The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

REVIEW OF OLD MINERAL PERMISSIONS

CHAPTER TWO RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

2.1 This chapter examines the methodologies employed in undertaking the research study, and presents general comments on the response rates and sample size.

RESEARCH CONTEXT

2.2 Since local government reorganisation in 1996, all 32 local authorities in Scotland are planning authorities, and as such, all have statutory duties and responsibilities for the review of old mineral planning permissions. However, it is evident that there are significant variations between authorities in terms of the extent of active and former mineral workings within their respective administrative areas, and hence in the potential number of review cases. This position is further complicated by virtue of differences in the timescales typically associated with extraction of different mineral types which is reflected in the terms of their associated planning permissions. This is best illustrated by reference, for example, to open-cast coal working which is heavily concentrated within a limited number of areas of the Central Belt. However, since this form of extraction is typically undertaken on the basis of short term permissions, relatively few Phase 1 or 2 sites requiring initial review are likely to be found in these areas. The converse position exists where hard rock quarrying is the principal form of extraction, typically operating over a lengthy time span, often extending to 60 years.

2.3 This position was confirmed by a survey undertaken by the Scottish Office Development Department in 1998, which revealed considerable variations between planning authorities in the numbers of Phase 1 and 2 active sites, and dormant sites. This variation was taken into account in the research design.

2.4 In addition to variations in the potential review workload, considerable differences now exist within the organisational structures of the planning authorities which has implications for the research methodology. Since local government reorganisation in 1996, how local authorities choose to discharge their statutory responsibilities for the planning system varies widely. Many authorities no longer have a single planning department responsible for both development plans/policy matters and development control. The planning function is now often administered through larger multi-functional units, with (in some authorities) the traditional policy and regulatory roles delivered through separate departments/directorates. Further complexity is added where the local authority operates through a decentralised (area office based) service delivery and decision making structure. As such, it was recognised that in obtaining information for the purposes of this study, for some planning authorities more than one source or point of contact would be required. Accordingly, the methodology selected had to be sufficiently flexible to accommodate a variety of organisational arrangements.

2.5 This variation between planning authorities generated subsidiary research questions for the study, namely -

• Does any relationship exist between different forms of organisational/ administrative arrangements and the effective and efficient discharge of the authorities' statutory responsibilities within the review process?
• Within the context of best practice, does any particular set of arrangements offer benefits to planning authorities in undertaking the review process?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

2.26 The study required the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data from all planning authorities. This was achieved utilising a combination of:

• Review of planning registers
• Use of a questionnaire
• Structured interviews with individual officials in selected authorities
• Selected case studies

For each planning authority, information was gathered both on the review process generally, and in relation to each review case. Information on individual cases was recorded in a database established for the purpose of this study.

2.7 In order to provide a general perspective on the review process from the minerals operators, the 3 principal industry representative bodies - Quarry Products Association, British Aggregates Association and the Confederation of UK Coal Producers (Coalpro) - were consulted, with meetings held with representatives of the former 2 organisations.

2.8 For the purposes of progressing the initial collection of data from the planning authorities, a nominated contact official was established. For most authorities, this initial contact was also used to confirm the organisational and administrative arrangements of the authority in relation to the review process.

Planning registers

2.9 There is a statutory requirement on all planning authorities to maintain a public register containing basic details of every planning application received and the decision. This provides a potentially invaluable source of information relevant to the research study, insofar as it contains details of each application for the approval of a new scheme of conditions and a record of the eventual decision. However given that for most authorities the resources required to identify an individual review case contained within a register of hundreds, and in many cases, several thousand entries, it reality the use of the general registers was not a feasible proposition. For this reason the use of the planning registers was restricted to situations where the planning authority could initially identify the relevant planning application reference number(s).

2.10 However, for the purpose of monitoring of progress on the review, or for minerals development monitoring or enforcement, some authorities have established separate registers in addition to the general register required by statute. Where these were available, they were used in gathering basic information on individual review cases.

2.11 In addition to the registers held by the planning authority, the contractor holds and maintains databases of all planning applications and decisions for the past 5 years for 11 planning authorities. This unique resource is used in connection with property searches, but was used in the study to initially identify review cases within these local authority areas. This facility was also used in the study as an independent means of verifying information supplied by these planning authorities.

Questionnaires

2.12 A questionnaire was used as the primary means of collecting information from the planning authorities. The questionnaire was in 2 parts - the first covering overall and general aspects of the review; the second covering details of each review case/ site. A copy of the questionnaire is attached to this report as Appendix 1.

2.13 Recognising the common difficulties associated with postal questionnaires in general, and major variations in the number of cases between different planning authorities, a number of methods were used to enhance the likelihood of completion. These included:

• Completion of the questionnaire by telephone (with prior arrangement) for those authorities with few review cases, ie 2 or less active sites subject to review
• Completion of the questionnaire as part of a meeting with the relevant planning officials - for those authorities with relatively large numbers of review cases, and/ or the subject of a case study
• By post with prior arrangement

2.14 On completion of the Part 2 questionnaire returns, information gathered on each review site was entered into the cases database.

Case studies

2.15 In order to provide deeper insights on specific issues and aspects of the review process a series of case studies were undertaken. The case studies were of 2 types, namely:

• Detailed examination of the approach adopted by the local authority, notably in terms of how the review process was administered and managed. These studies were based on a combination of review of relevant documentation, for example, initial and progress reports by planning officials to committee, and structured interviews (see 2.17 below)
• Detailed examination of individual review cases to provide a better understanding of common issues and/ or specific aspects of the review process. The study of individual cases was primarily undertaken through review of committee reports, supplemented by interviews

2.16 For reasons of confidentiality, the case studies are not specifically identified or described within this report, but in most cases, they provide the basis on which the "best practice" recommendations are made.

Structured interviews and meetings

2.17 For those planning authorities with a larger review workload, and/ or selected for the purposes of case study, meetings were held with the relevant planning officials of the following authorities:

• Aberdeenshire Council
• Angus Council
• Argyll & Bute Council
• Falkirk Council
• Fife Council
• Highland Council
• West Lothian Council

In each case, the meeting was initially structured around the format of the questionnaire, prior to examination and discussion of those aspects or cases of particular interest.

RESPONSE RATES

2.18 Although considerable effort was made to achieve a response rate of 100% it was generally accepted by the Steering Group that this was unlikely. Indeed a feature of the study was the general delay in obtaining initial responses of any kind from a significant number of planning authorities.

2.19 Ultimately responses were received from 25 of the 32 planning authorities, representing a response rate by authority of 78%. It should be noted however that only partial returns were made by 5 of these authorities. The returns for these authorities were generally confined to completion of Part A of the questionnaire only, or summaries of case monitoring/ progress report sheets.

2.20 However, the returns incorporated 145 of the total number of 167 Phase 1 and 2 review cases, representing a response rate by cases of 87%. This was a reflection of the methodology adopted in the study, in which those authorities with the highest numbers of review cases were specifically targeted in the initial stages. It should be noted that 5 of the 7 non-responding authorities had 4 or less cases subject to review. For the 145 cases accounted for within the study, detailed information was obtained for 95 of these cases, together with a further 7 IDO cases.

2.21 Thus while failing to achieve complete coverage, the response rate achieved was sufficiently high to facilitate robust and reliable analysis. The sample incorporates a sound cross-section of the Scottish planning authorities in terms of geographical distribution, size, and internal working arrangements. It also incorporates the full range of forms of extraction and mineral types found within Scotland.

« Previous | Contents | Next »