Practitioner's Guide to Nature Networks

This guidance brings together and highlights considerations for Nature Network design. Primarily derived from Natural England’s “Summary for Practitioners”, it is underpinned by a review of the scientific literature regarding connectivity and Nature Network design. 

Contents

1. Background

This guidance brings together and highlights considerations for Nature Network design. Primarily derived from Natural England’s “Summary for Practitioners”, it is underpinned by a review of the scientific literature regarding connectivity and Nature Network design. 

The guidance here is not prescriptive, Local Authorities and partners are free to design, map and implement Nature Networks in ways most appropriate for the local context. The information in this document, alongside the Nature Networks Framework and the principles contained within it, will help create functional Nature Networks, delivered locally, but providing continuity and consistency at a regional and national level. Additional guidance can also be accessed on the Nature Networks Toolbox. 

1.1 What are Nature Networks?

A Nature Network connects together nature-rich sites including restoration areas and other environmental projects, through a series of areas of suitable habitat, habitat corridors and stepping-stones.

The primary purpose of a Nature Network is ecological connectivity, working at the local, national and regional scale, to improve connectivity and contribute towards fully functioning and healthy ecosystems in the terrestrial and freshwater (including coastal) environment and increasing nature’s climate-resilience.

Nature Networks are primarily concerned with delivering strategic connections of ‘important areas for biodiversity’. This should include all 30 by 30 sites (except where there are sound reasons not to seek to connect a site, e.g., an island) as well as those areas that are assessed as being locally important for biodiversity (e.g., Local Nature Conservation Sites (LNCS) or Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) or previous connectivity projects).  The connections between these areas should be delivered through ecological corridors (structural or functional – see Glossary) and ‘stepping stones’ of suitable habitat.

In addition to ecological connectivity, Nature Networks should seek to better connect people and local communities to important sites for biodiversity. This can be achieved by delivering biodiverse active travel routes across towns/cities and out to important areas for biodiversity. Blue/green infrastructure with biodiversity at its core can help bring more species from important areas for biodiversity into built up areas.

In Scotland Nature Networks have two main strands;

  1. Connecting all sites contributing towards 30 by 30. These are protected areas (e.g. SSSI, European sites, Ramsar, National Nature Reserves) and Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (‘OECMs’). In connecting these sites, networks should incorporate sites locally important for biodiversity (e.g. Local Nature Reserves (LNRs), Sites Important for Nature Conservation (SINCs), Local Nature Conservation Sites (LNCS), country & regional parks, etc.). These will most likely be new connections, but may build on existing connectivity. 
     
  2. Connecting biodiversity across and between rural, urban, and the peri-urban area. Nature Networks across urban areas should connect outwards into the wider landscape. Again, the network will be built around locally important areas for biodiversity and some of these networks may have already been mapped via existing schemes and projects e.g., Green Networks, open space strategy, providing a good basis to build on.

1.2 Key policy drivers

Nature Networks are a  Programme for Government commitment and key delivery mechanism of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy (SBS) which states that Nature Networks across our landscapes will underpin the resilience and health of species and habitats. They also contribute to Scotland’s Environmental Strategy and align with international targets, as expressed in the Global Biodiversity Framework, and efforts such as the EU Trans-European Nature Network.

Nature Networks are embedded throughout the fourth National Planning Framework (NPF4) as a key means of ensuring positive effects for biodiversity from development.  

The  Scottish National Adaptation Plan (SNAP) features a “Nature Connects” Outcome, which recognises that efforts to address the risks posed by climate change must have nature at the centre. The creation of Nature Networks that addresses local priorities for both climate change (adaptation and mitigation) and biodiversity is a key policy in the SNAP, recognising the importance of the role of nature-based solutions in climate adaptation, and connectivity for functioning healthy ecosystems. 

Nature Networks will be developed and implemented primarily from the ground up, allowing them to be integrated into local plans, policies, and strategies. Local Authorities will play a key role in facilitating their design and implementation, using tools like Local Development Plans (LDPs). This approach positions Nature Networks as a national priority that can be adapted to local needs, helping to achieve positive outcomes for locally identified priorities. Further opportunities for implementation may be identified through a range of plans, many of which may have statutory underpinnings and requirements for reporting. For example;  

  • Local Biodiversity Action Plans/ Strategies
  • Climate Change and Climate Adaptation plans
  • Development Planning and Management Guidance on Biodiversity, Greenspace etc
  • Community Planning- Local Outcome Improvement Plans, Locality Plans, Place Plans etc 
  • Forest and Woodland Strategies
  • Open Space Strategies
  • Active Travel Plans and Core Path Routes
  • Greenspace Strategies and Green Networks
  • Coastal Adaptation Plans
  • Flood Management Plans
  • Other e.g. Community Empowerment initiatives, community food growing plans, healthcare initiatives etc 
  • Regional Land Use Plans/Frameworks
  • Regional Economic Plans and Strategies

2. Approach

The guidance below provides a summary of how to design Nature Networks, to benefit nature and people.  Although the process may vary locally, designing and implementing Nature Networks should broadly follow the process below. 

Figure 1. Designing and implementing Nature Networks process diagram
Click for a full description

The process is as follows;

  • Principles
  • Vision
  • Mapping
  • Projects 
  • Monitoring and reporting

2.1 Principles

Within the co-designed Nature Networks Framework for Scotland, six themes were identified that set out high level principles by which Nature Network design and delivery should be achieved. These were crafted with input from a broad range of individuals and organisations and adherence to them should maximise the chance of success.

2.2 Vision

Creating a vision for a local Nature Network that is clear about your objectives; specifying what the ultimate goals are for the network, the spatial scale, and the environmental and societal aspects that are important is key in allowing understanding and buy in. The overall vision for Nature Networks as set out in the Nature Networks Framework can act as a useful starting point for local vision development. 

2.3 Broader Considerations

There are a number of broad considerations which can guide the design of Nature Networks. More detail on these principles can be found in Appendix 1.1 of the Natural England Nature Networks Evidence Handbook. 

1. Understand the place

Recognising where the Nature Network will sit, in terms of how the natural characteristics of the area conditions for different habitats. Identify what the area is special for, from a national and local perspective, how nature has changed and the potential for its restoration. This assessment can include biodiversity and ecosystem function as well as geodiversity, landscape and the historical environment. In many cases, existing plans and strategies (including Place Plans, Landscape Character Assessments, Green Networks etc) can help with this process. 

By thinking about where people live and work and how nature benefits them, we can identify important areas and opportunities for improvement. This approach respects the current landscape while remaining open to future changes and restoration possibilities.

Early consideration of such factors helps secure the longer-term sustainability of a network by making it more likely to be valued by people, while also ensuring that the multiple opportunities from a Nature Network can be realised. 

2. Involve people

People both benefit from and create Nature Networks: plans should engage and be created with stakeholders and the community; recognising that landscape and the ecosystems that support habitats and species, also provide multiple benefits to people. Nature Networks should be co-designed wherever possible to ensure local priorities are met. Delivery of Nature Networks will rely upon a wide range of land owners/ managers, key stakeholders and local communities to be successful. Co-design of Nature Networks will ensure that everyone is bought into the concept and process, ensuring successful delivery from local and landscape scale. 

3. Create core sites

Core sites are the heart of Nature Networks; these are places that sustain thriving wildlife populations that may expand across the network. Alongside existing 30 by 30 sites and locally recognised sites of importance for biodiversity there may be the need to identify further sites of importance. These may be existing ‘good’ sites (for biodiversity) or areas where little wildlife currently remains and restoration work should be prioritised.

4. Build resilience

Enhance the resilience of landscapes, ecosystems and their ecosystem services through restoration that reinstates natural processes, accommodates desirable change, improves low quality habitat and includes areas that provide buffering from the effects of our changing climate. Take opportunities to deliver nature- based solutions to climate change and reduce external pressures (such as diffuse pollution).

5. Embrace dynamism

In a natural state, ecosystems and landscapes change and are inherently dynamic; allowing natural processes to operate whenever possible, will aid restoration of ecosystem function and enhance the sustainability of conservation efforts, whilst accounting for the effects of climate change. Nature Networks are expected to be flexible to adapt to change over time.

6. Encourage diversity

Nature networks need to include a diverse physical structure, influenced by the underlying geodiversity, to accommodate the widest variety of opportunities (niches) for species. Biological complexity and landscape diversity are important to facilitate resilience. Such diversity is best founded on the restoration of natural environmental processes where possible.

7. Think ‘networks’

Rather than individual sites. Networks need to be planned at multiple spatial scales and address multiple issues. Joined-up actions across adjacent landscapes help to deliver integrated outcomes, and ensure that the network acts as a coherent whole for all species (especially for those that live in the wider countryside), ecosystems and people within the area. Planning and implementation needs to include a wide range of stakeholders.

