Pilot Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Marine Spatial Plan. Consultation Analysis and Modifications Report.
The Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Marine Spatial Plan is a pilot process undertaken by a working group consisting of Marine Scotland, Orkney Islands Council and Highland Council in advance of statutory regional marine planning. This report presents an
11. General Policy 2: The well-being, quality of life and amenity of coastal communities
11.1 Summary of responses received
| Stakeholder | Count |
|---|---|
| Commercial | 2 |
| Fisheries and aquaculture | 2 |
| Individual | 1 |
| Non-governmental organisation | 1 |
| Public sector | 5 |
| Recreation | 1 |
| TOTAL | 12 |
11.2 Main themes
11.2.1 Although generally welcomed the respondents had some concerns as to how well-being, quality of life and amenity can be measured and therefore how this policy could be implemented. There was some concern this could be interpreted quite broadly and that it would be useful to have some examples of what development proposals would be assessed against.
11.2.2 Two aquaculture sector stakeholders (one commercial and one association) both noted that a degree of subjectivity would be required when interpreting this policy. Both noted that consenting and regulatory authorities should use 'sound science responsibly' and be committed to use risk analysis principles, tools and methodologies in the decision making process. Both suggested there should be reference to National Marine Plan Policy GEN 19.
11.2.3 There was support for using the Community Benefit Policy from one public sector respondent but a renewable energy stakeholder felt the policy needed to state more explicitly that many of the benefits are realised as a result of investment from development driving improvements to quality of life. This stakeholder felt the requirements of this policy were covered by other legislation.
11.2.4 Another response from a public sector stakeholder noted that they already contribute to communities and well-being through various investments and volunteer programmes.
11.2.5 A fisheries sector stakeholder noted that it is difficult to quantify what a 'significant' effect and noted that the emphasis should not be on monetary value alone but should take into account more intangible aspects e.g. belonging, identity, a sense of place and community.
Table 11.1 General Policy 2 The well-being, quality of life and amenity of coastal communities - Table of suggested modifications
| No. | Suggested modification | Action taken | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| 119 | Para 145 could be reworded to better explain/clarify the purpose of OIOF along the lines of: 'In 2013 …. Together with the Council leaders in … under the campaign banner of Our Islands, Our Future. | None. | Existing text is considered to be clear. |
| 120 | Info Box 4: Remove footnotes | INFORMATION BOX 4: footnotes references removed and placed in glossary. | For greater clarity. |
| 121 | Use of the word 'mitigation' requires care as changing to correct one thing may have an adverse impact on something else. | None. | Mitigation is an appropriate term within the General Policy 2. |
| 122 | Clarity on what level of community engagement would be required and how this would be achieved. | None. | Lessons Learned report - Further supporting guidance could be developed on assessing well-being and community engagement. |
| 123 | Para. 147. Suggest changing 'important' for 'long established'. | None. | The word 'important' is considered appropriate in this context. |
| 124 | Para. 149. Substitute 'with' to 'within'. | PARAGRAPH 149: The word 'with' has been replaced with 'within' in the first sentence. | To correct typographical error. |
| 125 | Concerned that, while the economic benefits of development can be measured and quantified reasonably well, impacts on 'well being, quality of life and amenity' are much less easily measured, especially when considering a development that is proposed, and therefore hypothetical. | None. | Lessons Learned report- Further supporting guidance could be developed on assessing well-being and community engagement. |
| 126 | Clarify how policy will be implemented and consider reference to risk analysis principles, tools and methodologies. | None. | Lessons Learned report- Further supporting guidance could be developed on assessing well-being and community engagement. |
| 127 | Text needs to explicitly state that many of the requirements of this policy are realised as a result of investment from development which drives an improvement in quality of life. | None. | The economic and well-being impacts of investment in development are acknowledged in the supporting text to General Policy 2 and General Policy 1B. |
| 128 | Policy needs to take account of more intangible benefits. | None. | This policy aims to take account of more intangible benefits. Lessons Learned report - Further supporting guidance could be developed on assessing well-being and community engagement. |
Contact
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback