New National Parks: nominations guidance and appraisal framework
Information on the nomination process for the New National Park(s) project, including links to all key documents for nominating groups.
Annex A – Appraisal framework and scoring guidance
Table 3 sets out the framework against which nominations will be appraised.
Assessment criteria |
Components |
Indicators (evidence provided in nomination) |
Assessment score 4 – extensive 3 – significant 2 – partial 1 – minimal/not addressed |
|---|---|---|---|
Outstanding national importance |
Is the area of outstanding national importance due to its natural heritage or the combination of its natural and cultural heritage? |
Nomination to include evidence of the following: Designated sites (number, area ha) Ramsar sites; Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas; European Marine Sites; Nature Conservation MPA; Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs); National Nature Reserves (NNRs); National Scenic Areas (NSAs); Wild land Areas; Local landscape designations; Regional Parks; Long Distance Routes and SGTs; World Heritage Sites; Biosphere reserves; Global Geoparks. Evidence of important natural assets (e.g. species, habitats, ecosystems, nature networks) not covered by designations set out above. Evidence of cultural heritage World heritage sites; Listed buildings; Scheduled monuments; Gardens and designed landscapes; Conservation areas; Battlefields. Other relevant information on cultural/historic significance. |
i) Importance of natural assets (1-4) |
ii) Importance of cultural heritage/ historic environment assets (1-4) |
|||
Size, character and coherence |
Does the area have a distinctive character and coherent identity? Does the area's size justify designation? |
Nomination to explain rationale for proposed National Park area, size of proposed National Park area, and why designation is justified e.g. due to coherent identity of the area, defined nature networks etc. Note: Applicants may wish to refer to Scottish Landscape Character Types and / or Natural Heritage Futures categories as part of their rationale/justification for their proposed geographic area. |
Distinctive character and coherent identify (1-4) |
Meeting the Special Needs of the area |
Would National Park designation meet the special needs of the area? Would designation be the best means of ensuring the National Park aims are collectively achieved in a coordinated way? |
Nomination to set out why National Park designation is justified and how this would impact specifically in each of the following areas in terms of supporting development of opportunities and achieving these in collective and coordinated ways. Nomination to set out restoration/enhancement potential for ecosystems/habitats and for cultural heritage and/or potential for reducing pressures on ecosystems and adapting/changing practices. Identifying/relating restoration potential to existing habitat condition and condition of designated sites (e.g. for peatland, native woodland, wetlands etc.). Nominees to explain/identify existing challenges/opportunities for natural resource management and land use transitions in their proposed area. Nominees to explain/identify challenges and opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing in their proposed area. Nominees to identify relevant evidence on population loss, economic performance and employment profiles and extent to which the local economy is dependent on natural resources. |
i) Potential for protection, recovery and restoration of the area's natural heritage/assets (e.g. due to decline in species abundance, protected areas in unfavourable condition) (1-4) |
ii) Potential for protection and enhancement of the area's cultural heritage and historic assets (1-4) |
|||
iii) Potential for sustainable use of the area's natural resources (1-4) |
|||
iv) Potential to support sustainable economic and social development and wellbeing of the area's communities (1-4) |
|||
Strategic contribution |
Would designation of this area as a National Park bring wider benefits to Scotland as a whole (e.g. through its contribution to climate action, nature restoration, nature-friendly farming, green skills and jobs, responsible investment in natural capital)? |
Relevant information to be provided by nominating areas to identify how the proposed National Park would bring wider benefits to Scotland as a whole. This could include contributions relating to net zero and just transition, biodiversity/nature restoration plans, plans to support nature friendly farming, plans to support development of green skills and jobs, plans/potential for investment in natural capital. |
Strategic contribution (1-4) |
Visitor management and tourism |
Would designation have a positive effect on visitor management, public understanding and enjoyment of the area and sustainable tourism? |
Nomination identifies current visitor and tourism pressures (including visitor numbers and number/extent of key activities/status as a visitor destination) and the current and future potential of tourism using supporting evidence where available. Proposals clearly articulate the potential of a National Park designation to address key challenges and enhance visitor management and public understanding and enjoyment of area's assets including access for all. Proposals clearly demonstrate potential of a National Park designation to support sustainable tourism that contributes to net zero, nature positive society, improves community wellbeing and delivers shared prosperity. |
i) Potential of NP designation to address key challenges/visitor management pressures and enhance public enjoyment of area (1-4) |
ii) Potential of National Park designation to support sustainable tourism (1-4) |
|||
Local support |
Is there evidence of local community engagement and participation in developing this proposal? Is there evidence of local support for this proposal? Does the nomination reference any opposition to this proposal? |
Nomination to provide evidence (where available) of the following: Local community engagement and participation in the development of the proposal. Support from local interests including community bodies, landowners and managers, businesses, third sector organisations, public bodies, relevant local authorities etc. Details of concerns/opposition from local interest groups and communities. Note: 'local' is defined as relating to the area within and near to the proposed National Park. |
i) Local engagement (1-4) |
ii) Local support (1-4) |
This section sets out the detailed scoring guidance for nominations
Assessment Criterion: Outstanding national importance
1 Minimal
i) low number of natural heritage and landscape designations/low level of coverage and several types not present.
ii) Limited examples/evidence of cultural/historic features in application.
2 Partial
i) Limited number/coverage of designated sites for nature and landscape and some designation types not present.
ii) Some examples/evidence of cultural heritage identified/listed in application.
3 Significant
i) Range of designated sites (and related features) for nature and landscape (covering a significant proportion of the proposed area) and some landscape designations; includes evidence of overall natural heritage value and important natural assets (species/habitats etc.).
ii) Range of cultural/historic features identified and some relevant information/evidence on cultural/historic significance provided.
4 Extensive
i) Extensive designated sites coverage (with a broad range of features/habitats/species) for nature and landscape; includes evidence of overall natural heritage value and important natural assets (species/habitats etc.).
ii) Broad range of cultural/historic features identified and information/evidence on overall cultural/historic significance provided.
Assessment Criterion: Size, character and coherence
1 Minimal
Application lacking a clear and well defined proposed area; lacking a strong rationale for a coherent identity; proposed area small and/or geographically fragmented and lacks justification for designation; nature networks not well identified and/or existing habitats fragmented/degraded.
2 Partial
A reasonably well defined area or area options; Lacking some aspects of rationale for proposed area and/or less coherent geographically (i.e. cutting across natural geographic boundaries etc.); nature networks less well identified and existing habitat areas smaller or more fragmented.
3 Significant
Well defined geographic area or area options; Clearly justified rationale for coherent identify of the area with some areas less coherent/contiguous; existing nature networks and large contiguous areas of habitats identified.
4 Extensive
Well defined and justified geographic area or area options. Clearly justified rationale for coherent identify of the area; very well defined existing nature networks and extensive areas of multiple types of habitats/nature networks identified and evident.
Assessment Criterion: Local support
1 Minimal
i) Limited/no evidence provided of applicants having undertaken community/ stakeholder engagement.
ii) Limited/no evidence of local/stakeholder support for proposal provided in any form (or opposition to the proposal).
2 Partial
i) Some evidence provided of applicants having undertaken engagement with some relevant groups but may be missing certain stakeholders and/or be less formal/more ad-hoc.
ii) Some evidence of local/stakeholder support for proposal provided but may be partial, not quantified and/or less current/up to date and/or not consider/include any opposing views.
3 Significant
i) Community/ stakeholder engagement undertaken during proposal development with a range of stakeholders (see indicator).
ii) evidence of majority local support within local community and some key (local and non-local) stakeholder groups and consideration of opposing views included in application.
4 Extensive
i) Community/ stakeholder engagement undertaken during proposal development with a comprehensive range stakeholders (see indicator) using different methods.
ii) evidence of strong/majority local support and balanced inclusion of opposing views across a broad range of stakeholder (local and non-local) types included in application.
Assessment Criterion: Meeting the special needs of the area
Category i) Potential for protection, recovery and restoration of the area's natural heritage/assets
1 Minimal
i) existing ecosystem restoration potential and/or cultural heritage enhancement potential not clearly set out or only partially explored, no use of supporting evidence.
ii) Specific rationale/potential of National Park designation to support developing/coordinating new opportunities for restoration of natural and cultural heritage not fully explained or only for a very limited set of opportunities.
2 Partial
Existing ecosystem restoration potential and/or cultural heritage enhancement potential partially explored for a limited set of opportunities, limited use of supporting evidence.
ii) Includes rationale/potential of National Park designation to support developing/coordinating new opportunities for restoration of natural and cultural heritage but this is partial and/or specific links to National Park designation are limited/weak.
3 Significant
Restoration/enhancement potential clearly set out for several key habitats/ecosystems and cultural heritage features, supported with relevant evidence.
ii) Includes a convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing/coordinating new opportunities for restoration of natural and cultural heritage.
