« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
APPENDIX 2: TOPIC GUIDE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC FOCUS GROUPS
INTRODUCTION/WARM UP - 10 MINS
Introduce self and Ipsos MORI
Explain purpose of the research:
- Ipsos MORI has been commissioned by the Scottish Executive to conduct a programme of research among the general public looking at aspects of the Scottish environment and the Scottish Landscape. (If ask, say that we'll explain more later on but don't want to pre-judge what issues you think are important)
- We are not expecting people to have given a lot of thought to the subject or to be knowledgeable. We will be talking to a range of people in different locations across Scotland.
- Ipsos MORI's independence and guarantee of confidentiality.
Explain group should last around 1hr 30 minutes. Check everyone is ok with this. Tell participants where the nearest fire exits, toilets are etc.
Request permission to record (can be turned off at any point).
Warm up exercise/Participant introductions (Ask them to speak to neighbour, ask them what they would and wouldn't miss about the Scottish landscape if they went to live abroad, then introduce them)
ENVIRONMENT IN GENERAL - 10 MINS
Word association: What words come to mind when you think of "the Scottish landscape".
PROBE: different parts of Scotland?
this area?
urban/rural areas?
different features?
how would you describe it to someone from China who had never been here?
Is there anything particularly distinctive about it?
There's a lot of talk these days about environmental or 'green' issues. Thinking about Scotland's environment. How good a state do you think it is in?
PROBE: How does it compare to other parts of the UK?
Other parts of the world?
What's good about it?
What's bad about it?
What are the biggest threats to it?
(What do you think we should be doing about it?)
(What action should individual members of the public like ourselves be taking?)
WATER ENVIRONMENT - 10 MINS
Thinking back to school, can you remember what the "water cycle" is? SHOW DIAGRAM A.
I'd like to talk now about Scotland's water in particular. What are all the different bodies of water in Scotland? For example, rivers… what else? USE FLIP CHART TO LIST DIFFERENT BODIES AND CHECK GOT: rivers, burns, lochs, pools, reservoirs, canals, coastal waters, underground water. I'll use the term "water environment" to cover all these different bodies .WRITE "WATER ENVIRONMENT" at top of list.
Thinking about Scotland's water environment. How healthy do you think it is?
PROBE: Different bodies of water?
Different parts of Scotland?
This area?
Urban/rural areas?
How does it compare to other parts of the UK?
Other parts of Europe?
What is a "good" water environment?
What are the biggest threats to it?
What are the biggest threats to the water environment in this area?
What do you think we should be doing about it?
What action should individual members of the public like ourselves be taking?
USES AND PRESSURES - 1O MINS
Can we compile a list of different uses of the water environment? (FLIP CHART)
PROMPT: in this area?
What do you use it for? How often?
industry, agriculture, fishing, water supply, leisure, wildlife.
USE DIAGRAM B AS A PROMPT IF NESS.
How do different uses affect the water environment?
What else do we do that affects it?
Which things are the most damaging?
Which do no damage or very little damage?
EXPLAIN: Some things which most of us don't think of harming the water environment actually can do some damage - for example, simply taking water out or putting it back in can alter the flow in a river, or the water levels in a loch and affect plants and animals. Putting it back at a different temperature can also affect them. Strengthening or straightening river banks, or putting in dams or flood defences can change the flow or course of a river and upset the ecological balance, and increase flood risk and increase erosion. However, there might be good reasons for doing these things and we might decide that the benefits outweigh the potential damage.
WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE - 10 MINS
Have you heard any information about changes to the way the water environment in Scotland is managed?
Have you ever heard of the Water Framework Directive?
EXPLAIN (AND GIVE OUT SUMMARY):
the Water Framework Directive is a piece of European legislation designed to improve the quality of all the water environments across the European Union.
There has been legislation to protect the water environment before - for example, laws about pollution, but the WFD is broader than that and aims to cover broader ecological issues - like the shape of water bodies, rate of flow and the impact on wildlife - and also take into account economic and social considerations.
Some exceptions will be allowed but the aim is that all of the water environment will reach what's called "good ecological status" by 2015.
Scotland has implemented this European legislation in the 2003 the Water Environment and Water Services Act - you don't need to remember that!
What's your reaction to all this?
PROBE: is it a good thing or bad thing?
Is it important?
What concerns do you have about it?
SCENARIOS - 25 MINS
I'd now like to talk about some of the sorts of scenarios that might come up and decisions about priorities that we might have to make about the water environment.
Scenarios….(probably time for 3 out of the 5 scenarios in each group) - 8 mins each
SCENARIO 1 (aiming to explore: flood prevention v habitat/ new houses built in risky areas v existing houses threatened because of changes in flow/ large number v small number of houses affected).
The River Eden is a small river which flows from the Benmore hills to the sea. In recent years, because of wetter weather in the winter, it has almost burst its banks. Twenty new houses in the area of Newton are threatened by flooding. The villages want flood defences put it to safeguard their homes. However, environmentalists say that the flood defences will threaten important wetland habitats a couple of miles upstream from Newton and endanger a rare species of bird as well as other plants and animals.
What do you think should happen?
PROBE: what should be taken into account?
Who should decide?
What if the houses in Newton had not yet been built, but had only recently received planning permission?
Slightly further downstream, twenty houses in the area of Auldton are now threatened by flooding. Most of these houses have been there for over fifty years and have never been flooded before. These people join the Newton residents in their campaign for flood defences.
