Capital Type | Specific criteria | Preferred Indicator | Evidence and availability of indicator (or close proxy) | Methods required for assessment | Social/spatial/temporal scale of assessment | Relevance of measure |
|---|
(A) Social | Trust Openness and transparency is a measure that has been used in surveys in process of designation/ review by nature conservation authority | Change in level of trust by affected actors from T1 to T2 | NA | Survey
SNH Customer care Surveys 2001 & 2007 | At individual SSSI
T1-T2 as agreed
Site owners and managers | A key feature of the reform's intention |
Community sense of self determination with respect to external regulation | % of community feeling increased capacity for self determination with respect to land use decisions relating to SSSIs (T1-T2) | NA | Survey | At community level
T1-T2 as agreed | Assesses the sense of community participation
Potentially useful future measure. Quite low just now but emerging policy and aspirations to increase community involvement. Realisation will depend on many factors. |
Active local input into site management statement | Numbers of local actors involved T1, T2, T3
Only site owners and occupiers (but 100% of them) offered opportunity to input. | NA Need to define 'local' | Survey or review of possible records of land owner/ SNH
SNH Customer care Surveys 2001 & 2007 | At site or community level | Assesses direct engagement in site management and monitoring by local actors |
Volunteering in site management | No. of volunteer days | Readily easily estimable | Site manager records | Site or community | Assesses local engagement
Only currently relevant to sites owned and managed by SNH (as NNRs) or by NGOs. Others are private land managed by their owner's/ occupier's economic purposes. |
(B) Economic (financial) | Degree of SPS dependency for SSSI affected units | SPS as a % of NFI on affected farms | Not available as subset of farms/rural business units | Survey of affected farms | Sectoral summary would sufficeT1-T2 as agreed | Indicates shift towards new policy imperative |
Reduced transaction costs in negotiated settlement of SSSI disputes* | Average cost per agreement
% of cases going to land court for arbitration
% of ORC consent cases resolved amicably without compensation/grant | Not available
File check
File check | Survey (following Falconer and others work)
Land Court records
SNH File check | Sample of different types of payment model
No. as a proportion of total SSSIs [very few cases go to arbitration - may not give statistically meaningful trend]
Could be sample based | Indicates admin efficiency
Indicates breakdown of relations
Indicates confidence in system |
Net income directly derived from SSSI agreement | Net income from SSSI designation per holding | SNHMA costs available on SNH website through "facts and figures" | Check of SNH files | Could be broken down regionally or by SSSI type | Indicates internalisation of externality and correction of market failure |
Indirect income from enhanced green infrastructure | Representation of protected areas in tourism literature | Not available | Survey of local economy and tourism businesses | Case study of region/subregion/
parish | Indicates wider local capture of value of EGSs |
Income from Natural Care management agreements* | Income received from Natural Care as % of total household Income | SNHMA costs available on SNH website through "facts and figures" | Survey of SSSI owners/managers | Site level, based on sample | Indicates how EGS enhancement can be valorised |
Non-market values _ of EGS | See under Env capital below | Some case study evidence | Survey | Site or sub-regional scale | Highly relevant to economy, where non-market values prevail |
(C) Human | Skill base in nature conservation management | % of SSSI owners and managers [and agents and factors?] with relevant training
% of site owners and mangers with Conservation management components in FE/ HE courses | NA
NA | Survey
Survey | The LMU | Indicates likelihood of sympathetic management regime
Quite a weak indicator as it shows training not attitudes |
Appreciation of legitimacy of different perspectives on natural environment | Scaled assessment of legitimacy of agency values
Scaled assessment
of legitimacy of farmer values | NA
NA | Survey
Survey
SNH Customer Care Surveys 2001 & 2007 | LMU
SNH | Indicates narrowing of gulf between NC and LMU interests |
Confidence in one-to-one negotiation with nature conservation authority | Scaled self assessment of confidence to negotiate | NA | SNH Customer Care Surveys 2001 & 2007 | LMU | Indicates reduction in confrontational view and ability to negotiate |