4 Extensive
i) Restoration/enhancement potential clearly set out for a range of ecosystems/habitats and cultural heritage features, supported with evidence
ii) Includes a convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing new opportunities for restoration of natural and cultural heritage. Includes innovative elements and consideration of the scale of restoration/enhancement and related benefits.
Category ii) Potential for sustainable use of the area's natural resources
1 Minimal
Existing challenges and opportunities for natural resource management not clearly/fully set out; related opportunities for land use transitions not fully set out/limited in scope and/or not clearly linked to role of National Park designation; limited/no use of supporting evidence.
2 Partial
Existing challenges and opportunities for natural resource management partially/not fully set out; related opportunities for land use transitions not fully set out/limited/no use of supporting evidence; Rationale/potential of National Park designation to support developing/coordinating new opportunities for natural resource management/land use transitions included but limited in scope.
3 Significant
Existing challenges and opportunities for natural resource management clearly set out covering a range of relevant areas and supported with evidence. Includes a convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing/coordinating new opportunities for natural resource management/land use transitions including specific examples.
4 Extensive
Existing challenges and opportunities for natural resource management clearly set out covering a range of relevant areas, supported by a wide range of evidence. Includes a convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing/coordinating new opportunities for natural resource management including examples of mechanisms/innovative measures directly linked to National Park designation.
Category iii) Potential to support sustainable economic and social development and wellbeing of the area's communities.
1 Minimal
Existing challenges and opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing not clearly/fully set out related opportunities limited in scope and/or not clearly linked to role of National Park designation limited/no use of evidence .
2 Partial
Existing challenges and opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing partially set out; Rationale/potential of National Park designation to support developing/coordinating new opportunities included but limited in scope; limited or no use of supporting evidence.
3 Significant
Existing challenges and opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing clearly set out covering a range of topics including identifying linkages between economy and natural resources, supported with evidence. Includes convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing/coordinating new opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing including several examples/measures.
4 Extensive
Existing challenges and opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing clearly set out covering a range of topics, including identifying linkages between economy and natural resources, supported by evidence. Includes a convincing rationale for how National Park designation would support developing/coordinating new opportunities for economic/social development and wellbeing including mechanisms/innovative measures directly linked to NP designation.
Assessment Criterion: Visitor management and tourism
1 Minimal
i) existing challenges and visitor pressures not clearly identified or only partially explored, no use of supporting evidence.
ii) potential of National Park designation to support sustainable tourism not fully explored or only in relation to a limited set of measures/areas.
2 Partial
i) Some existing challenges and visitor pressures noted but use of evidence limited; potential of National Park designation to address challenges partially set out but less comprehensive/lacking innovation and/or not fully covering visitor management and public enjoyment.
ii) some sustainable tourism opportunities identified and linked to the National Park designation but limited in scope and/or not clearly linked to NP designation.
3 Significant
i) scale and significance of existing challenges, opportunities and visitor pressures clearly set out including some evidence; potential of National Park designation to address challenges and opportunities to enhance visitor management and public understanding of the area clearly set out
ii) potential of National Park designation to contribute to sustainable tourism clearly articulated across a wide range of relevant activities.
4 Extensive
i) scale and significance of existing challenges and visitor pressures and related opportunities clearly set out including use of evidence; potential of National Park designation to address challenges and opportunities to enhance visitor management and public understanding of the area set out convincingly
ii) potential of National Park designation to contribute to sustainable tourism clearly identified across a range of innovative activities with potential for improving community wellbeing/prosperity, nature positive society and delivering on net zero targets.
Assessment criterion: strategic contribution
1 Minimal
Proposal lacks any consideration of the wider/strategic benefits from designating the area as a National Park. No specific relevant evidence used.
2 Partial
Some limited references made to opportunities which may have wider/strategic benefits but some may be more localised and/or less well linked to the need for National Park designation. Limited evidence used to support claims.
3 Significant
Proposal sets out several relevant opportunities which could have wider/strategic benefits (e.g for climate/nature action) which have been clearly linked to National Park designation. Some evidence used to support claims.
4 Extensive
Proposal clearly and convincingly sets out how National Park designation would bring wider benefits to Scotland in relation to climate action, nature restoration and other areas (e.g. nature friendly farming, green skills and jobs and investment in natural capital) and makes some reference to the scale of benefits. Relevant evidence used to support key points.
Contact
Email: NationalParks@gov.scot
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback