The Scottish Government

Relevance to measure

The context variables are those that represent important aspects of the state of the system but where attribution of cause and effect will be difficult but which it might be hoped that land reform would contribute positively to

Number & frequency of visits

% & frequency of population taking outdoor access

Available - Scottish Recreation Survey BUT does not include non-leisure access-taking or the recreation of youths and non-residents of Scotland / Sustrans

supplementary data required on youths, non-leisure trips and non-residents of Scotland

All access takers

To assess the number of people taking the opportunity to visit and enjoy the countryside, and how often they go

Spatial distribution of access taken

GIS spatial distribution map of access taken by number and type of visit

Partly available - Scottish Recreation Survey records visits by LA area and % using a path on most recent visit and types of location visited BUT not sufficient detail desired by informants / Sustrans

Case studies, possibly employing GPS (see Bullivant, 2007)

All access takers

To assess the location and spatial degree to which there is a 'greater opportunity for people to visit and enjoy our countryside' ( e.g. to ascertain whether access is taken over same/different, larger/smaller areas)

Type of activity

% visits for each main activity type ( e.g. walking, canoeing, horse riding, cycling, nature watching)

Partly available - Scottish Recreation Survey / See Scott Porter 2005 for data specific to cycling-based recreation / Sustrans

supplementary data required on youths, non-leisure trips and non-residents of Scotland

All access takers

To assess the modes through which people choose to visit and enjoy the countryside (which can shape the outcomes of other criteria)

Relevance of measure

(A) Social
Social criteria should relate back to social capital. Social capital refers to networks and/or trust and new institutional formation and inter alia, we might wish to think about bridging and bonding capital

Degree of harmony amongst land managers/occupiers and access takers

Number & type of access incidents or issues reported

Partly available:
1. Formal incident reporting through SNH web-based system
2. Informal incident reporting of LAs & representative bodies
3. Scottish Recreation Survey (% access takers encountering problems on most recent visit, % access takers encountering another user behaving inappropriately, % access takers needing to alter route significantly due to barriers or problems)

Standardised data collation & collection required on reported problems - and survey using quantitative & qualitative techniques where no data exist

Scotland & local case studies

To gauge whether there is communication and a balancing of interests in the spirit of the access-related aim of LRSA "to create greater opportunity for people to visit and enjoy our countryside without interfering unduly with legitimate land management operations"

Health and wellbeing (physical and mental)

1. Perceived well-being
2. % population with lifestyle-related medical conditions.

1. More data required - limited data collected in SIRC (2007) and Land Use Consultants (2004)
2. Partly available in national health statistics

See PFAP (2006) for information on Health Impact Assessment methodologies and Forest Research (2006)

Land managers & access takers

To assess the extent to which 'greater opportunity for people to visit and enjoy our countryside' affects health

Social inclusion

Diversity in participation in outdoor activities

Partly available - Scottish Recreation Survey / Bell et al. (2006) for deaf visitors specifically / Forthcoming FCS study on barriers to access study

Further data collection through survey required to cover different axes of diversity (Complementary qualitative analysis would be necessary to understand why a particular pattern of participation exists).

Representation of ethnic minorities, disabilities, class, gender, age, sexuality etc

To assess precisely which people are provided with a 'greater opportunity …to visit and enjoy our countryside'

Benefits of access measures for sustainable transport

Change in % and frequency of non-leisure, off-road access

Partly available:
1. SIRC (2007) has data on '% choosing to use path network as alternative to car'
2. Sustrans have limited statistics

Further data collection through survey required

Sub-regional scale of analysis needed

To assess the extent to which greater or clearer access opportunities affect transport behaviour

(B) Economic(financial)
Economic capital refers to the financial resources of the community. This might be explored in relation to the community as a whole, the land based community and at household or collective level. We might want to think about non-market but still economic values here

Impact on economy

1. Spend per visit
2. Change in employment

1. Scottish Recreation Survey records 'spend per visit'
2. Forests for People evaluation (Forest Research, 2006) measures impacts of forests relating to employment ( NB and evaluates Gross Value Added of forest visitor spending)

NBSIRC (2007) give useful overview of existing economic impacts studies relating to access.

In land management, access, recreation and tourism sectors. ( NB spend per recreational type is useful where possible)

To assess the positive or negative effects greater or clearer access provision on employment and £ brought into local, regional and national economies.

Viability of access-related businesses

1. Change in profit margins of access-related enterprises
2. No. of access-related businesses

No data available

Requires quantitative survey.
Plus: see SIRC (2007)

Business units relating to land management, tourism, recreation & leisure

To assess changes in incomes and costs for different kinds of businesses relating to greater or clearer access provision.

Adequacy of resources for access provision

1. LA expenditure on human resources & infrastructure
2. Net difference between costs incurred and income gained relating to access provision

1. LMC data on income from access options/Limited data in MVA (forthcoming) on land manager expenditure
2. LA data on access expenditure

Income from LMC access option minus land manager costs of access provision
See also unpublished study for SNH done by Peter Scott Planning Services for expenditure

1. Land management unit
2. LA

To assess the degree to which the delivery of public benefits from LRSA is enabled (or otherwise) through funding provision.

Targeting of resources for access provision

Concurrence between supply and demand of access investment or infrastructure

LMC data on take-up of access options
Survey required to assess access investment needs

Existing LMC data to be overlain with survey data from regional audit of requirements for access investment or infrastructure

Land management unit / LA unit for audit

To assess the effectiveness of public spend on access provision through land management means.

(C) Human
Human capital refers to the individual capacities and often is associated with education and training

Awareness of LRSA/ SOAC

% of people aware of LRSA or SOAC

Existing data available:
Qs on 'awareness of new legislation' and 'awareness of SOAC' in both SRS & Progressive (2006) (the latter includes visitors as well as residents of Scotland) / George Street Research Ltd (2006) for data specific to young people

Needs to also cover land managers & non-residents of Scotland & under 16s

Land managers
Access-takers
Population of Scotland
Visitors to Scotland

To assess the degree to which people are aware that there is recent legislation delineating their rights and responsibilities.

Knowledge of content of LRSA/ SOAC

Knowledge of content of SOAC

Partly available:
Q on 'What SOAC asks people to do' and 'What SOAC asks land managers to do' in SRS / More detailed data on young people only in George Street Research Ltd (2006)

Survey - Methods used in George Street Research Ltd (2006) for studying knowledge of young people could inform broader understanding of knowledge amongst adults

Land managers & access takers

To assess the degree to which people know what their access rights and responsibilities are.

Understanding of reasons underpinning (ir)responsible behaviour (vis-à-vis SOAC)

Interpretation of principle of 'responsibility' (to then be linked to access-related behaviour)

Further data required:
Limited data on young people's appreciation of possible impacts of their actions in George Street Research Ltd (2006) / possibly MVA (forthcoming)

Further in-depth qualitative analysis required ( e.g. examining: understandings of the countryside & natural heritage; behaviours, values and norms relating to notions of 'rights' and 'responsibility')

Purposive sampling of main land management and actual and potential access taking groups

To understand how knowledge of LRSA/ SOAC, and the reasons behind it, shapes actual access-related behaviour.

(D) Environmental
Environmental capital is the natural capital embodied in forests, soils, land etc. it will include non-market goods such as biodiversity as well as forms of natural capital which allow profitable resource management.

Environmental condition (regarding access and its management)

1. Path and vegetation condition
2. Number and distribution of key species

Further data required:
ad hoc data available - SNH study in progress on impacts of access on sensitive sites

Collation of existing data & GIS-based survey to fill gaps

Sampling of different vegetation types &/or species

To assess the extent to which access taking has a negative environmental impact.

Environmental services provided by access

Physical accessibility of routes vis-à-vis vegetation condition i.e no damage to environment

No data available

Quantitative & qualitative survey

Sampling of different vegetation types

To assess the extent to which access taking has a positive environmental impact.

(E) Physical
Physical capital refers the man-made physical infrastructure

Area of land/water over which access rights are not exercisable

Area of land or water (km2) exempted from LRSA 2003

Limited data available from LA and legal proceedings - further data collection required

Survey

LA

To assess the spatial extent to which there is 'greater opportunity to visit and enjoy our countryside'

Physical characteristics of Core Paths

Length (km), location, connectivity & affordances (appropriateness for different uses & abilities) of Core Paths

No data available
Some data may become available after Feb 2008 once Core Path Plans have been drawn up by Local Authorities.

GIS-based survey with ground truthing

( LA)

To assess the spatial characteristics of the 'opportunity to visit and enjoy our countryside' vis-à-vis different abilities & activities

(F) Cultural (symbolic )
Symbolic and cultural capital refers to how assets are perceived and their importance in society and culture over and above any economic values

Enjoyment and quality of experience of access

Levels of enjoyment and quality of experience of access

Further data required:
No data available looking specifically at before and after LRSA 2003

Examination of experiential qualities of access taking. In-depth qualitative case study approach, possibly using 'observant participation' or audio-visual techniques

Principal types of access taker

To assess how much, and the ways in which, people 'enjoy our countryside'

Confidence to exercise rights

1. perceived confidence to exercise access rights
2. degree to which information ( e.g. signs) are SOAC-compliant

Partly available:
1. MVA (forthcoming) are looking at levels of 'comfort' in taking access
2. MCoS gathering a signs library

Further survey work required to gain sufficient information on who is confident (or not) in exercising access rights and under which circumstances

Access takers and land managers

To ascertain whether the ambiguity perceived over access rights pre-Act has been addressed (and if not, why not)

(G) Institutions & processes
within the livelihoods framework are the institutions, organisations, policies and legislation that shape livelihoods. Their importance cannot be over-emphasised. They operate at all levels, from the household to the international arena, and in all spheres, from the most private to the most public.

Effectiveness of conflict prevention & resolution mechanisms

1. effectiveness & speed of problem resolution
2. number & type of incidents reported

Further data required - ad hoc data on incident reporting held by LAs and representative bodies

Standardised data collection required to analyse effectiveness

LA

To assess how well LRSA/ SOAC co-ordinates the various interests involved in access to fulfil its aim.

Promotion and inclusivity of core paths planning process

Representation of stakeholder perspectives in core paths planning process

Should become partly available: Raw data on responses to Core Path-related consultation exercises should exist by Feb 2008

Content & Stakeholder Analysis of procedures & responses

LA

Allows an assessment of how representative Core Path stakeholder engagement has been.

Core Path Plan status, implementation progress & review procedure

1. No. of Core Path Plans drafted for consultation by Feb 2008
2. Degree to which Core Path Plans implemented by review date
3. No. of Core Path Plans reviewed every 5 years

Some data may become available after Feb 2008 through Core Paths planning process

Survey

LA

Enables a check on the progress of drafting Plans, keeping them under review, and the degree to which the Plans lead to material changes.