategy for Scotland

ScottishCampaignforNationalParksandAssociationfortheProtectionofRuralScotland(2013).

Governance of Protected Areas – From Understanding to Action

BestPracticeProtectedAreaGuidelinesSeriesNo.20.IUCN(2013).

Putting Nature on the Map

AReportandRecommendationsontheUseoftheIUCNSystemofProtectedAreaCategorisationintheUK.IUCNNationalCommittee,UnitedKingdom(2014).

SNH Map of Wild Land Areas

www.snh.gov.uk(2014).

Models of National Parks

K.Bishop,M.GreenandA.Phillips.ReporttoScottishNaturalHeritageSNHReviewNumber105(1998).

The Special Qualities of National Scenic Areas

SNHCommissionedReportNo.374(2010).

National Parks for Scotland – Advice to Government

ScottishNaturalHeritage(1999).

National Parks (Scotland) Act (2000)

ScottishParliament(2000).

The Socio-Economic Benefits of New National Parks Designations in Scotland

SCNP/APRS(2015).

National Scenic Areas – Advice to Government

ScottishNaturalHeritage(1998).

REFERENCES


20


If you would like further information on the activities of the Scottish Campaign for National Parksplease contact :John Thomson – Secretaryemail [email protected] visit the website www.scnp.org.uk

GOT A QUESTION? – GET IN TOUCH

For information on the activities of theAssociation for the Protection of Rural Scotlandplease contact :John Mayhew – Directoremail [email protected] visit the website www.aprs.scot

design / Stone Circle / e: [email protected] / ©SNH, ©Stone Circle, ©A. Devlin.

Date post:	23-Jul-2019
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trandan
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Future National Parks in Scotland Possible Governance Models · FUTURE NATIONAL PARKS IN SCOTLAND...

Documents