Development management: when does NatureScot provide advice on development proposals?

Published: April 2026

NatureScot engages with the planning system to help deliver the right development in the right place. Our approach is set out in Planning for Great Places - service statement. which highlights four key ways we engage:

• Sharing our knowledge about Scotland’s nature
• Helping business increase investment in nature
• Supporting plan and place-making, for example through input to Local Development Plans
• Providing advice that enables good development

This note sets out our approach to the last of these: providing advice on individual development proposals when we are consulted by planning authorities and other decision-makers. It explains that our responses are focused on proposals where we consider the effects raise issues of national interest and explains how we identify these cases. We also welcome pre-application discussion with developers and consultants, our role in these is set out in Guidance for developers and their consultants

We encourage decision-makers to consult us on applications they have received which meet one of the criteria set out in our How and when to consult NatureScot checklist, for example, proposals affecting protected areas such as Special Protection Areas (SPA) and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC). These consultations are made through our InformedDECISION casework platform. InformedDECISION considers whether a consultation meets the criteria set out in our How and when to consult NatureScot checklist and if it does, the case will be passed on to one of our case officers.

Using the approach set out in Annex A, our case officers will consider whether a proposal is likely to have a significant effect on key natural heritage resources. Where significant effects are likely we will then consider whether any of the effects undermine the conservation, recovery or enhancement of nature of national or international importance. If we conclude that the conservation, recovery or enhancement of one or more of these features is significantly undermined, we consider that this raises an issue of ‘national interest’. 

This process is relatively straightforward for proposals affecting protected areas such as SPAs, SACs, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and National Scenic Areas (NSA). We do however recognise that nature of national importance occurs outside protected areas and may be affected by development proposals. Our guidance Identifying Natural Heritage Issues of National Interest in Development Proposals sets out our approach to considering cases affecting key natural resources (listed in Annex A of the National Interest guidance) and how we then respond.

Our assessment of whether effects of development raise issues of national interest involves professional judgement by operations staff and specialist advisers, reference to NatureScot guidance and other guidance, consideration of information provided with the application and other published sources of information, such as scientific papers. 

In cases where we conclude that a proposal raises issues of national interest, we will provide a response to the decision maker setting out our advice. This may be in the form of an objection, although outright objections are relatively infrequent. In cases where we conclude that the effects of a proposal don’t raise issues of national interest, we will not provide detailed advice. We recognise that there may be other significant effects on nature that need to be considered by the decision-maker and we have a range of guidance on our website to help with this. 

An exception to our approach of only providing detailed advice in cases which raise issues of national interest are those cases where effects closely approach, but don’t exceed, the national interest threshold. These are cases where our initial assessment, usually by a case officer, has indicated that issues of national interest are potentially raised, but further work is needed by us to reach a firm conclusion. In these cases, detailed consideration by specialist advisers and operations colleagues may subsequently conclude that, although nature of national importance is affected, the effects are just below the level at which we consider them to raise issues of national interest. In these cases, we may provide detailed advice since the detailed work already carried out by us to arrive at a conclusion may be useful to the decision-maker.

Annex A - NatureScot’s approach to considering significant effects

When we are consulted on development proposals by decision-makers such as planning authorities, or by other regulators, NatureScot considers whether there are significant effects on the natural heritage. These effects are the outcomes of impacts on natural heritage features. For example, an impact of a development might be removing an area of woodland and the effects might be a loss of ancient semi-natural woodland habitat and a breeding bird population and change to landscape character. When responding to consultations on development proposals we will only provide advice on those significant effects which we consider raise, or come close to raising, issues of national interest. We recognise that other significant effects may occur which should be taken into account by the decision-maker and we have a range of guidance and standing advice available on our website to help them with this.

When assessing whether an effect is significant NatureScot must take into account a range of factors including the legal and policy context, relevant NatureScot and other guidance, the information provided on impacts and the professional judgement of specialist advisers and other staff. We will consider how well potential negative effects have been mitigated in line with the mitigation hierarchy set out in NPF4. The wide variety of natural heritage interests which NatureScot provides advice on means that the legal, policy and guidance context varies depending on the type of interest affected (although some requirement such as EIA regulations apply across many interests). Our approach to these different interests is set out below. Whenever legislation or national policy changes we review our approach to ensure it remains appropriate in the changed context.

European sites (Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas) and Ramsar sites

Regulation 48 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, as amended (the “Habitats Regulations”) requires that any plan or project likely to have a significant effect on a European site must be subject to an appropriate assessment. This requirement is transposed into Policy 4 b) of National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4). European Court of Justice case law (the Waddenzee case) provided clarification on what constitutes a significant effect in this context: “…where a plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of a site is likely to undermine the site's conservation objectives, it must be considered likely to have a significant effect on that site. The assessment of that risk must be made in the light inter alia of the characteristics and specific environmental conditions of the site concerned by such a plan or project.” It is this approach, as explained in our European Site Casework Guidance, that NatureScot applies when considering whether a development management proposal is likely to have a significant effect on a European site. Following a policy update on protecting Ramsar sites in July 2025, the Scottish Government requires that Ramsar sites should be treated as European sites for the purposes of land use change decision making. This means that the approach taken by NatureScot to assessing likely significant effects on European sites also applies to Ramsar sites. As a result, our responses around Habitats Regulations Appraisals use the word significant in a very specific way in relation to the tests. 

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), National Scenic Areas (NSAs) and National Parks 

The legislation that applies to SSSIs (the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004) does not refer to “significant effects”. Policy 4 c of NPF4 states: “Development that affects a National Park, National Scenic Area, SSSI or National Nature Reserve will only be supported where:

• the objectives of designation and the overall integrity of the area will not be compromised; or:
• any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social, environmental or economic benefits of national importance”

We therefore regard an effect that could compromise the objectives of designation and the overall integrity of an SSSI, NSA or National Park as being a significant effect.

Guidance on assessing the effects on Special Landscape Qualities of NSAs and National Parks has been published by NatureScot and Scotland’s two National Park Authorities. This includes guidance on assessing whether effects on Special landscape Qualities are significant.

When considering proposals affecting SSSIs, NatureScot’s assessment will focus on significant effects on the natural features of the SSSI. Section 5.4 of NatureScot’s Development Management Guidance provides clarification of the concepts of objectives of designation and overall integrity.

Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

Section 83 of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 requires a regulator to decide whether a proposed activity and/or development is capable of affecting, other than insignificantly, the protected features of an MPA. Our approach to providing advice on this test is set out in our Nature Conservation MPA Development Management Guidance 

World Heritage Sites (WHS)

Policy 7 l) requires that development proposals affecting a WHS or its setting will only be supported where their Outstanding Universal Value is protected and preserved. Scottish Ministers’ decision on the Kirkton Energy hub and its effects on the Flow Country WHS was made in the context of Policy 4a) which states that development proposals which by virtue of type, location or scale will have an unacceptable impact on the natural environment will not be supported.

When considering a proposal affecting the natural Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the Flow Country WHS or St Kilda WHS NatureScot adopts the approach set out in the UNESCO guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage context

The UNESCO guidance is focused on assessment of impacts. It defines an impact as “The effects or consequences of a factor on the attributes of the heritage place, both in terms of the attributes’ state of conservation and their ability to convey the heritage/conservation values. An impact is the difference between a future environmental condition with the implementation of a development project, and the future condition without it.” Due to the wide range of WHS attributes the guidance does not set out what constitutes a significant impact on WHS Outstanding Universal Value.

Highland Council have also produced a Flow Country specific Impact Assessment Toolkit.

To maintain consistency with the UNESCO guidance NatureScot’s advice on developments affecting WHS OUV will continue to be expressed in terms of significant impacts on the attributes of the WHS.

Wild Land Areas (WLA)

Policy 4 g) of NPF4 sets out that certain types of development within Wild Land Areas will require a wild land impact assessment which sets out how significant impacts on wild land qualities will be minimised. 

NatureScot’s Assessing impacts on Wild Land Areas - technical guidance provides advice on assessing significant effects on wild land qualities and this is the approach we follow when considering whether a proposal will have a significant effect on a WLA.

Habitats and species not connected to protected areas

Policy 3 b) iii of NPF4 requires that for proposals for national or major development or development that requires an EIA an assessment of potential negative effects on biodiversity is made which should be fully mitigated in line with the mitigation hierarchy. 

NatureScot’s engagement on species and habitats not connected to protected areas is focused on species and habitats of outstanding conservation importance. These include:

• Habitats and species of EU importance as listed in Annexes I, II, IV & V of the Habitats Directive;
• Birds listed under Annex 1 of the Birds Directive and regularly occurring migratory species:
• Species listed in Schedules 1, 5 and 8 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981);
• UKBAP priority habitats or species;
• Scottish Biodiversity List habitats and species;
• Priority Marine Features
• Ancient and semi-natural woodland inventory sites; and
• Watercourses that support internationally important oceanic bryophyte communities

Our consideration of whether an effect on these interests is significant will follow the approach set out in the NatureScot and Historic Environment Scotland Environmental Impact Assessment Handbook and will also reflect the approach set out in the CIEEM Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment Version 1.3.   

Given the high sensitivity and value of priority peatland habitats, NatureScot has published guidance Advising on carbon-rich soils, deep peat and priority peatland habitat in development management. This provides advice on assessing the significance of effects of development proposals on these habitats and when these effects may raise issues of national interest. 

Our guidance Assessing the significance of impacts on bird populations from onshore wind farms that do not affect protected areas provides advice on assessing whether impacts of onshore wind farms are likely to adversely affect the conservation status of key bird species.

Landscape and visual impacts not affecting NSA, NP or WLA

Policy 11e of NPF4, which relates to energy, requires that: “In addition, project design and mitigation will demonstrate how the following impacts are addressed:

ii. significant landscape and visual impacts, recognising that such impacts are to be expected for some forms of renewable energy. Where impacts are localised and/or appropriate design mitigation has been applied, they will generally be considered to be acceptable.”

Our approach to identifying significant landscape and visual effects is in alignment with Landscape Institute Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA) and the wider landscape profession who follow this approach. It is an evidence-based process combined with professional judgement. We are careful that the use of the term ‘significant’ should convey issues that are material and that should be brought to the attention of the decision-maker.