Does this make a difference?
What if only three houses in total were threatened?
SCENARIO 2 (aiming to explore: 'good' status v 'very good' status/ agriculture v habitat/ larger more profitable enterprises v smaller less profitable enterprises)
Scientists have undertaken an assessment of the River Floom. They have concluded that it is ecologically pretty healthy. The main problem they have identified is pollution from the surrounding farmland. There are 8 small farms and 2 large farms in the area. They want the farmers to take various measures to minimise the pollution from fertilisers, pesticides and animal waste. The measures include fencing off the river banks so cattle can't trample the river banks and defecate in the water, a reduction in the number of cattle, a reduction in the use of fertilisers and pesticides, and creating buffer strips of a several metres between the river and the cultivated land. The farmers argue that they are struggling financially as it is and they cannot afford the reduction in profit that these measures will involve.
What do you think should happen?
Should the size of the farm matter?
Do the farmers' profits make a difference?
The farmers also argue that the river is pretty healthy. Although pollution from farmland might be the biggest problem - it's not actually that big a problem. They say that striving to make the river extremely healthy (e.g. 10 out of 10 rather than 8 out of 10) is not necessary. What do you think?
SCENARIO 3 (aiming to explore: economy v leisure interests/ economy v habitat/ tourism v 'necessary' housing/ general public saving water v increasing supply)
A firm wants permission to build a development of 250 holiday chalets. They say the development will bring a much needed boost to the local economy. However, the local water supply is already under strain and if the development goes ahead it will require a local loch to be dammed to create a sufficient supply of water all year round. The damming will affect the flow rate of the river which flows out of the loch and will mean that salmon will no longer be able to use the river as a spawning ground. Local environmentalists and salmon fishers think the development should not go ahead.
What do you think should happen?
What if the development was for affordable housing for local people rather than holiday chalets?
Environmentalists say that there would be no need to for an additional water supply if everyone in the area was much more conscious about saving water. They suggest that existing houses and the new chalets should have water meters fitted and everyone should cut their consumption by a third. What do you think of that suggestion?
SCENARIO 4 (aiming to explore: water environment v broader environmental issues/ energy v habitat/ energy v landscape/ energy v leisure/ economy v landscape/ economy v habitat/ economy v leisure)
To help meet targets for renewable energy production, there are plans to build an innovative new form of hydro-electric power station on the River Spate. This will provide sufficient power for the nearby town of 10,000 people. However, environmentalists object that the engineering works and the changes in flow will damage the habitat and affect fish stocks. Other people object because they say the power station will spoil a renowned beauty spot.
What do you think should happen?
The rivers is very popular with kayakers and they say the changes to the flow will severely limit the times they can use it. Does this make a difference?
The power station will employ 100 local people - many of whom have just been made redundant from a local factory. Does this make a difference?
SCENARIO 5 (aiming to explore: abstraction for industry v environmental concerns v economic development)
Badachlie is a small but successful whisky distillery. It would like to substantially increase production to meet the demand for its whisky. This would create around 20 new jobs. However, the local landowner objects that the additional water needed by the distillery from the River Achlie up-stream of his land, would damage the habitat and affect trout stocks. His livelihood and five of his staff depend on organising trout fishing holidays for tourists. Environmental groups also object that this will damage the habitat.
What do you think should happen?
An independent assessment of the impact of the distillery is undertaken. It concludes that there is enough water in the river for the majority of each year. for there to be no affect on the habitat and fish stocks, but recommends in times of low water, that the distillery should not be allowed to draw extra water. Does this make a difference?
PRIORITIES - 10 MINS
How would you prioritise the different uses of the water environment (go back to flip chart or write new list: agriculture, industry, leisure, domestic water supply, wildlife/habitat, energy, tourism). Top priority? Least important?
Should we try and raise the quality of the water environment across the board or focus on specific areas? Why? What specific areas?
PROBE ON SOME OF THESE IF TIME:
- PROBE specific geographical areas. (e.g. Loch Lomond, Solway Firth) Which ones? Why?
- PROBE particular types of geographical area (e.g. urban/rural, Central Belt/Highland) Which ones? Why?
- PROBE specific types of water body (e.g. coastal water, lochs, large rivers, wetlands, canals). Which ones? Why?
- (PROBE in relation to specific activities (e.g. abstraction, damming, pollution, sewage). Which ones? Why? PROBE ON EACH SPECIFIC ACTIVITY)
- (PROBE in relation to particular threats (ensuring adequate supply, flood defences, water quality and domestic supply, water quality and impact on wildlife/fishing) )
- PROBE pros/cons of numerous small improvements or few large-scale improvements.
Do you think we should aim to restore some of the water environment to how it was in the past?
Where do you think the biggest conflicts/clash of priorities will lie?
What should be taken into account when resolving these conflicts?
Which uses should be prioritised?
(Ideally, what position would you like Scotland's water environment to be in by 2015?)
(And what position do you think it actually will be in? Why?)
How important an issue is this?
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT - 5 MINS
EXPLAIN: One of the features of the new legislation is that there should be public involvement in decisions about what should be done to improve the water environment and what the priorities for improvement should be.
Do you think the public would be interested in being involved in decisions about the water environment?
What's the best way for the public to be involved?
Would you, personally, want to be involved?
What kinds of things do you think would prevent/discourage people like yourselves getting involved?
What might encourage you to get involved?
Finally - anything else you would like to say?
« Previous | Contents | Next »