Positive interactions with nature conservation authority | % positive interactions as % of total | NA | SNH Customer Care Surveys 2001 & 2007 | LMU | Indicates reduction in confrontational view |
(D) Environmental | SSSIs condition | % favourable or unfavourable (improving) over time | Available | SNH records | By landowner type/region and over T1-T2 | This shows whether the nature conservation authority is delivering on its core purpose [Whilst legislation provides the tools, site condition and related targets are functions of government policy] |
SSSI with formal access provision | % with formal access | Probably available from SNH site files
Or by GIS analysis of SSSI polygons against long distance routes and core path networks etc (the latter when available from LAs) | SNH records | By site type | Indicates link to EGS provision
SSSI legislation and policy currently makes no provision/ requirement to provide/ promote public access. May be developed on some SSSI (as now) where appropriate and where resources allow and demand is apparent. |
Value of Ecosystem Goods and Services associated with designated areas | Non-market value of designated area | Needs baseline and continual survey. Neither currently available. [Emerging policy to try and identify env service values in SSSI site management statements. If agreed, this will become more apparent over the next few years. Likely to identify qualitative values] | Survey (of rather sophisticated nature) indicating _ | Aggregate and by site type | Shows value of _ EGS in monetary terms |
(E) Physical | Access facilities at site | Presence absence | May be on SNH file | Check files | Site level | A crude indicator- site may not be accessible |
Interpretive facilities at site | Presence absence | May be on SNH file | Check files | Site level | A crude indicator-site may be inaccessible/inappropriate |
Parking at site | Presence absence | May be on SNH file | Check files | Site level | A crude indicator-site may be inaccessible/inappropriate |
Representation of SSSI site components in local identity | Content analysis of parish/community council publications or place-related websites | NA | Survey/content analysis | At appropriate local scale (parish community council) | Not easily reducible to indicator but yields evidence of local values towards local 'nature' |
(F) Cultural (symbolic ) | Involvement of community in LBAP actions | No of LBAP projects in community | NA | Survey of LBAP records | At parish, community council level | Indicates involvement of community in biodiversity management and nature
Though not necessarily relevant to SSSIs |
Community endorsement of SNH approach to SSSI management | Attitude scale | NA | Survey | At parish, community level | Indicates endorsement of SNH values (and change from earlier position)
As for above - providing it assesses communities valuation and appreciation of the sites/ features rather than the administrative and legal procedures in which they have not been given a role after notification |
Scottish Land Court referrals | No. of referrals as % of total SSSIs | Records reasonably readily available | Record check | Aggregate or by region, T1-T2 | Indicates land manager disagreement
None to date. Only expected to be a rare event. May not give statistically meaningful trend. |
(G) Institutions & processes
| Natural Care management agreements on SSSIs | % of SSSI in receipt of natural care payment | Simple record check | Record check
Available from SNH - by No SSSIs; by area of SSSIs, by No of parties; etc | Aggregate or by region, T1-T2 | Indicates uptake of positive management
Planned to decline as RDC introduced and current (mostly 5 year) Natural Care scheme agreements expire. |
Site Management Statements complete | % of total | Simple record check | Record check | Aggregate or by region, T1-T2 | Indicates communication of basis for management to various parties
Near 100% issued between 1994 and 2004. 100% to be reviewed and (re)issued between 2005 and 2010. Not therefore a very informative measure. |
Simplification of site administration | No. of ORCs/No of previous PDOs | Check of SSSIORC lists | Record check
SNH can provide baseline number of PDOs (at Nov 2004) and reports of No of current ORCs | By site or by SSSI series - which will avoid the site-specific variability [removal of ORCs done on a site-by-site basis to reflect the site's interests, local factors and current legislation] | Assesses degree by which legislation simplifies site management
Relevant measure until 2010 and completion of the current SSSI documents review programme. Thereafter the No of ORCs will remain +/- stable except primarily for site notifications and denotifications. |