The Environment Strategy for Scotland: Delivering the Environment Strategy Outcome on Scotland's Global Footprint - Evidence Base & Policy Levers

5. Section 2: Improving Scotland’s international environmental impact

5.1 From evidence to policy options

Section 1 identified how Scotland’s international Footprint can be monitored. Section 2 explores options for containing this Footprint, addressing Research Question 2: “What policy levers could potentially be used most effectively to improve the sustainability of Scotland’s international environmental impact?”

5.1.1 Operating in the context of wider societal goals

Meaningful actions need to show a commensurate impact on Scotland’s overseas Footprint. Further, since Scotland, like any other nation, pursues multiple goals, efforts that also support wider societal outcomes are more likely to have a chance to succeed. Therefore, particularly effective and lasting ways to achieve reduced Footprints overseas would be those which also contribute to central goals of Scotland’s society. Some are spelled out in the National Outcomes of the National Performance Framework^[8], while three core missions on equality, opportunity and community are set out in the First Minister’s Policy Prospectus, published in April 2023.^[9] International Footprint reduction policies that also advance these core goals may be more likely to be implemented.

If we accept the premise of a future with increased climate change and resource constraints, and we recognise that these trends will have a major impact on the Scottish economy, then it becomes more obvious how to link this Footprint reduction goal with overall ambitions for Scotland. Because in this case, reducing Scotland’s resource dependence, particularly from overseas resources, turns into a meaningful economic resilience strategy. We submit therefore, that there are three critical conditions for an effort to succeed:

a. It meaningfully and measurably reduces Scotland’s overseas impact.

b. It strengthens Scotland’s ability to thrive. Given the evidence of Scotland’s resource context, identifying assets that will become more valuable in the future is a critical step towards sustainability. Such assets make the Scottish economy more robust for the predictable future. Therefore, we look for recommendations that build such assets.

c. It speaks these benefits so clearly that enough stakeholders are in favour of it. This is simple because if not, those opposing stakeholders may hamper any such effort. This may be complicated since in some cases short-term costs can be a deterrent even though the long-term benefits are demonstrably higher than the costs. Delayed gratification can make it challenging and requires more planning and careful communication to overcome.^[10]

These criteria imply what we might call an “ecosystemic approach” to policy development. It considers which solutions are more likely able to thrive in the policy ecosystem. Such an approach recognises the reality of multiple and potentially conflicting societal goals. These are all contexts a single focus approach may ignore. Single focus approaches only consider what policy options could be deployed to achieve a particular goal. Hence their ability to manoeuvre around potentially competing goals and survive in such an ecosystem are slim.

5.1.2 Shifting the focus from growth to wealth

This report also suggests a fresh way to navigate a polarized debate between those who believe that:

• without persistent economic growth (as measured by GDP) the economy would become unstable (because of asset value decay, unemployment and financial instability); while others believe that
• with persistent economic growth (as measured by GDP) the economy would become unstable (because of ecological decline).

To overcome this fundamental contradiction in views, we take a different approach here. Rather than focusing on income (which is the lens of GDP), we take a wealth approach. We suggest that the focus needs to be on determining what activities and investments build, rather than erode, society’s wealth.

Wealth is a stock. In contrast, GDP tracks income which is a flow or an amount per year. Building wealth is therefore a distinct consideration from GDP growth. GDP growth on its own generally leads to increased Ecological Footprints (Cumming and von Cramon-Taubadel, 2018; Haberl et al., 2020). A wealth focus pays attention to what assets are being built which enable generating income over time.

A more useful interpretation, or even name, for wealth or capital would be 'capacity’: the capacity to feed people, move them about, house them, produce goods etc. Hence the practical question with every investment becomes whether it enhances, in this case Scotland’s, capacity to provide the critical goods and services for a thriving population. In other words, the premise of this report is about how to increase Scotland’s capacity to operate and thrive, rather than debating whether it will be economic growth or degrowth that will lead to this desired outcome.

5.1.3 The significance of trade policy

Policy recommendations for reducing overseas environmental impacts are often linked to trade. Recent examples can be found in:

• Stockholm Environment Institute’s Stockholm+50: Unlocking a Better Future report^[11], which includes recommendations focusing on the sustainability of global supply chains and environmental due diligence;
• OECD ‘s Biodiversity, natural capital and the economy report^[12], which includes a section discussing ‘Biodiversity and Trade’; and
• WWF UK & RSPB’s Riskier Business: The UK’s overseas land footprint report [13], which explores the impact of global supply chains and, through that, the environmental impact of trade.

These studies correctly recognise that in order to understand the overall impact of a product, one needs to consider the life-cycle of products, which includes where and how something was produced, how it was transported etc. So, this makes clear that what and how things are being traded makes an environmental difference.^[14]

But, as these studies also acknowledge, trade policy alone is not sufficient to address international environmental impacts. Because, in the epoch of the Anthropocene, impact is no longer merely a qualitative problem stemming from poor practices. Rather some of the impact is inevitable as long as we operate in global overshoot. Scotland is facing an “overusing the resource budget” problem, not merely a “specific impact” problem. Given global overshoot, some parts of human demand must come from depletion, since overall demand exceeds what the planet’s ecosystems can renew. This means that green import policies may just lead to burden shifting. For instance, higher income countries may import greener portions of the available goods, leaving the products that were manufactured using more destructive practices to lower bidders. This is why reducing the quantity of demand is central if countries want to contribute to tackling climate change, nature loss and resource constraints. A recent study by James Hutton Institute (Rivington et al., 2023) illustrates this point by differentiating between reducing consumption and reducing the impacts of consumption, emphasizing that fundamental changes to reduce overall consumption are required to be “responsible global citizens”.

Still, trade policies have power. They can reduce environmental harm, even though in the era of overshoot, they address symptoms rather than drivers. For example, trade policy has the potential to help address some of the quality issues related to certain environments, such as deforestation or biodiversity loss in specific geographies.

A 2020 study by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), The Linking Environment to Trade (LET) Guide, reviewed existing policies designed to reduce the embodied environmental impact associated with global trade and consumption (Hawker et al., 2020). Key tools and approaches identified in that study are summarized in Table 4. Many of these were further discussed in JNCC’s recent review of policy levers for promoting sustainable consumption. Rivington et al. (2023) explored international best practice in using these levers, including a range of trade-related policy options such as mandatory due diligence requirements, measures to improve supply chain traceability, public procurement directives, sustainable commodity import guarantees and capacity building. Overall, these trade-related policy options can play a significant role in addressing some localized impacts.

For example, Rivington et al. (2023) noted that the establishment of due diligence obligations (which falls within the reserved powers of the UK Government) on businesses is widely recommended as a critical policy intervention to address environmental impacts in supply chains and investments. Organisations such as the UK Government's Global Resource Initiative Taskforce, conservation charities like WWF and RSPB, academics, and stakeholders advocate for the establishment of mandatory due diligence obligations on businesses and financial institutions to address environmental impacts in their supply chains and investments. The emphasis is on transparency and integrating environmental considerations throughout supply chains, as supported by the Dasgupta review on biodiversity economics. While the UK and EU have both responded to these recommendations, the UK’s response has been criticised due to its narrower scope. Additionally, some uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of such policies since they are relatively new.^[15]

Mandatory public procurement directives are a further example. Green public procurement has the potential to help reduce environmental footprints through two primary mechanisms. Firstly, it directly impacts overall consumption due to the substantial volumes of goods and services purchased by public sector organisations. Secondly, it sets an example, provides price stability, and fosters market expansion and financing for more sustainable products. However, the complexity and unpredictability of its environmental impacts have been noted as potential challenges.

Green public procurement is prominently featured in EU Green Deal policies, to help achieve environmental objectives related to supply chains and the circular economy transition. EU Directives establish legal frameworks for socially responsible public procurement. The effectiveness of such measures relies on robust and transparent systems for mandatory reporting and compliance monitoring. Despite some complexity and uncertainty, green public procurement holds promise as a policy instrument that can influence supply chains beyond international trade, making it valuable for promoting local produce and dietary changes. The Scottish Government has significant opportunities to engage in this domain, aligning with UN Sustainable Development Goal 12, which encourages governments to use public procurement practices to advance sustainable consumption and production patterns. An example highlighted by the European Committee of the Regions^[16] is Munich’s inclusion of social and environmental criteria in awarding a contract for school meals, earmarking 5% for aspects like Fairtrade-certified raw materials.

