Scotland: biodiversity and the positive effects requirement

This article covers Scotland only. There is no statutory biodiversity metric and no mandatory 10 per cent net gain in Scotland. The biodiversity Scotland planning requirement comes from National Planning Framework 4, adopted in February 2023, which forms part of the development plan and requires development to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity. For national and major development the test is more demanding: the proposal must demonstrate that it will leave biodiversity in a demonstrably better state than without the development, including future maintenance.

Developers used to the English regime find this harder rather than easier, because there is no calculator to hide behind.

What Scottish policy requires instead of a metric

NPF4 sets biodiversity policy for the whole of Scotland, sitting alongside each authority's local development plan. The policy expects development to contribute to the restoration of nature rather than merely to avoid harm, and it asks for that contribution to be evidenced.

Because the test is qualitative, the evidence has to carry the argument. An assessment that lists habitat enhancements without establishing what was there before, and without explaining how the enhancement will be secured and maintained, does not demonstrate a better state. The absence of a metric means the reporting officer is making a judgement, and judgements are persuaded by baselines, quantities, management commitments and monitoring.

In practice the strongest submissions quantify anyway. Habitat areas before and after, species lists, the extent of new planting, the length of new hedgerow, the number of integrated bird and bat features: all expressed as numbers even though no national methodology requires them.

How the development hierarchy changes the test

Scotland classifies applications as national, major or local development, and the classification determines which limb of the biodiversity policy applies.

So the first question on any Scottish site is which class the application falls into, since it changes the evidence burden substantially. Our note on the hierarchy of developments in Scotland explained sets out the thresholds and the procedural consequences that follow from each class.

Proportionality is real for local development. A single house extension is not expected to produce a habitat management plan, and an authority asking for one has misread the policy. A ten house scheme on a greenfield edge is a different matter.

Evidence for significant biodiversity enhancement

The sequence that works mirrors good ecological practice anywhere, with the Scottish policy test layered on top.

1. Desk study, covering designated sites, protected species records and the local biodiversity action plan.
2. A habitat survey establishing the baseline, with target notes and a mapped habitat plan.
3. Species specific surveys where the habitat survey indicates the potential, in the correct seasons.
4. An assessment of effects on each receptor, with mitigation following the avoid, minimise, restore sequence.
5. Enhancement proposals that go beyond mitigation, tied to the habitats and species actually present.
6. A habitat management plan with responsibilities, a timescale and monitoring triggers.
7. A statement explaining how, taken together, the proposals leave biodiversity in a better state.

The baseline survey is the part that cannot be compressed. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal carried out in the right season, by a suitably qualified ecologist, is what the rest of the case stands on, and councils in Scotland are as likely as English ones to refuse an application whose ecology work was done in December.

Nature networks and connectivity

NPF4 introduced the expectation that development contributes to nature networks: linked habitats that allow species to move across a landscape rather than sit in isolated pockets. That shifts the design question from how much habitat to where the habitat goes.

What officers look for is connection. A new hedgerow that links two existing woodland blocks does more for the policy than the same length of hedge planted in isolation, and a wildlife corridor along a watercourse running through the site delivers more than an equivalent area of amenity grassland. Gaps matter too: a fence line without mammal gaps, or a lit corridor that bats will not use, breaks the connection the plan is trying to make.

Several authorities are identifying local nature networks through their development plans and supplementary guidance. Check the local development plan and any published mapping early, because a scheme that cuts across an identified network has a problem that landscaping cannot fix.

Protected species law in Scotland

The legislation differs from England and the distinction matters for licensing. European protected species in Scotland are dealt with under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, not the 2017 Regulations that apply in England and Wales, and licences are issued by NatureScot. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 applies, as amended for Scotland by later Scottish legislation, and it protects a wide range of species, nests and places of shelter.

A survey for bats, great crested newts, otters, water voles, badgers, red squirrels or pine martens, and any mitigation licence that follows, requires a suitably licensed ecologist. That is not a document a developer can assemble, and PlanScope's Protected Species Survey draft is a starting point for that licensed professional rather than a substitute for them.

Illustrative example: a 60 unit scheme on the edge of a Scottish town, classified as major development. The site holds semi-improved grassland, a drystone dyke used by nesting birds and a burn along the eastern boundary with otter signs recorded downstream. The submission sets out the habitat baseline with areas, retains and buffers the burn with a 12m corridor, creates species rich grassland on the areas of poorest existing habitat, rebuilds the dyke with retained stone, installs integrated nest features, and secures a 30 year management plan. The otter work is carried out under NatureScot advice by a licensed ecologist. Those figures are illustrative.

Who assesses and who signs off

The ecological work should be carried out by an ecologist with relevant experience and professional standing, typically membership of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management at an appropriate grade, and a NatureScot licence where protected species are involved.

NatureScot is consulted on proposals affecting designated sites and protected species, and its advice carries substantial weight. The planning authority makes the decision. There is no equivalent of the English biodiversity gain plan approval stage, so there is no second approval gate after permission, which puts more weight on getting the conditions and the management plan right first time.

Professional review of a draft before submission is worth the cost on any major scheme, and PlanScope's professional directory is the route to that review.

Where the Scottish approach diverges from England

Four differences are worth holding onto.

There is no statutory metric, no 10 per cent figure and no mandatory gain plan, so compliance is demonstrated by evidence and judgement rather than by a calculation. The English Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment, which the Environment Act 2021 regime expects a competent person to produce using the statutory metric, has no Scottish counterpart. Securing enhancement long term is done through conditions or an obligation under section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 rather than through a gain plan. And off-site units and statutory credits, which underpin much English delivery, do not exist as a formal mechanism in Scotland, so enhancement is expected on site or through locally agreed arrangements.

PlanScope's drafting is grounded in English national policy and local plans, so a Scottish application needs the reviewer to check NPF4 and the relevant local development plan.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Scottish policy and licensing requirements change, so confirm the current position with the planning authority and NatureScot before relying on it. For specialist technical reports, qualified professional input may be required.

PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.