Land Reform Policy Group: Identifying the Problems (February 1998)

6. Land use

6.1 Improving the way in which land is used is at the centre of the Group’s agenda. The aim is to find ways of maximising desirable land use - which the Group defines as sustainable rural development which can make local populations more self-reliant, increase their economic independence, and provide them with a better quality of life, while conserving and where possible enhancing the environment, both for now and for the future. And equally the aim is to discourage undesirable land use - which the Group defines as activity or inactivity which results in population loss, the inhibition of desirable local activity and damage to the natural heritage. At times there will be tensions amongst the different aspects of these objectives so that solutions will require balances and trade-offs.

6.2 The Government has a wide range of regulatory, advisory and financial instruments relevant to this, both at its own hand and in the hands of the Forestry Commission, Scottish Natural Heritage and the enterprise bodies; and local authorities also have wide-ranging powers to this end. The range of these existing schemes is daunting (particularly for small and medium sized enterprises). Is part of the solution to focus and integrate these better to promote desirable land use (even though the European dimension is a significant limiting factor)? On the environmental side, the proposals to merge the Countryside Premium Scheme and the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Scheme is a step in the right direction; and the Agenda 2000 proposals for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy may help in due course.

6.3 There is a long history of encouraging desirable land use through the development and promotion of good practice. How far can the Government continue to rely on a voluntary approach, supported by advice and information, as a way of achieving good management of land? Some commentators have suggested that land management plans should be required as condition of any Government grant. In principle this is an attractive idea, as such plans would provide a mechanism for integrating support. But it would be difficult to include relevant EU schemes in such arrangements. And it is difficult to see how such arrangements could be effectively policed without a massive increase in bureaucracy. An associated idea is that cross-compliance should be introduced to ensure that receipt of public subsidy is dependent upon desirable land use. Again the idea is appealing, but the same practical difficulties apply. Could such conditions help?

6.4 Some 18% of the land area of Scotland is covered by statutory natural heritage designations: the figure is higher in the Highlands and Islands which have a disproportionately large share of the UK’s and Europe’s areas of outstanding natural heritage. (In addition, there are some 6,600 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and 47,000 Listed Buildings across the country.) There is some criticism that current arrangements for environmental designations can inhibit rural development. There is a tension between the requirement under European Directives to base nature conservation designations on objective scientific criteria and the need for these to be applied sensitively and with regard to the views and interests of local communities. The Group believes that heritage designations and environmental protection measures should wherever possible generate social and economic benefits for local people. The SSSI system (which applies to GB as a whole) is under review. Issues include how the system can be developed to achieve the maximum possible integration of natural heritage and socio-economic objectives, and take more account, within the framework of international nature conservation commitments, of the views of local communities. Procedures for compensation under SNH management agreements will also be examined, with a view to moving to a system based on positive incentives. In order to reflect distinctive Scottish circumstances, the Government plans to issue a separate Scottish consultation paper on the future of the SSSI system later this year. The Group will wish to take account of the outcome of this in due course.

6.5 Further protection will come through the establishment of National Parks in Scotland, starting with Loch Lomond and the Trossachs. Again, the Group believes that these must integrate economic and social development with the proper protection of the natural heritage. The structure and powers necessary to achieve this are likely to differ from area to area, reflecting different circumstances. The Government has asked SNH, in consultation with the relevant local authorities and others, to identify areas within Scotland which would benefit from designation as National Parks, to suggest the specific structure for each area to take forward development of an integrated management strategy, and make proposals as to the powers required in each area to implement that management strategy. SNH’s proposals will be the subject of separate consultation during 1998. Again, the Group will wish to take account of the outcome of this in due course.

6.6 How best to discourage undesirable land use if the normal operation of market forces plus the present range of Government incentives and controls fail to deliver the desired outcome in terms of sustainable development? One mechanism for addressing these failures would be to extend the definition of development under the statutory planning system to cover agricultural and forestry-related development. The planning system is there to secure the efficient and effective development and use of land in the public interest, taking into account objectives for the conservation and enhancement of the natural and built environment. Planning authorities already have a vehicle for influencing decisions about the location of development in the countryside through the operation of the development planning system, backed up by statutory arrangements for development control and enforcement powers. They also have an important part to play in considering suitable locations for forestry development through the use of Indicative Forestry Strategies and through their involvement in consultations on woodland proposals. The forthcoming National Planning Policy Guideline on rural development will provide a sound basis for planning authorities to adopt a more co-ordinated and proactive approach to rural development. The Group welcomes this initiative, and hopes that planning authorities will respond as positively as possible. The Group believes that this will help provide a framework to underpin appropriate local strategies for rural development and to generate pilot projects, which can then serve as a basis for promoting desirable land use and inhibiting undesirable land use in terms of local circumstances and needs.

6.7 At present, most agricultural and forestry-related development is exempt from planning control. It is sometimes suggested that this exemption should be modified or abolished. The Group is aware of the practical difficulties and significant resource implications of such a change. To what extent do the existing arrangements cause problems, and could changes to the land use planning system help?

6.8 Some commentators have suggested that there should be new financial penalties for undesirable land use. The main difficulties with this are practical - difficulties of defining undesirable land use in legislation; and of policing such legislation, other than by the creation of an inspectorate, which would have significant resource implications. Could this be justified?

6.9 It has been suggested that ultimately there needs to be a power of compulsory purchase in the event of undesirable land use which cannot be tackled otherwise. There have in the past been notorious instances of action (or inaction) by landowners, which all efforts to modify through persuasion and encouragement have proved fruitless. In such unusual circumstances where all other means have failed, might there need to be a power of compulsory purchase, with possible local community involvement, to secure a resolution?

6.10 At present, the approach in Scotland is to try to resolve on a voluntary basis the conflicts which can exist between landowners and walkers and other visitors, and SNH has secured agreement to an Access Concordat which seeks to balance the reasonable needs of the various parties. Any changes in the law on access in Scotland will be for the Scottish Parliament to introduce. To prepare the way for this, the Government has asked SNH to consider, in consultation with others, what changes in the law are required. SNH is taking this forward through the Access Forum with extended membership, and will issue a separate consultation paper on this later this year. The Group will wish to take account of the outcome of this in due course.

6.11 A more specific issue relates to the foreshore. Sometimes this is owned by the Crown, sometimes by private landowners. If a landowner has a title which covers the foreshore, this carries the right to control how others use it. However the landowner’s rights are subject to public rights over the foreshore, particularly in connection with navigation and fishing. The Group recognises that it would be a serious step to reduce or remove an owner’s right to preserve the interest associated with the landholding. Could a strengthening of public rights over the foreshore be justified?