Bilateral, plurilateral or multilateral international trade agreements^[17] are also significant as such agreements can enable more consistency among trade partners, for example by setting common environmental standards, which can have the effect of levelling the playing field. They can also facilitate trade in environmental goods and services and incentivise greener production mechanisms and materials.^[18] Consideration of trade in other forums, such as Multilateral Environmental Agreements also has the potential to support coherence between trade and environmental ambitions. ^[19]

This report does not review trade-related policy options in detail – instead, we signpost to further information and recommendations on relevant tools and approaches in the studies mentioned above. In summary, trade policy offers some opportunities for reducing overseas environment impacts. However, these should be considered as supplementary to wider efforts to address the underlying quantity issue that gives rise to overshoot.

It is also important to note that trade policy is a highly complex area, and solutions for improving environmental impact must take account of a wide range of factors, such as resource production efficiency, goals for self-sufficiency and consumer choice, while also considering impacts on upstream supply chain economies. For example, for some commodities, importing may be a more environmentally sound option than domestic production. These complexities mean that trade-related policy approaches must be carefully designed in the context of the products and countries in question. Moreover, since trade policy is primarily reserved to the UK Government, this constrains the policy options available to Scotland. Finally, although this report focuses on the Footprint of Scotland’s consumption, Scotland’s position in global supply chains means that exporters in Scotland are also dependent on imports. Consideration should also therefore be given to export-related trade policy levers when exploring opportunities for improving Scotland’s overseas environmental impact.

Table 4: Summary of existing tools and approaches for understanding and reducing the embodied environmental impacts associated with global trade and consumption – as set out The Linking Environment to Trade (LET) Guide by JNCC (2020). See full report for further detail. The Linking Environment to Trade (LET) Guide

1. Environmental impacts associated with trade and consumption

• Trade flow models – by modelling trade routes to connect consumption to production
• Earth Observation technology and remote sensing – for detecting large scale environmental impacts
• Global commitments and multi-lateral environmental agreements – for global collaboration on common goals
• Scenario models – for modelling impacts of potential future environmental and/or supply chain changes

2. Supply chain transparency

• Trade flow models – by modelling trade routes to connect consumption to production
• Due diligence approaches – which address risks
• Certification schemes – an example of due diligence but also holds the entire supply chain to a standard set by the scheme
• Life cycle analysis – understanding the whole life cycle of a product
• Supply chain risk assessments – to monitor risks in supply
• Hot-spotting tools – to highlight areas at risk or of value to conservation

3. The complexities of the production landscape and achieving sustainable production

• The landscape approach – to understand the interdependencies (social, economic and environmental) of the production landscape
• Community engagement and collaborative governance – to design appropriate responses
• Ecosystem services approach – to understand impacts and dependencies of production
• Development of condition indicators – to monitor change

4. Agreeing a common understanding of sustainability

• Sustainability frameworks – for cross-sectoral understanding of sustainability
• Certification schemes – for defined sustainability standards with conformance criteria

5.2 Choice of policy domains for this analysis

Research Question 1 shows Scotland’s consumption demand broken down by five domains: food, housing, personal transportation, goods and services. It highlights the relative contributions from each domain to Scotland’s overall Ecological Footprint. It also shows how much of each domain depends on biocapacity abroad or required emissions released abroad. Of these, food consumption paid for by households makes the largest contribution to Scotland’s overall Footprint and has the largest overseas Footprint. Goods has the largest overseas proportion of its Footprint at 72%, driven largely by clothing. The Consumption Land Use Matrix (CLUM, Table 2 and Table A1) also showed that all household consumption categories have a significant carbon Footprint, both of UK and overseas origin, and that the Footprints of housing and personal transportation are dominated by their carbon Footprints.

Carbon emissions from fossil fuel use put pressure on ecosystems around the world and play a central role in Scotland’s overseas Footprint. However, as noted above, since Scotland’s carbon Footprint is already being considered through the Scottish Government’s climate change policies, this report focuses on complementary areas that have larger non-carbon components. These are particularly prominent in the consumption domains of food and goods as shown in the CLUM (Table 2 and Table A1).

Based on CLUM results from Section 1 and feedback solicited from the working group on specific issues pertinent to Scotland, we identified the following list of policy domains, organised by consumption categories. Because of the targeted scope of this analysis, and overlap with climate policies, we clarify below which domains are included within this report and which ones are not covered here.

The most relevant domains and subdomains were identified as:

• Food has the highest portion of non-carbon inputs.
  • Food waste. Food waste is a significant contributor to the food Footprint and has an impact on Footprints both on the emissions side, including methane, as well as on the production side. We cover food waste in 5.3.1 (page 48).
  • Localizing food allows Scotland to be less dependent on food production from overseas. We cover the issue of local food production in 5.3.2 (page 53).
  • New technologies and approaches are emerging which can reduce the land Footprint of food production. These are covered in 5.3.3 (page 57).
  • Our diets make a big difference to the Footprint. Healthy choices often also go hand in hand with lower demands on nature. We cover this in 5.3.4 (page 59).
  • Food exports are integral to the Scottish economy. Salmon farming and whisky production are particularly prominent examples of sizable industries in the food sector. Because an analysis of the production Footprint and the environmental challenges associated with specific food industries falls outwith the remit of this report, those industries have not been evaluated in detail. Still, it is important to note that a significant input for salmon farming stems from fish harvested outside of Scottish waters and even land abroad, for instance for soy production. It may be helpful to study these particular flows in more detail.
  • Biocapacity for food could have an impact on overseas Footprint. Higher domestic production would relieve pressure overseas. For instance, if there was capacity for more sustainable fish farming, or regenerative agriculture, more local products could be made available. Vice versa, agricultural activities that erode local capacities and natural capital would have the inverse effect over time, leading to more Footprint abroad. Since biocapacity was not analysed in as much detail in this study, nor the sustainability of particular agricultural practices, this assessment is not included here. However, we cover the topic of vertical farming, which has the potential to increase local biocapacity for food, in 5.3.3 (page 57).
• Shelter/housing is not covered here as it is largely a climate change topic. Significant aspects of this domain include:
  • Efficiency of housing, including how to “future-proof” the building stock.
  • Land-use and resource efficiency, reflecting how sustainability-oriented urban design and management can not only make the building stock more efficient, but also encourage ways of living that are far more resource efficient.
  • Energy provision, particularly the electric grid, which shapes energy use and the sector’s environmental impact.
  • Biocapacity provides many materials for building shelters. Structural materials are largely made of wood, while interior design often uses more refined materials, including special wood from afar, leather, textiles, etc. Therefore, buildings and their interiors are likely to contribute to Scotland’s overseas Footprint. Some of these aspects are covered in 5.4.1 (page 63) on clothes and textiles.
• Mobility is largely a climate topic as well as one of local land use. The latter also has biodiversity impacts. Its dependence on overseas Footprints is relatively small and if so, largely carbon and climate related - hence the topic is not covered in this report. However, key issues to consider would include:
  • Transport systems, mode preferences and transportation capacities.
  • Energy demand, including opportunities to reduce carbon emissions through electrification.
• Goods cover a large variety of products. The majority of goods consumed by Scottish households are manufactured overseas, as reflected by the Footprint of goods which has 72% foreign origin. For many, the carbon Footprint is their dominant demand on nature, but other impacts are also important. The areas we cover in the report are:
  • Non-food agricultural items are often land and water intensive, and since the products are not eaten, often associated with more aggressive chemicals, including pesticides. When carbon Footprints are excluded, clothing makes up 51% of the Footprint of goods - the largest component within the goods category - 90% of which originates from overseas. Policy options therefore focus on clothing and textiles, covered in 5.4.1 (page 63). Other non-food agricultural crops, including for tobacco (representing 18% of the non-carbon Footprint of goods) and flower production, are also important, but not covered in detail here.
  • Electric devices and electronics are ever more prevalent in our lives, and often produced in distant global supply chains. They require energy in their production, but sometimes also use highly polluting materials in their manufacturing. This may be a domain where other environmental impacts than demand on regeneration are of highest concern: persistent pollution from mining all the way to production. But the even bigger impact may stem from the systematic electrification of all our energy systems, with large implications for the demand of transition minerals such as cobalt, lithium, manganese, nickel and rare earth metals. Their environmental impact is briefly discussed in 5.4.2 (page 68), drawing on a recent Friends of the Earth Scotland report.
• Services sound dematerialised. However, many services require significant amounts of resources to operate, including the hospitality industry, health care, education and security (including policing and military forces). Also, services such as the financial industry are a key component of a highly material reality – without the industry there would be little to finance. Consumption linked with services is therefore cross-cutting, and in the scope of this report only certain aspects are considered, largely those linked with sustainable procurement policies related to food waste (5.3.1) and local food production (5.3.2).
• Population numbers obviously amplify demand. Our assessment in Research Question 1 showed per person consumption through the CLUMs; and per person biocapacity, to compare it to. Population numbers are the complementary factor to per person consumption. Multiplied they make up the total demand. Therefore, it would be mathematically incomplete not to mention population numbers. In Scotland, over the last six decades, population numbers have moved slowly, with the population today just 6% larger than 60 years ago. Hence, we are not covering population dynamics in this report.

