Scotland's New National Park Appraisal Panel: final report

Appraisal framework and criteria

The appraisal panel assessed each nomination against the six appraisal criteria set out in the published appraisal framework:

• outstanding national importance
• size, character and coherence
• meeting the special needs of the area
• strategic contribution
• visitor management and tourism
• local support

The appraisal framework and the six criteria were finalised following public consultation.

The appraisal panel noted that the first three of these criteria relate very closely to the conditions for a National Park Proposal which are set out in the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000:

(i) that the area is of outstanding national importance because of its natural heritage or the combination of its natural and cultural heritage

(ii) that the area has a distinctive character and a coherent identity, and

(iii) that designating the area as a National Park would meet the special needs of the area and would be the best means of ensuring that the National Park aims are collectively achieved in relation to the area in a co-ordinated way.

The panel also highlighted that the interaction of the natural and cultural heritage with visitor management and tourism is highly relevant to the ‘meeting the special needs’ criterion and noted that information relevant to this spans several of the criteria.

In conducting its work, the panel referred to the detailed guidance for appraising and scoring the nominations: New National Parks: nominations guidance and appraisal framework - gov.scot (www.gov.scot). The panel considered each nomination and, based on the evidence provided in the applications, agreed the extent to which they considered the nominated areas met each of the criteria (i.e. minimally, partially, significantly or extensively). Using this analysis, the core panel then undertook an overarching assessment of each nomination to provide a recommendation as to whether each area could be considered for designation as new National Parks.

The appraisal framework and detailed scoring guidance for each criterion is at Appendix 3. Table 3 presents over-arching definitions for the four scoring categories used in the appraisal of nominations section below. The definitions shown in Table 3 are broadly relevant to all criteria/sub-criteria. The appraisal framework also includes definitions for the four scoring categories for each criteria/sub criteria, which are more specific to the criteria in question.

The appraisal process has been based on the information provided in the nominations with limited additional information (supplementary analysis) and cross-checking provided by officials. As some aspects of the appraisal process relied more on assessing qualitative narrative (as opposed to quantitative evidence), the panel recognised a degree of subjectivity is inevitable in the assessment process. The nominations also varied in maturity and the level of detail and evidence provided. The panel recognised that this variability was partly a reflection of the different levels of capacity, resources and time available across the nominating groups for developing nominations. In relation to this point, the panel recognised and were highly appreciative of the time and effort made by all nominating groups. The panel also recognised that while some nominations did not meet the specific appraisal criteria, this does not preclude these areas from being considered for National Park status in the future. Likewise, the absence of nominations from other areas should not preclude them from being considered for National Park status in the future.

The panel noted the timescale which nominating areas had available to undertake public engagement in developing their nominations, with the extent of evidence on local support and engagement varying considerably across nominations. The approach taken to engagement/assessing local support (and how results were interpreted) also varied, with the evidence provided predominantly qualitative in nature. These factors mean that it has not been possible to provide a consistent assessment of the degree of local support or opposition across the proposals. The panel therefore recognised the need for a more detailed assessment of local, stakeholder and wider public opinion during the reporter phase for the designation of the next National Park(s) in Scotland.