5.2.1 How policy levers are assessed

Based on our “ecosystems” perspective on policy interventions, described above, we highlight how possible responses fit within the larger policy environment.

Therefore, we assess options in each domain area based on five central questions:

• What? What aspects of a particular domain are being addressed? For example, in the food domain: food waste, local food production, land Footprint of food production, and the environmental impact of diets.
• Impact? How much can this effort reduce Scotland’s Footprint, and how much of that is overseas?
• How? What types of policy levers can governments use to reduce overseas Footprints? The general categories of policy levers governments can use go beyond the proverbial carrots (economic incentives) and sticks (regulations). For example, governments can also, through their procurement power, shape markets and curate information to convince market players. A recent JNCC report (Harris, 2023) provides examples and identifies the following broad categories of policy levers:
  • infrastructure-based
  • information-based
  • economic
  • regulatory.

  In our analysis, we identify how the Scottish Government currently uses policy levers within these categories. We then contrast this with case studies of international best practice and recommendations from the literature . This evaluation is used to inform recommendations.

• Impact per effort? To compare the effectiveness of interventions, it is helpful to put impacts in proportion to efforts it takes to intervene. Are there synergies or conflicts with other Scottish Government policies? This also may help to identify easy or symbolic wins.
• Strengthening Scotland? Ultimately, those interventions which also support Scotland’s wider overarching goals are more likely to be welcomed and produce lasting effects. Therefore, it is key to explore how efforts are making Scotland better positioned to thrive now and in the future. Practically speaking: how are they making Scotland stronger? What are the wider co-benefits, for example for supporting jobs and making society more equitable, in line with the missions set out in Scotland’s new Policy Prospectus and the outcomes of the National Performance Framework?

When exploring potential recommendations, we also considered three practical factors to increase likelihood of policy success:

• Link to existing Scottish Government policies and programmes. Here, the question is whether they already contribute or could be adjusted to contribute to reducing Scotland’s overseas Ecological Footprint. This will have the benefit of lowering policy cost to the Scottish Government and should also make for quicker implementation.
• Identify policy actions which lead to clear and measurable practical results.
• Prioritize policy actions that harness Scotland’s natural strengths as a nation.

5.3 Focus area: food

Food consumption directly paid for by households (hereafter food Footprint) makes up 19.7% of the total Ecological Footprint of Scotland. Of this, 52% originates from abroad. This implies that over half of the bioproductive land needed to produce, process and transport the food consumed in Scotland is outside the UK^[20]. Thus reducing Scotland’s food Footprint can make an important contribution to reducing the total overseas Footprint of Scotland’s consumption. The three largest contributors to Scotland’s food Footprint are cropland, carbon and grazing land, contributing 51% (25.9% domestic and 25.5% overseas), 26% (14.2% domestic and 11.3% overseas) and 14% (7.3% domestic and 6.9% overseas) respectively to Scotland’s food Footprint.

5.3.1 Food waste

What?

Food waste reduction can directly reduce the Ecological Footprint of food through increased efficiency. This is one of the few current strategies that can address the quantity of consumption by “doing more with less”.

Impact?

An estimated one third of food produced globally for human consumption is wasted. The greenhouse gas emissions linked with global food waste is estimated to be 6% of global emissions^[21]. Were food waste its own country, it would be the third-largest global emitter after China and the USA (FAO 2011). In addition to emissions, food waste also causes inefficient use of resources linked to the production, transportation, distribution and preparation of food, including demands on ecosystems.

In Scotland, an estimated 987,890 tonnes of food and drink was wasted in 2013. This is split between household food and drink waste of 598,946 tonnes (60.6%), commercial and industrial food and drink waste of 248,230 tonnes (25.1%), and other sectors who contributed 140,714 tonnes (14.2%)^[22]. Given similar levels of per capita consumption, food waste reduction will directly drive down Scotland’s Ecological Footprint of food (52% of which is overseas) through greater resource efficiency. If the 2025 target of 33% per capita food waste reduction set out in the Scottish Government’s Food Waste Reduction Action Plan is achieved, Scotland would produce around 330,000 tonnes less food and drink waste in 2025 against the 2013 baseline, assuming food and drink waste grew in line with expected population growth. This would directly help to reduce the overseas Footprint of Scotland’s food consumption.

Over-consumption can also be viewed as a form of food waste, with clear links to obesity and other health problems. Curbing over-consumption can thus simultaneously deliver public health and environmental benefits. We address diets and environmentally sustainable healthy food choices in 5.3.4 (page 59).

How?

Current policies on food waste reduction, as included in the Food Waste Reduction Action Plan^[23], set out how the Scottish Government, public sector organisations, businesses, industries and consumers can work together to reduce per capita food waste by 33% in 2025, compared to 2013 levels. The plan has a strong focus on food waste prevention, with the top priority being waste reduction of raw materials and products, followed by food redistribution to people and animals. Policy levers currently used by the Food Waste Reduction Action Plan include:

Information-based levers

• Public sector procurement guidance and training.
• Food waste reduction plans for the NHS and education sector, supported by awareness raising campaigns.
• Food waste as a topic in the national educational curriculum.
• Engagement with the hospitality sector and demonstration of return on investment.
• Engagement with the food and drink business sector to address food waste hotspots.
• Consumer awareness raising and education: ‘Food Gone Bad’ and ‘Save Food. Save Money. Save The Earth.’ campaigns were delivered in 2019 and 2022, encouraging Scottish households to reduce and recycle their food waste.
• Improved food labelling advising consumers on how to minimise waste.
• Initiative to share good practice with retailers on the way products are packaged, labelled and priced: Food date labelling.

Infrastructure-based levers

• Funding of community food redistribution via community fridges, food sharing hubs and apps to connect consumers with surplus food offered by the hospitality sector.
• Improvement of waste monitoring infrastructure and data by the Scottish Waste Data Strategy Board.
• Promotion of waste monitoring and reporting in public, business and hospitality sectors.
• Development of environmental accreditation schemes for the business sector.

Regulatory levers

• A ban on landfilling of biodegradable municipal waste (2021) to address emissions from food in landfill.
• Consultation on the mandatory annual reporting of food waste by food businesses, along with mandatory food waste reduction targets.
• Consultation on the mandatory requirement for large supermarkets to redistribute food that is still fit for human consumption.

Economic levers

• Scottish Government’s support for food surplus redistribution.
• Research and development of innovative methods and technologies to reduce food waste, funded by national research councils.

A review of progress since 2019 in implementing the measures in the Food Waste Reduction Action Plan will soon be published by the Scottish Government.

International case studies

Regulatory levers: No country has yet fully overcome the issue of food waste. However, internationally, government legislation has been found to be effective in driving reductions. An example is France’s Loi Garot, enacted in February 2016, which made it illegal for large supermarkets to dispose of food safe for human consumption and added a legal requirement for food distributors with over 400 square metres retail space to offer food donation agreements to food aid associations. As a result of Loi Garot, 93% of eligible supermarkets were engaged in food redistribution in 2018, compared to 33% before the law came into effect. The volume of food donated has also increased by between 15% and 50% since the law was enacted, depending on region (EY, 2019). France followed Loi Garot with the EGAlim law in 2018, which required commercial catering operators to offer a “doggy bag” to customers, and which extended the food donation requirement to collective catering operators and the agri-food industry. The ban on rendering foodstuffs that are still edible unfit for consumption was also extended to these players. In comparison with Scotland’s target of 33% per person waste reduction by 2025, France has taken a more aggressive position, setting a 50% food waste reduction target (compared to 2015 levels) for the sectors of food distribution and collective catering by 2025, and a 50% target by 2030 for households, food producers, processors and commercial catering sectors^[24].

At EU level (from Rivington et al., 2023), the Farm to Fork Strategy (European Commission, 2020a), which is included in the European Green Deal (European Commission, 2019a), aims to make food systems fair, healthy and environmentally friendly. One of the four main elements in the Strategy is Food Loss and Waste Prevention, with proposed legally binding targets for food waste reduction, and the promotion of a bio-based economy that uses food waste as fertilizers, animal feed and bioenergy. The EU Food Loss and Waste Prevention Hub reports the actions EU Member States are taking to prevent and reduce food losses and food waste. The hub shows that France is not the only EU country with ambitious food waste reduction targets – the Netherlands, Spain and Portugal all aim to halve food waste in various parts of the sector by 2030.

Opportunities

While Scotland’s Food Waste Reduction Action Plan has set out near-term food waste reduction targets, using a range of policy levers, it mainly targets waste reduction at the consumer and food business level via information-based levers. In 2022, the Scottish Government set out a number of proposals to tackle food waste as part of its plan to deliver a zero waste, circular economy. Actions targeting waste in the broader food value chain are still largely lacking, for example at the packaging, distribution and supermarket levels. There is also opportunity in reducing overconsumption of food. Regulatory and economic levers, at present a minor component of Scottish food waste policy, can be effective whether or not actors such as businesses or individuals are actively seeking to reduce their environmental impact (Harris, 2023). Food waste reduction targets are also not as ambitious as those set in other European countries, and thus it is recommended that Scotland increases the breadth and depth of actions to tackle food waste^[25]. Referring to France again as an example of progressive food waste policy in Europe, some of the implemented measures by the French government include:

• Facilitate donation agreements between distributors and associations by requiring food retailers with a store area of more than 400 square metres to donate surplus food to community organisations.
• Ensure a tax reduction of 60% of the value of donation is applied to the agricultural producer in cases where the donation has passed through a processing and/or packaging intermediary.
• Make information on food waste prevention available to all stakeholders of the food chain by creating a website with the most innovative actions.
• Promote awareness-raising activities on food waste in schools, secondary education institutions and leisure centres. For example, in 2020, a national ‘zero waste’ challenge in high schools was created.
• Strengthen efforts to raise consumer awareness of the fight against food waste through public communication campaigns, documents and tips. For example, the communication campaign ‘Jeter moins c’est manger mieux!’ (Throwing away less means eating better!) raises awareness through tales from childhood in a world without food waste.
• Work with representatives of the catering industry to encourage the implementation of actions to combat food waste within companies.

Impact per effort?

Food waste reduction has strong synergies with other active policy areas like circular economy and waste, sustainable public procurement^[26] and, in the case of over-consumption, public health benefits. In the food value chain, which ranges from production to processing, distribution and final use, a reduction of food waste has few trade-offs, as it improves efficiency and reduces disposal costs, with potential benefits accruing to the entire value chain.^[27] For the production and supply sectors, process changes, training and new procurement strategies carry a cost, but this can be outweighed by long-term gains in efficiency. For households, consumers benefit directly through money saved. However, achieving food waste reduction at household level requires consumer behaviour change, which is not trivial and will require further investment in information-based and financial levers.

Strengthening Scotland

Scottish householders waste more than £1 billion of food each year (Scottish Government, 2019). Household food waste reduction thus brings a direct financial benefit to consumers. Further, if done well, food waste reduction along the value chain could help to increase resource efficiency in food production and consumption, allowing Scotland to meet its food needs with fewer resources. In a world of finite resources and a growing global population, this shows responsible global citizenship and will also increase Scotland’s potential to thrive in a future of increased resource constraints. Finally, given the large greenhouse gas emissions linked with food waste, food waste reduction will also strengthen Scotland’s international contribution to emissions reductions at a low cost.

5.3.2 Local food production

What?

Increased consumption of locally produced food can potentially reduce the carbon Footprint of food distribution. However, this assumption doesn’t apply to every product, and highlights the need for robust metrics to allow for a distinction to be made. Nonetheless, local production can better internalise natural resource use, environmental impacts and social impacts of food production, as the feedback loops are more direct.

Impact?

A recent global study suggests that global food-miles account for nearly 20% of total food-systems emissions when accounting for transport, production and land use change. The study also finds that global freight transport associated with vegetable and fruit consumption contributes almost twice the amount of greenhouse gases released during their production (Li et al., 2022). Similar results are reported by UNEP, who found that the carbon Footprint of food distribution is significant and comparable to that of food production (UNEP 2021). These transport-related emissions can be addressed through greater local consumption, particularly of fruit and vegetables. Obviously, this would also require linking food consumption more tightly to seasonality. Further, the carbon Footprint of food can also be heavily influenced by production methods. For instance, soy production associated with natural vegetation loss in Brazil carries a larger carbon Footprint, with associated imports entailing up to six times greater emissions per unit of product than the Brazilian average (Escobar et al., 2020).

Considering wider impacts, globally the majority of natural resource use, social and environmental impacts that take place along food value chains are occurring at the primary production stage through farming crops, raising livestock and fishing (UNEP, 2021). Where efficient from a trade perspective, the consumption of locally produced food can thus internalise the wider impacts of food production. If domestic policy to address these impacts is stronger, which arguably is the case for Scotland, it is likely to result in impact reduction. It is also likely to create a better understanding of the environmental and social impacts of food production, increasing public demand and political will to address these impacts (Harris, 2023).

How?

In August 2021, the Scottish Government published the consultation “Local Food for Everyone: A Discussion” to ensure that the public and relevant organisations had a chance to further shape government action to encourage local food. The consultation focussed on the three pillars of the Scottish Government’s draft local food strategy: connecting people with food; connecting Scottish producers with buyers; and harnessing public sector procurement. These pillars outlined the wide range of activities being undertaken by the Scottish Government and agencies relating to local food.

The Scottish Government has committed to publishing a final version later this year, which will support locally-based production and circular supply chains, cutting food miles and enabling more people to enjoy food grown locally. Relevant interventions in the strategy include:

Information-based levers

• Certification of school caterers with the Food for Life catering mark, ensuing menus are fresh, seasonal, high welfare, with progress towards more healthy, locally sourced and ethical choices.
• As part of the Scottish Government’s Out of Home Action Plan, there is a commitment to develop an Eating Out, Eating Well Framework to support the out of home sector to provide a range of healthier options to consumers. This will include principles around sustainability.
• Regional showcasing events, connecting buyers and Scottish suppliers.
• The Scottish-Government joint-funded Supplier Development Programme, which provides information, guidance and training to prospective suppliers across multiple sectors, including food and drink, on how to bid for and win contracts for public procurement.
• Public education and awareness-raising campaigns about local, seasonal food.

Infrastructure-based levers

• Utilising land or vacant lots for local production.
• Providing local market infrastructure and temporary space in popular locations to support interaction between local producers and consumers (e.g. farm shops, farmers markets).

Regulatory levers

• Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022, placing duties on Scottish Ministers and certain public authorities to produce plans of their policies in relation to food, setting out outcomes, policies and measures to assess progress^[28].
• Public sector food procurement reform via The Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act.

Economic levers

• Funding for allotments, community gardens and community orchards to promote Grow Your Own activities.

Currently, SG promotes local consumption mainly through a large variety of information and infrastructure-based levers. Regulatory levers are mostly used for public sector procurement, while economic levers are limited to small-scale local initiatives. While there has been a general lack of policy levers encouraging local consumption by households, in particular financial incentives that are known to have a strong influence on consumer choices (Harris, 2023), SG continues to support Scotland’s Towns Partnership to deliver the Scotland’s Loves Local programme, including the Scotland Loves Local Gift Card, which remains a major opportunity to support local economies^[29]. Effectively creating a local currency, it provides a means for companies and individuals to reward and incentivise in a way that ensures that the value of that spending stays local and recirculates round the local economy. Current actions still only target a small segment of the population and food products, with the majority of food being consumed without consideration of whether it is local or not. The challenge is therefore to promote localisation at a higher ‘systems’ level.

SG’s Curriculum for Excellence^[30] encourages learning about food through making food education an integral part of the national educational curriculum. Strengthening education through a concerted educational campaign, including teaching school children how to prepare and cook local, seasonal food is a key aspect as education and food confidence is at the heart of long-term consumer behaviour change.

International case studies

A rapid literature review found that there are numerous studies that aim to quantify the emissions related to food production and distribution, and that local consumption is often recommended to address this (e.g. Weber et al., 2023; Tidaker et al., 2021). Still, the literature seems to lack proven recommendations on how to upscale local consumption among end consumers.

Ecolabelling seeks to empower consumers to make environmentally conscious decisions. Using ecolabels in food to convey metrics like related emissions in production and transport could be one way to encourage local consumption by households. Rivington et al. (2023) found that research in Spain and Scotland (Akaichi et al., 2020) show the effects of labels such as organic, local and low greenhouse gas emissions on consumer preferences. Results showed a willingness to pay premiums for certain combinations of food attributes and labels, and UK demand for beef mince increased if also labelled as organic or low in emissions. Ecolabelling is thus a potential way in which to encourage household consumption of more local produce with lower associated transport emissions. However, while ecolabelling can inform the end consumer, it is vulnerable to data quality issues, and has to date been limited in providing information about the labour and social conditions which make up the wider impacts of food production (Rivington et al., 2023).

Other initiatives found in the literature include the use of vending machines for local products, a circular business model based on a short supply chain. For example, a study by Pereira et al. (2018) found that vending machines selling locally produced milk led to savings in packaging and transport energy compared to supermarkets. However, the success of the initiative relied on investment in vending machine infrastructure, public awareness and engagement with local farmers.

While initiatives like short circular supply chains have potential, in reality, the majority of food is purchased in supermarkets, where price and quality are major drivers of consumer choices. Broader structural changes at supermarket level (e.g. the retailer offering a larger proportion of local products at an affordable price) are thus likely to deliver more impact in the near term.

Opportunities

There was a commitment in the 2022/23 Programme for Government to update Catering for Change, which will set out principles in relation to sustainable procurement of food and catering services in the public sector, to align public procurement behind sustainable, low carbon farming and food. This refreshed guidance will incorporate and sign post all those involved in public procurement to the Sustainable Procurement Tools.

While not without its challenges, there is evidence that information-based levers like ecolabelling can empower consumers to make more environmentally friendly purchasing decisions. Investment in short supply chain, circular infrastructure, like vending machines for local produce, presents another opportunity to reduce food miles, in conjunction with more local and seasonal offerings by supermarkets. Addressing the wider challenge of long-term behaviour change, it is imperative to have strong educational campaigns aimed at school-aged children, teaching them how to prepare and cook local, seasonal food.

Impact per effort?

Although not the focus of this study, by reducing food miles, initiatives to promote local food consumption align with emissions reduction policies and Scotland’s net zero agenda. Local consumption also has the potential to reduce Scotland’s impact on ecosystems overseas. As noted above, the majority of natural resource use and environmental impacts that take place along food value chains occur at the primary production stage, so the consumption of locally produced food can help to internalise these impacts. Since domestic policy to address these impacts may often be stronger in Scotland, this is likely to result in impact reduction. Local consumption also ensures that a larger part of consumer spending remains within the Scottish economy. As Scotland’s public sector is already intent to boost local consumption, extending policies to the household consumer is a logical progression. Educational campaigns for children have strong synergies with public health targets, as it could increase the proportion of fresh food consumed and lead to long-term consumer behaviour change.

Strengthening Scotland

In a future of increasing climate extremes, food production will become more challenging in many parts of the world, and this is likely to have impacts on food prices and supply chains. A recent report on the potential trade-linked cross-border climate impacts to EU supply chains finds that there still exists uncertainty in the nature and severity of such impacts, and that this calls for a highly precautionary approach, where low- or no-regrets measures like localised food supply systems are adopted (West et al., 2022). Consumption of more locally produced food products can thus make Scotland less vulnerable to future trade-related food supply chain shocks, while providing present-day benefits for Scottish producers.

5.3.3 Agricultural innovation

What?

Vertical farming (VF), a form of controlled environment agriculture (CEA) with multiple growing levels, reduces the amount of bioproductive land area needed for food production, and thus has the potential to reduce Scotland’s cropland Footprint. However, such practices are also material and resource intensive. Therefore, they need to be carefully designed to produce net benefits. Depending on the share of renewables in the national electricity mix, VF could also lead to a reduction in the carbon Footprint of food production (Sandison et al., 2022). Looking beyond the Footprint accounting framework, technological innovation in VF can reduce other environmental impacts of food production like pesticide and fertiliser inputs and water use (Avgoustaki and Xydis, 2020).

Impact?

Food makes up 19.7% of Scotland’s total Ecological Footprint. 52% of the food Footprint comes from overseas, with cropland and carbon the largest components of Scotland’s food Footprint at 51% (25.9% domestic and 25.5% overseas) and 26% (14.2% domestic and 11.3% overseas) respectively. Further, considering the detailed household category breakdown of food presented in Research Question 1, the overseas Footprints of fruit and vegetables are approximately three times larger than their domestic Footprints, indicating the heavy reliance in Scotland on imported fruit and vegetables.

A recent study by the James Hutton Institute found that VF has the potential to reduce both the cropland area and carbon Footprints of food (Sandison et al., 2022). By comparing land use area, carbon Footprints and water Footprints of vertical lettuce farming in Scotland with that of open farms in the UK and Spain, the study found that VF required 74% to 84% less land area than open farms, directly reducing the cropland Footprint.

The analysis also found that the carbon Footprint of open farms is dominated by transport, fertiliser and soil management, while in VF the carbon Footprint is dominated by electricity use. It follows that, under a 100% renewable electricity scenario in Scotland, the carbon Footprint of VF would be lower than that of open farms. Finally, VF was also found to have the smallest water Footprint of all production methods. While this study focused on lettuce production, it highlights the potential of VF to reduce the land, carbon and water Footprints of food production, much of which is overseas for Scotland. However, while VF has the potential to revolutionise food production, it cannot yet be applied to all foodstuffs, and therefore needs to be considered alongside other policies like food waste and diets.

How?

No existing policies of the Scottish Government were identified which directly promoted VF. However, the “Local Food for Everyone: a discussion” consultation included an overview and questions relating to VF.

Food production innovation is also a priority at UK level, reflected in government funding for agricultural research and innovation via UKRI’s “Transforming food production challenge”. The challenge has a budget of £90 million, running from 2019 to 2024, with the aim to help businesses, researchers and industry to transform food production, meet the growing demand, reduce environmental impacts and move towards net zero emissions. In the development of cutting-edge technology, continued government support of research and development is essential.

Impact per effort?

Government support of VF and CEA research and innovation aligns with SG targets to reduce emissions and environmental impacts of food production. It can also enable urban food production, which can aid urban regeneration and reduce food miles. Investment in VF research and development thus has many synergies with other policy areas in government and those identified in this report to reduce the impact of Scotland’s consumption.

Strengthening Scotland

In the predictable future of climate change and resource scarcity, VF can contribute to Scotland’s food security by providing a controlled environment less vulnerable to climate extremes, requiring less resource inputs. VF also allows production of a wider range of produce not otherwise suited to the Scottish climate, thus reducing Scotland’s reliance on imports of fruit and vegetables and the associated vulnerability to international supply chain challenges, as highlighted during the Covid-19 pandemic. While the high electricity requirements of VF makes it vulnerable to high energy prices, it will benefit from increased Scottish green energy production. VF can also bring about more efficient land use (e.g. vertical farms in unused urban buildings) and increased food production in urban areas, which can further contribute to Scotland’s food security.

Coupled with the reduced land, water and carbon Footprints outlined above, VF can thus strengthen Scotland by providing, if designed well, a potentially sustainable and climate-resilient method of food production. Such initiatives would also bring jobs to Scotland and give it an edge on an emerging technology that will be increasingly needed around the world.

5.3.4 Diets

What?

Switching to more sustainable diets, particularly a shift away from emission-intensive meat options towards more diverse plant-based diets, can reduce the Footprint of Scotland’s food domain.

Impact?

Research Question 1 noted that “most of the current biodiversity loss that can be linked to consumption in Western Europe is embodied in international trade...with food products contributing 74% to that biodiversity loss. Among food, consumption of animal products is the largest driver by far of potential biodiversity loss (Sun et al., 2022; Wilting et al., 2017)”.

Further, globally, emissions from food systems (from production to consumption) make up over a third of total GHG emissions (Crippa et al., 2021). In Scotland, the CO₂ emissions of household food consumption makes up a significant 8% of Scotland’s total carbon Footprint. Reducing the carbon Footprint of food is thus both a global and national priority to progress towards emission reduction targets.

The literature recommends various ways to reduce the carbon Footprint of food. Beyond technical innovations to increase food production efficiency (e.g. VF) and a reduction in food waste, diet change, and specifically a shift away from meat products with a large carbon Footprint, has been identified as a means by which to reduce the carbon Footprint of food and keep food systems within safe operating limits, given the expected growth in the global population (Springmann et al., 2018; Willett et al., 2019).

Potential benefits of more sustainable diets also apply to Scotland, with household meat consumption shown to be the largest contributor to the carbon Footprint of food. Meat consumption is also the largest and second-largest contributor to grazing land and cropland Footprints of food respectively, both of which have large overseas components. A reduction in consumption of meat and other animal products can thus benefit Scotland’s carbon Footprint, as well as Scotland’s demand for grazing land and cropland.

In Scotland, venison, as a niche product, has specific relevance to lowering the Footprint of meat consumption, or at least a small portion of it. NatureScot has the statutory responsibility for sustainable management of wild deer species in Scotland, based on the Code of Practice on Deer Management which itself is based on the 2008 policy Scotland’s Wild Deer: A National Approach.^[31] Under the guidance of NatureScot, deer management groups, landowners, local residents and partners like Forestry and Land Scotland manage deer numbers through culling, resulting in a limited amount of Scottish venison available as a high-quality food product. Venison lacks the Ecological Footprint associated with farmed meat production, and its production supports rural jobs while reducing the pressures associated with Scotland’s excessive deer populations. It should be noted that the recommendation is not to drive a large-scale switch from beef to venison, but rather to point out that there are potential synergies between existing landscape-scale ecosystem restoration projects (e.g. Cairngorms Connect, which is aiming to control excessive deer numbers that are preventing woodland regeneration) and offering venison as a local, low-carbon meat option. However, availability and price are currently barriers to Scottish venison being recognised and consumed more widely as a ‘niche-product with a positive contribution’, as part of a drive towards more flexitarian, sustainable diets.

As reported by Rivington et al. (2023), the EAT-Lancet report (Willett et al., 2019) highlights the imbalance in human diet and the need for reduced consumption of some food goods but increases in others: “Transformation to healthy diets by 2050 will require substantial dietary shifts. Global consumption of fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes will have to double, and consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar will have to be reduced by more than 50%. A diet rich in plant-based foods and with fewer animal source foods confers both improved health and environmental benefits”. The dichotomy of needing to reduce consumption of meat whilst increasing consumption of (seasonal and preferably local) fruit and vegetables has substantial consequences for land use and management. In the UK, approximately 85% of farmland is used to feed livestock, but provides only 32% of the calories we eat; whilst the 15% of farmland that is used to grow plant crops for human consumption provides 68% of our calories. Overconsumption of meat is a direct cause of diet related health issues – which points to a clear bridge between environmental and health benefits.

How?

The UK Climate Change Committee has recommended a 20% reduction in the consumption of high-carbon meat and dairy products by 2030, with further reductions in later years to cut emissions and protect natural ecosystems. As reported by Rivington et al. (2023), such substantial behavioural changes are likely to have significant impacts on land use both in the UK (and elsewhere) and on trade in food and livestock feeds. The UK Food Strategy (Dimbleby et al., 2021; Dimbleby et al., 2022) makes recommendations on dietary change for human health and environmental sustainability, alongside the need for food system and land use transformations. The report recommends cutting meat consumption by 30% within a decade.

The Dimbleby recommendations have only partially been acted on in developing a food strategy and eventual legislation in England and Wales. The recent Scottish Government Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act places a strong emphasis on the need for healthy diets and sustainable food production.

Despite evidence-based arguments for a reduction in meat consumption (e.g. flexitarians with lower meat consumption than their omnivore peers can significantly reduce environmental impacts, according to Springmann et al. (2018)), meat forms an important part of many western food cultures, and thus a shift away from meat poses a large policy challenge. In addition to cultural barriers, there are also educational barriers, where people may be willing to change, but lack the practical knowledge on how to plan and prepare meat-free meals. Linking with the topic of localising consumption, here a similar recommendation is to invest in educational campaigns that target consumers, and to adjust the national curriculum to empower children and young adults with the knowledge of how to prepare local and seasonal food, with a focus on plant-based alternatives to meat, prepared freshly.

International case study

Recent research commissioned by the French Government evaluated the effectiveness of traffic light ecolabelling across food categories in enabling consumers to compare the environmental impact of food products at point-of-purchase (Arrazat et al., 2023). Results showed that front-of-pack traffic light ecolabelling across food categories had a statistically significant effect in driving consumers to make more environmentally-friendly food choices, e.g. a move away from red meat towards plant-based foods. The efficacy of ecolabelling in this study was argued to stem from the simple and uniform labelling applied on the front of packs across all food types, as this allowed clear and unambiguous comparisons between different food types at the point of decision making. However, this poses a difficult challenge, due to the complexity of environmental impacts, and the rigor needed to reduce these to a simple five-scale metric. It may be possible to capture metrics like the product’s carbon Footprint with existing data. While not complete, this could illustrate a contrast between different types of meat, soy products, and local and imported fruit and vegetables. This metric, if applied rigorously, could capture impacts like deforestation in soy production, and benefits like local meat produced from pasture rather than solely with animal feed. Admittedly, this poses significant data and methodological challenges. While price and quality are expected to remain the main drivers of consumer choices, an indication of carbon Footprint may however influence some consumers at the point of purchase and serve to create awareness and understanding of products’ carbon Footprint.

Opportunities

The shift away from red meat towards more sustainable diets is a complex and substantial policy challenge. In Scotland, there are some niche opportunities, such as increasing the consumption of venison as a meat option with co-benefits linked with land management and rural job creation. There is also some opportunity to influence consumer choices via ecolabelling that illustrates, for instance, the carbon Footprint of food products. However, the largest opportunity lies in education, where the national curriculum should empower young people to understand the implications of different food choices, and plan, prepare and cook meals with more fresh, seasonal plant-based ingredients.

Impact per effort?

A switch to more sustainable diets aligns with existing SG policies that target emissions reductions, public health and food security. Due to the importance of meat in many cultures, it will take substantial investments in public information and education to encourage and foment desire for switching away from meat towards environmentally lighter plant-based foods.

Strengthening Scotland

In addition to reducing Scotland’s food Footprint, a switch to more sustainable diets can benefit consumers directly through reduced food bills (e.g. substituting expensive processed and/or meat-heavy meals for freshly prepared options with plant-based proteins like pulses, with the exception of highly industrial plant-based meat alternatives). Creating a more diverse food culture will also make consumers more resilient to supply chain challenges that may arise in the future. Finally, there are public health benefits associated with more freshly prepared, plant-based diets, and so to drive this in the national curriculum could contribute to addressing wider health-related challenges in Scotland, many of which are diet related.

5.4 Focus area: goods

Research Question 1 showed that the consumption category of goods makes up 10.2% of Scotland’s total Ecological Footprint. Along with food, ‘goods’ is another consumption category for which there is a predominantly overseas Ecological Footprint, with 72% of the goods Footprint being of overseas origin (Table 2). Reducing the Footprint of goods consumed in Scotland can therefore make an important contribution to the overall reduction of Scotland’s Ecological Footprint.

5.4.1 Clothing and textiles

What?

Clothing is the largest contributor to Scotland’s goods Footprint, making up 45% (or 51% when carbon Footprint is excluded). The vast majority (91%) of Scotland’s clothing Footprint is overseas, and thus any policies that can address the size of the clothing Footprint, or the impacts associated with the production of clothing, will make an important contribution to Scotland’s mission as a responsible global citizen.

Impact?

A recent UNEP report on sustainable consumption and production analyses the global textile value chain to identify where (both geographically, and at which points in the value chain, Figure 8) impacts arise (UNEP 2021).

The report finds that globally, clothing production has approximately doubled in the last 15 years, with less than 1% of clothing currently being recycled. The climate impacts of the textile value chain are substantial, with over 3.3 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases emitted across the value chain per year, more than all international flights and maritime shipping combined. Of this, the largest emissions (36%) exist in the bleaching/dying phase, followed by the emission of electricity used for clothing care (24%) (Figure 9). However, land use impacts of the textile value chain are also significant and largely linked to cotton production, which has driven large-scale land conversion and now occupies 2.5% of global arable land (Figure 9).

Further, the clothing industry is estimated to use 215 trillion litres of freshwater annually. Absolute water use is highest in the end use, bleaching/dying and production stages, but when viewed through a water scarcity lens, the highest water scarcity Footprint is at the raw material production stage, again mostly due to cotton cultivation (Figure 10).

Textile production also has large negative impacts on ecosystems, with 16% of global pesticide use and 4% of global fertiliser use linked to cotton production. Microfibres from synthetic textiles released into the environment during manufacture, use and end of life is an area of active research, and knowledge gaps still exist about impacts on biodiversity and human health through uptake into the food chain.

The social risks associated with the textile value chain are significant, with the highest social risks occurring during natural fibre production and excessive working time in high-risk garment assembly. The report finds that social risks are mainly due to three common practices: demand for short lead times, demand for flexibility, and a continual search for lower prices (UNEP, 2021).

In essence, significant environmental and social impacts characterize the global clothing and textile value chain. At the farm level, fibre production has impacts linked with water scarcity, land use, agrichemicals, GHG emissions and poor working conditions. Yarn and fabric production stages have impacts related to water scarcity and GHG emissions. The textile production stage not only releases GHG emissions, but it is associated with chemical pollution, microfibre release and poor working conditions. Finally, clothing users put additional demand on water and electricity for clothing care, release lasting microfibres, and still largely fail to recycle (<1% recycling rate) (UNEP, 2021).

As Scotland is very much part of this global supply chain, these impacts can also be linked to Scotland’s high level of consumption of clothing and textiles. GHG emissions of waste textiles is another impact. In total, it is estimated that the clothing and textiles value chain contributes 8% to global GHG emissions. Zero Waste Scotland’s latest Carbon Metric Report shows that textiles make up four per cent of Scotland’s household waste by weight, but account for nearly a third (32%) of the carbon impact of Scotland’s household waste.

Any mitigation related to quantity consumed or environmental quality improvements will thus contribute to Scotland’s mission of being a responsible global citizen.

How?

One way to mitigate the environmental impacts of textile production and reduce the quantity challenge is via increased quality, allowing consumers to wear clothes for longer, and breaking the fast fashion cycle. Not only will this reduce the quantity of clothing and textiles that need to be produced from virgin materials, but also reduce GHG emissions in waste by slowing the flow of textiles and clothing into landfills.

Textile recycling is a secondary opportunity, as whilst reducing the demand for virgin materials and keeping textiles out of landfill, the process still carries a water, carbon and environmental Footprint. The Scottish Government is currently using a range of policy levers to speed up the transition^[32] to a circular economy, as set out in Making Things Last: a circular economy strategy for Scotland. Regulatory levers include the recently published Circular Economy Bill.^[33]

SG is also using economic levers like the Circular Textiles Fund (delivered through Zero Waste Scotland) to support the development of circular supply chains in Scotland and promote innovation.

Financial and information-based levers within and beyond the textile industry are being deployed through the partnership between Zero Waste Scotland and South of Scotland Enterprise, where Zero Waste Scotland will provide access to expertise and advice on the opportunities and benefits of embracing a more circular way of operating; while South of Scotland Enterprise will work with people and businesses across the region to grow its economy by providing investment, expertise and mentoring in more sustainable ways of living and operating.

Public procurement is also included in SG’s drive towards greater circularity, as guided by the National Climate and Procurement Forum, policy guidance and SG’s Sustainable Procurement Toolkit.

International initiatives

At present, international initiatives that aim to address the environmental and social impacts of the clothing and textile industry are largely voluntary. Existing multi-government initiatives include the UNFCCC Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action, created in 2018 and renewed at COP26, where signatories and supporting organisations collaborate to drive the fashion industry to net-zero GHG emissions no later than 2050.

Initiatives addressing social impacts of the textiles industry include the Transparency Pledge where clothing and footwear signatories transparently report their manufacturing supply chains with the aim of identifying and preventing human rights violations; and the Better Work Programme. The Better Cotton Initiative aims to embed sustainable farming practices, enhance producer welfare, and drive global demand for sustainable cotton. This initiative has received large uptake, and to date nearly a quarter of the world’s cotton is produced under the Better Cotton Standard. The Fashion Pact is another example and aims to halt climate change, restore biodiversity and protect the oceans.

Recently, the drive for increased circularity has brought recognition that true circularity requires systemic change throughout the whole value chain, with actors following a common agenda (UNEP, 2021). One example of an initiative that aims to drive systemic change in textile use is the Ellen McArthur Foundation Make Fashion Circular initiative which aims to build an industry that designs products to be used more, made to be made again, and made from safe and recycled or renewable inputs.

Opportunities

To reduce the environmental and social impacts related to textiles and clothing, UNEP (2021) identifies the need for a comprehensive approach with strategic interventions across the entire textile value chain, with governments applying new legal frameworks and incentives; industry and innovation creating textiles for reuse and recycling; and civil society encouraging behaviour change. Specific recommendations include (UNEP, 2021):

Governance (economic and regulatory levers)

• Incentives for new circular business models. This is being done in Scotland via the Circular Textiles Fund.
• Disincentives, e.g. taxation of virgin materials versus decreased taxes on secondary raw materials. Such disincentives do currently not exist in Scotland.
• Eco-design and sustainable production requirements. Such requirements are currently largely lacking in Scotland.

Collaboration and finance (economic and information levers)

• Provide support for scaling circular business models through public-private partnerships. This is being done through the partnership between Zero Waste Scotland and South of Scotland Enterprise.
• Leverage funding. This is being done in Scotland via the Circular Textiles Fund.

Change consumption habits (information, infrastructure and financial levers)

• Change consumer attitudes through information and educational campaigns. Currently largely lacking in Scotland.
• Provide infrastructure for rentals, repair and recycling. Currently there is still much room to improve in Scotland.
• Incentivise sustainable purchasing through discounts. Such schemes do not exist in Scotland.

Comparing the levers currently used in Scotland to boost circularity and sustainability in the clothing and textile domain with the recommendations by UNEP (2021), shows that Scotland’s current policy attention is largely focused on providing the support (economic and capacity building) to develop and upscale circular business models. Disincentives like taxation of virgin materials and regulation of production practices are still largely absent, and limited use has been made of financial levers like incentivising sustainable purchasing, and information levers like improved ecolabelling to influence consumer choices at point of purchase. There is also a lack of educational campaigns on the impacts of clothing and textile production and waste to build consumer appetites for more circular approaches.

Impact per effort?

As outlined above, increased circularity in clothing and textiles is an active policy area, which aligns with emissions reduction and waste reduction policies. There are thus large synergies with other parts of government.

Strengthening Scotland?

Investment in circular economy approaches in Scotland not only contributes to Scotland’s mission as a responsible global citizen, but can also lead to job creation and a transition to growing Scotland’s green economy.

5.4.2 Electronics and transition minerals

With the electrification of all societal domains, as part of the transition from fossil fuels, the demand on minerals and metals for such an electrification is skyrocketing, even though electrification is essential for a sustainable future. This cuts across several of the consumption domains explored in this report, including personal transportation, housing and goods. The implications and contradictions are significant and well summarized in the “Unearthing Injustice” report commissioned by Friends of the Earth Scotland, launched in May 2023.

Apart from the social implications of mining (also covered in that report), mining is an extremely energy intensive process, with most of that energy coming from fossil fuel. This leads to significant carbon Footprints.

In addition to GHG emissions, mining impacts ecosystems, polluting the air and the water, to different degrees for different mines. Some mining can also be water intensive. Often mines operate in remote sites and pose a threat to the biodiversity there. Tailings, i.e. the mining left-overs including toxic waste, are often deposited on surfaces around the mine, behind dams that have high failure rates.

While this study was too limited to meaningfully analyse the relative importance of mining among all Footprints overseas, it cannot be ignored, and the “Unearthing Justice” report provides a powerful introduction to the challenges of growing demands for mining products.

5.5 Recommendations: linking opportunities to current government efforts

The examples outlined here in this report would be far from enough. Marginal changes here and there will not have the necessary effect to either reduce Scotland’s overseas Footprint or to make Scotland ready for the predictable future. Rather, this report recommends how to think about these possible interventions, and how to structure them to make them more likely to succeed. The reality is that Scotland, like most other places, faces competing policy ambitions, with goals like “adjusting the material metabolism to a level that fits within planetary constraints” often finding themselves low on the priority list.

For this reason, this report emphasizes how central it is to recognise the policy context. This means that positioning interventions in a way that aligns with wider goals, that may otherwise be perceived as competing, is essential.

Additionally, it is helpful to consider where to host the transformational policy opportunities. Therefore, after identifying key domains that shape Scotland’s overseas Footprint, and discussing the ones which have the greatest direct (non-carbon) impact on the natural environment overseas (food and clothes), a central question also becomes how such initiatives can be taken forward in the real-world policy context.

Let’s recognise that meaningfully and substantially addressing those overseas Footprints in an era of overshoot requires a lower material metabolism of the Scottish economy, involving a shift to sustainable forms and levels of consumption. There is no way around reducing the metabolism, otherwise impacts may just be displaced, rather than eliminated. But, equally importantly, such a reduction is much more likely achieved if it also strengthens the Scottish economy,^[34] and people feel enhanced, not diminished by those shifts. The focus and emphasis need to be on how to restructure the economy to be fit for the future and making it more secure, rather than only advocating to avoid certain materials or certain sources.

What are the practical ways forward? 5.3 and 5.4 included options for reducing the metabolism in the consumption domains of food and clothing. All other domains, more dominated by carbon Footprints, would have similar recommendations. The task is to find effective vehicles for such recommendations. Since Scotland’s government is already actively involved in shaping its future, the best opportunities for recommendations to find outlets is to be woven into existing initiatives pursued by the government.

Here are some options for how the above recommendations for reducing Scotland’s overseas Footprint could be linked to existing initiatives.

5.5.1 Keep Scotland’s focus on a comprehensive environment strategy

Scotland’s Environment Strategy says it beautifully: “The Environment Strategy for Scotland creates an overarching framework for Scotland’s strategies and plans for the environment and climate change. Its 2045 vision and supporting outcomes describe our guiding ambitions for restoring Scotland’s natural environment and playing our full role in tackling the global climate and nature crises. In turn, this will help to build a stronger, more resilient economy and improve the health and wellbeing of Scotland’s people. It will help to ensure we live within the planet’s sustainable limits as responsible global citizens.”

Recognising the interconnectedness of the environmental challenge, and the fundamental relationship with Scotland’s economy, gives Scotland a strong foundation.

Others have separated out climate change. This is, in our view, a strategic mistake, because isolating the problem makes the challenge next to unwinnable, since it overemphasises “free rider” dynamics. Free-riding means that the actors and society’s incentives are not aligned. The emitter profits from the energy benefits while society carries the emission costs. Or vice versa, those who cut their own emissions give up easy access to energy, while the benefit of emission reductions accrues to humanity as a whole. Such dynamics are tough to overcome.

However, by upframing the climate challenge to the bigger dynamic – overshoot – the free-riding trap can be overcome. Because, from an overshoot perspective to one of resource security, it becomes clear that individuals, companies, cities and countries have a direct self-interest to act and prepare themselves for a future of climate change and resource constraints. In other words: fighting climate change in isolation is largely an unwinnable proposition, putting it into the larger context of overshoot makes it potentially winnable.

Recommendation: Implement the approach outlined in the Environment Strategy Vision and Outcomes, and the forthcoming ‘outcome pathways’.

5.5.2 Accelerate circular economy strategies

Scotland has many initiatives already focusing on the transition to a circular economy. A simple way to identify opportunities is to ask the question: are there products and services produced in Scotland that currently use imported natural resources that could be partly replaced with waste produced domestically?

For example, are there feed inputs that are imported for use in agriculture, aquaculture and general food production that could be replaced by turning wastes into feedstock?

This could potentially be facilitated by:

• The new Scottish farming funding programme that will replace the EU CAP support mechanism.
• Scottish Enterprise and Zero Waste Scotland grants programmes could be targeted at supporting such innovation.
• Existing or additional support to the emerging vertical farming sector could be partly focused on generating alternative feedstocks.
• Waste management could be redesigned to benefit from maximum, and most energy efficient, repurposing of wasted materials. Circularity could be optimised by creating maximum overshoot reduction per effort. This would require improving current metrics for circularity to go beyond kilograms of material, in order to capture both the biocapacity effects of circular practices and the Ecological Footprint savings.
• The forest industry could be invited to develop a longer-term perspective on how it could serve Scottish industrial needs, including for construction materials.

5.5.3 Education

Education has a critical role to play in shaping Scotland’s future as a responsible global citizen, with the youth of today becoming the consumers of tomorrow. The two major focus areas of this report - food and textiles - form part of a global value chain with significant environmental and social impacts displaced from the area of consumption. It is critical to not only address the “quality” of consumption, but also the overall “quantity” of Scotland’s metabolism. This will require substantial consumer behaviour change, much of which is currently hindered by a lack of awareness of the impacts, scale of the problem and practical solutions. While the current national curriculum has made progress, more needs to be done to empower young people with the knowledge and skills to be sustainable consumers of the future.

Focus areas could include education and awareness-raising about:

• Meal planning to combat food waste
• Food products’ carbon Footprints (e.g. seasonal and local versus imported; whole food versus processed; meats versus pulses)
• Practical meal preparation with environmentally lighter ingredients
• Fast fashion – impacts, alternatives, career opportunities.

Strong synergies exist between these areas of education and aims in other parts of government (e.g. public health, carbon reductions, job creation) and so this recommendation is considered a no-regrets option.

5.5.4 Transferring skills, job training

Internationally, Scotland has been recognised for its efforts to deploy offshore oilrig workers to develop and install offshore wind turbines. Further, Scotland has had extensive success in decarbonising its energy system. Another new arena may be resource-efficient, well-designed vertical farming as discussed above. Also, ecological restoration work, for instance in the context of restoring peatlands, would produce local jobs, and could also bring economic development through carbon credits.

Some of the equipment (e.g. wind turbines) is partly or fully manufactured overseas. Can Scotland’s manufacturing and, in particular, remanufacturing skills base be used with overseas suppliers to help them produce products that have lower Ecological Footprints? Could such skills also become an asset to Scottish companies selling their expertise overseas or even to Scottish workers seeking opportunities abroad? What other skills exist in Scotland that could help in reducing Scotland’s overseas Footprint?

This could potentially be facilitated by:

• A project to examine, say, the top ten imported inputs to Scotland as measured by value or volume to see if joint work can take place with the overseas sellers to reduce the Footprint of these inputs.
• For the long-term it is also essential that school curriculum adequately incorporates the sustainability transformation in its topics.

5.5.5 Partnership models

There are some great examples of partnership models in Scotland that work out how to use resources more efficiently or generally protect the environment. Examples include the programs of Zero Waste Scotland, the more recent Hydro Nation Chair initiative, or the build out of SEPA’s sustainable growth agreements etc.

Could these partnership models be extended to help reduce overseas ecological impact by either import replacement or export enhancement?

This could potentially be facilitated by:

• Taking models such as the Dornoch Environmental Enhancement Project (DEEP) which we understand is a partnership involving industry, NGOs and government agencies and extending them in other areas. For example, could projects such as these lead to the replacement of oyster importing, thereby reducing overseas ecological impact? Could this partnership model be applied to other impact reduction challenges?

5.5.6 Grants programmes

Could existing grants programmes run by Scottish Enterprise and Zero Waste Scotland be adjusted, in general, to provide extra incentives to grant recipients to reduce overseas ecological impact?

This could potentially be facilitated by:

• A project gets extra funding (e.g. a 10% top-up) or points awarded in project evaluation for any grant application that can demonstrate any significant type of reduction in overseas ecological impact?

5.5.7 Procurement

Over 13 billion pounds are spent annually by the Scottish Government on procurement. There may be opportunities for the Scottish Government’s purchasing policy be adapted to give extra points to any product or service provider that includes demonstrable ways of reducing overseas Footprint.

5.5.8 Metrics

Scotland has a strong metrics approach already in place. Given that platform, and the significance of current resource trends, it might be helpful to expand the platform with indicators that can reveal more about the state and progress of Scotland’s resource security. This would also help build the bridge between seemingly separate policies.

This could potentially be facilitated by:

• Verifying whether regeneration is the materially limiting factor for economies, and if so, developing robust accounts that track demand on and availability of regeneration to understand Scotland’s situation in detail.
• Produce such accounts within Scotland or join international efforts to produce them collectively (which may be more robust and cost-effective).

5.5.9 New industries and economic development

Scotland’s economic development strategies have a proactive history of including energy and resources within their overarching framing. Could Scotland be one place where new industries that reduce Ecological Footprint get an early foothold? This would also be a value proposition for the economy, as such industries are more likely to gain in value and be needed more as we enter a future shaped by increasing climate change and resource constraints.

Such an initiative could potentially be facilitated by:

• A project to identify, say, the next ten new ‘low ecological impact industries of tomorrow’ and whether there is any existing or future potential to develop any of these industries partly or fully in Scotland?

In conclusion, while there are many possibilities for reducing Scotland’s impact abroad, deploying those that build on Scotland’s unique strengths while also advancing the most central goals held by the Scottish Government and Scotland’s residents is likely to create advantages in efficiency and effectiveness. The most expedient approach for deployment is to link such efforts to existing initiatives, as exemplified here in the last section of the report, and to use those to include fresh dimensions that address Scotland’s overseas impact. This could support progress towards the Environment Strategy’s goal of being a responsible global citizen with a sustainable international footprint, while at the same time helping to strengthen Scotland.