8. Consider constraints

Assess possible risks such as the spread of invasive non-native species, pests or diseases and build in steps to mitigate such risks. 

9. Start now but plan long-term

Identify the locations that can deliver a coherent Nature Network, and prioritise those locations within it that provide the best opportunities for action now, while simultaneously developing longer term project opportunities. Developing a pipeline of projects for the short, medium and long term will ensure that opportunities to secure funding can be responded to in a timely manner. 

10. Monitor progress

Evaluate actions and adapt management in the light of results to achieve long-term aims at local, regional and national scales.

3. Ecological Considerations   

3.1 Rules of Thumb

A Natural England review of the scientific literature identified a number of ‘rules of thumb’ to help practitioners design Nature Networks. These rules are not a fixed list that must be adhered to, and can be adjusted to take local conditions and context into account. 

The “rules” can still be useful in assessing the relative merits of a proposal and provide one useful structure to help determine whether projects and actions are likely to contribute significantly towards a Nature Network.  Further ecological guidance can be found in the Nature Networks toolbox.

The points below summarise this information and follows the “Lawton Report” (2010) mantra of ‘better, bigger, and better connected’ and are reproduced from Natural England Report NERR082, (2020).

Please note that the figures quoted are guidelines only, based on currently available evidence and should be used with due regard to local circumstances. ‘Site’ does not necessarily mean a designated site, but an area of contiguous wildlife habitat.

View table layout of Rules of Thumb guide.

Better site quality

  • Encourage natural processes
  • Encourage habitat mosaics
  • Create more niches for more species – use ‘ecosystem engineers’ and welcome ecological disturbance.
  • Increase messiness (variation of physical structure within sites).
  • Restore missing biodiversity by increasing niches or by reintroduction
  • Maintain rare species
  • Encourage climate colonists
  • Reduce edge effects by buffering sites and encouraging graded ecotones to ‘soften the edge’
  • Buffer sites with at least a 50-100 m buffer strip, possibly up to 500 m wide
  • Maintain ecological continuity of management to protect soils

Bigger sites

  • Big enough to encourage natural processes – include sufficient area to ensure functioning ecosystems
  • Provide space for ecosystem dynamism, supporting mosaics and to encourage succession
  • Reduce edge effects by decreasing the edge:area ratio
  • Join habitat fragments; choose the ones that will create the biggest site
  • Restore degraded habitat surrounding the site.
  • Enlarge sites to >40 ha (or >100 ha for wide- ranging species)

More sites

  • Add larger sites in preference to many smaller sites
  • Target areas of unprotected irreplaceable habitat or with a long ecological continuity of un- intensive land management
  • Target areas with complex or additional topography & geomorphology and with a potential to be climate change refugia
  • Target areas of important habitat potential in the surrounding area
  • Target degraded areas with potential for high ecosystem service delivery
  • Ensure connectivity is good for new sites

Stepping stones and a permeable matrix

  • For poorly dispersing species, sites should be < 1 km from each other and < 200 m apart for highly specialised species within a habitat
  • Expand sites towards existing habitat to reduce space between patches.
  • Increase the cover of semi-natural habitat in landscape to at least 20%
  • Reduce the intensity and increase the diversity of land use in the surrounding countryside
  • Stepping stones should provide appropriate resources to avoid becoming ecological traps

Corridors

  • Natural corridors are better than human designed corridors
  • Use linear landscape features
  • Ensure corridor habitat matches that in core sites
  • Minimum width of corridors = 100m, preferably wider

 

When applying these rules of thumb to the design of Nature Networks, it is also important to take account of the following:

  • Central to the development of a sustainable Nature Network is the inclusion of core important areas for biodiversity, 30 by 30 sites and those recognised locally for their importance, where priority is given to the conservation of biodiversity. These are areas that will provide the sources of biodiversity that brim over into the rest of the Nature Network, and will provide important areas for ecosystem service provision. In general, the bigger and the more naturally functioning, the better. Sites which are secure for the long term are also better.
  • The intervening ‘matrix’ of habitats between core sites (i.e. the wider environment outwith the primary Nature Network) is also important, both for the species that use it as their primary habitat, but also to facilitate dispersal between core sites. Patches of “stepping stone” habitat and dispersal corridors through the wider environment (matrix) are the foundation of the Nature Network as they permit movement through environment. 
  • The many individual species that form ecosystems have different requirements and are influenced differently by external factors and pressures. It is therefore necessary, where individual connections within a network are designed with species in mind, to have clarity about the species the Nature Network is intended to support so that their complete life-cycles and inter-generational needs can be taken into account when designing the network. In general terms, a diverse range of habitats will support more species, but some species will have specific needs at different phases in their life-cycle which requires accommodating. 
  • To make core sites for biodiversity ‘Better’ is to make them ‘Big Enough, Messy, Complex and Dynamic’. Restoring natural ecosystem function is the best means of achieving this.
    • ‘Big enough’: Core sites need to be big enough to be able to function well ecologically, with natural hydrological processes and rich food webs, so that they are more resilient.
    • ‘Messy’: sites that are physically messy, with mosaics of habitat, and a diverse structure that provides more niches for species and refuges in times of environmental stress (e.g. drought).
    • ‘Complex’: sites with a complex and rich biodiversity and full food webs, as these will be more resilient to external shocks and environmental stresses.
    • ‘Dynamic’: well-functioning ecological networks are dynamic and may involve shifting mosaics of habitat types at a range of spatial scales.
  • Climate change refugia should form key parts of ecological networks as they are likely to improve resilience for species within landscapes.
  • Rare, long-distance dispersal events are likely to be important for many species, so receptor site quality and quantity is therefore very important.
  • Whenever possible, work with natural processes and give them enough space to operate. This requires consideration of hydrology, nutrients, soil and sediment processes, factors that control vegetation growth and species composition.
  • Be aware of scenarios where connectivity may be less positive, and plan accordingly to reduce risk (for example, control of invasive species, biosecurity measures etc). 

Taking all of these together, the general directions of travel for nature network establishment are summarised in Figure 2, below.

Direction of Travel for ecological components of a Nature Network
Figure 2: Direction of travel for ecological components of a Nature Network (Natural England Research Report NERR 082, 2020).
Click for a full description
  • Degraded: Core sites are limited and many important sites are small. Functional: Larger sites, including more very large core areas are fundamental.
  • Degraded: Sites fragmented and disconnected in hostile landscape matrix. Functional: Managing sites as networks, more connected conservation areas.
  • Degraded: Focus on man made habitat types and strict vegetation classifications. Functional: Moving from vegetation type to ecosystem view.
  • Degraded: No consideration of climate change. Functional: Adapting to climate change.
  • Degraded: A moment in time ideal. Functional: Accepting dynamism and accommodating change. 
  • Degraded: Constrained natural processes. Functional: Restoring and working with natural processes. 
  • Degraded: Physical structures constrained and homogeneous. Functional: Greater physical structure and heterogeneity.
  • Degraded: Gaps in trophic levels and functions rely on a limited species pool. Functional:  Increasing trophic and functional diversity. 
  • Degraded progressing to functional.

Figure 2: The direction of travel for ecological components of a nature network (Natural England Research Report NERR 082, 2020). 

3.2 Further defining a Nature Network  

A nature network needs to provide a high level of ecological connectivity, providing a habitat corridor, with limited use of ‘stepping stones’, given that for many species movement is limited. A Nature Network should incorporate a broad diversity of habitats to maximise connectivity for as many species as possible. As such a single species/ group/ habitat network would not constitute a Nature Network, but could be incorporated as part of one. For example, a Pollinator Network or a Forest Network would not be considered as Nature Networks in their own right, but could significantly overlap with a Nature Network which considers wider connectivity for a broad range of species. 

In order to meet ecological requirements, some features in the landscape may not, provide an adequate connection to be considered part of the Nature Network.  As highlighted above, core areas, corridors and stepping stones all need to meet certain basic requirements to be considered a functional part of a Nature Network.

The form such a corridor might take could be very varied, mirroring the variety of habitats that are found across Scotland and will be context specific, considering the areas in which the network connection is linking together. Examples include waterways with intact riparian habitats, native woodlands, non-designated natural landscapes, agricultural land with suitably wide hedgerows/ tree corridors, agricultural land grazed to support biodiversity rich meadows, areas under effective agroforestry or a series of wetland habitats (e.g. pools, marshes, boggy areas, scrapes) connected by natural habitats.

In the rural context, the following, whilst often positive and contributing towards biodiversity, are unlikely to constitute part of a Nature Network (although may be necessary in limited stretches where the landscape is highly modified presenting a bottle neck); 

  • thin or poor-quality hedgerows/ tree corridors, 
  • unplanted field margins that are to be bought back into rotation, 
  • meadows and similar with unsuitable levels of grazing, 
  • waterbodies that are heavily influenced/ controlled, 
  • areas of land that are highly impacted by invasive non-native species (INNS), 
  • and highly disturbed areas (e.g. road verges).

It is worth noting that these habitats offer potential for improvement to a point at which they would contribute to a Nature Network if they continue to be managed appropriately (for example road verges which are managed as meadow). 

In peri- urban settings, as well as any of the above, Nature Networks could also include road verges that have been significantly improved for biodiversity, parks and green spaces that are being managed to maximise biodiversity (e.g. native species, variety of habitats, suitable management, minimal chemical control etc), waterways that have been reopened and/or restored so they are not channelised and present biodiversity opportunities, as well as smaller scale components such as rain gardens, green roofs, vacant and derelict land or active travel routes that have green infrastructure with biodiversity value. To contribute, these areas must be helping connectivity for biodiversity, providing a connection to a wider nature network.

In the urban context, green areas/spaces that are not delivering for biodiversity or, managed in a way to promote and maximise biodiversity would not count towards a Nature Network (e.g. playing fields with little to no biodiversity or parks dominated by cut grass and ornamental plants). Other types of networks are not directly analogous to a Nature Network, as they usually have a different primary focus. For example, a Green Network has a focus on economic and social benefits, rather than being focussed on wildlife. Special focus networks (e.g. a woodland network, a nectar network) do not in themselves constitute a Nature Network as their focus is too narrow.  Both examples can however form a critical component of the wider Nature Network and there may be overlap with already established networks such as green and blue space networks or green infrastructure networks.

In both the urban and rural context, areas that are not currently providing connectivity – but have the potential to do so – could be included within a spatially defined nature network. Such potential sites should have a clear, assured, and time bound route to improve their contribution to biodiversity and connectivity. Nature Networks should be identified, and set up, so as to provide long term connectivity routes. Long term solutions, where possible, will allow for greater benefits with less resources.

  • Features which do not meet the Rules of Thumb above. For example a poorly managed hedgerow is unlikely to create a Corridor due to being of limited diversity, diameter and other ecological features. However, it may provide an underpinning for a corridor or act as a route for some species,  particularly if it is well managed for biodiversity. 
  • Some projects may not directly contribute to Nature Networks in themselves, for example because they do not contribute towards a spatially coherent network. As these projects may still improve connectivity for biodiversity or between people and biodiversity, they will nevertheless count towards broader aims of enhancing biodiversity.

3.3 Partnership and Governance

Local Authorities are expected to lead and coordinate the spatial identification and co-design of the Nature Network at a local level, and to facilitate consultation on the indicative networks once mapped. 

Local Authorities are not expected to have sole responsibility for the delivery of Nature Networks, once mapped, but should retain oversight of project delivery across the Network. Local Authorities are also expected to report on progress towards delivering the Nature Network (not just work which takes place on Local Authority land). To achieve this, it is advised that a delivery Group/ Partnership is established.  Although not required, it is advised that the following should be included in the membership; Planning Authority staff, Biodiversity/ Ecology officers, climate resilience/ sustainability officers, NatureScot operations staff, other SG agencies, representatives of community groups, landowners/ managers and relevant NGOs. 

As detailed in the Nature Networks framework, the use of existing groupings and regional partnerships where these are already established, is encouraged to reduce administrative burden. Such partnerships may include Biodiversity Partnerships, Community Planning Partnerships, Regional Land Use Partnerships, Deer Management Groups, River Basin Management Groups, Climate Adaptation Partnerships and Landscape Partnerships.

A governance structure should be set up early on, which includes key delivery partners, as well as being representative of locally important stakeholders and considering diversity and inclusion. Group membership and structure may change as work shifts from spatially identifying the Nature Network through to project scoping and delivery. Such an approach could help to reduce resource requirements on individual Local Authorities, encouraging community empowerment and a Just Transition. The exact form of governance will differ across different areas and involve different partners, therefore Local Authorities are best placed to facilitate this.   

4. Mapping the Network

Where Local Authorities are leading, Local Development Plans should facilitate Nature Networks, however Nature Networks may also be referenced in other Plans, Policies and Strategies within Councils and in other partner organisations. 

The Nature Networks Framework stresses that the process of identification and implementation must be informed, ensure meaningful engagement, and empower and equip a bottom-up approach to nature network creation. The Nature Networks Toolbox provides links to some useful tools that are available to help with this process. 

Initial stages of identifying local Nature Networks should include;

  • Capturing spatial data and/or identifying data sources
  • Identifying and recognising 30 by 30 sites as the backbone of local nature networks
  • Identifying other locally important sites including the locations of local biodiversity priorities and targets
  • Identify already established corridors and connections (including existing Green Networks etc, where appropriate)
  • Opportunity mapping, including engagement, capturing local knowledge to identify potential areas for improvement. The purpose of opportunity mapping tools is not to dictate where the Nature Network will be, but to outline the options available – where there are opportunities to create new, or restore existing areas for biodiversity- , that can then be used as the basis for discussions with local communities, land owners and managers, and experts to decide where best the Nature Network can and should go, in line with local priorities for both climate and nature.

5. Projects

5.1 General Considerations

Once the indicative Nature Network has been spatially mapped, opportunities for project implementation can be identified. This process will require extensive stakeholder engagement to ensure opportunities are assessed thoroughly and a pipeline of projects which can be resourced in the short, medium and long term can be developed. 

Tools (e.g. Storymaps) are available which can help to provide good visual representations of where project delivery is currently taking place, or where there are opportunities which have been identified which can be picked up by delivery partners or organisations who wish to invest in project delivery. Over time, these portals can evolve to show where projects have been completed, connectivity has been improved and the Nature Network strengthened. 

As it is likely that projects will be at a variety of scales, and delivered by a range of stakeholders, some oversight of the project pipeline will need to be held centrally, either via the Local Authority, or a Partnership tasked with delivery of the Nature Network. Ideally, this responsible group/body will also take an active role in coordinating partners and identifying resources for ongoing project delivery, for example by bringing together landowners, or sourcing funding. 

Large scale projects may require the development of a partnership of local interests which will take on management and delivery of different aspects of the project, similar to landscape partnerships.  

In the urban and peri-urban environment, it will be important to make sure that the local planning system is used to its fullest extent, as it can provide helpful levers to facilitate the development of the network. National Planning Framework 4 provides numerous requirements on Local Authorities that support Nature Network development, including the use of green-blue infrastructure; the concept of Positive Effects for Biodiversity is also a potentially powerful tool. 

In the rural environment, where Local Authorities may have less direct influence and where land ownership tends to be in the private sector, partnerships between stakeholders may be coordinated by government agencies other than NatureScot, eNGOs or community led groups. Rural land use policy and funding from Agri-environment schemes may provide opportunities to work with farmers, land managers and landowners to support Nature Network development. Partnerships such as Regional Land Use Partnerships, Landscape Partnerships,  Landscape Enterprise Networks (LENs) and ‘Farm clusters’  are just some examples of mechanisms to improve landscape-scale collaboration.

Finally, it is important to put in place a system of monitoring and evaluation to measure the progress and success of both development of a Nature Network, and the projects which contribute towards its delivery. Sufficient resources should be built into projects to undertake this. It is essential that this is planned up-front, not bolted on at a later stage. 

Further guidance on ensuring that projects funded through the Nature Restoration Fund (NRF) contribute to Nature Networks can be found on the Nature Networks Toolbox. 

5.2 Invasive Non-Native Species (INNS)

Improving connectivity has the potential to facilitate the spread of INNS, and in some situations increasing barriers to INNS spread (i.e. reducing connectivity) can be used as a conservation measure for some threatened species. Therefore, consideration should be given to effectively manage populations of INNS before or during work to create new habitat connections. Monitoring may also be required to note the spread of INNS before they become established along corridors or in new sites. Conversely increasing connectivity through enhancing the habitat matrix has been suggested as a means of reducing the risk of invasive species by enhancing the resilience of native communities. Where possible, sites which are heavily affected by INNS should not be connected to the Nature Network until treatment has occurred, although this may not always be possible due to financial or other constraints. Sites which are otherwise good for biodiversity should not be excluded from a Nature Network solely due to the presence of INNS.  Due consideration should also be given to Biosecurity, to reduce the risk of spreading pests and diseases through a Network. Further information on INNS in Nature Networks has been published by Natural England (2014).  

6. Monitoring and Reporting

Monitoring and reporting should be coordinated by the Local Authority. This is most likely to be via the Planning System and/ or the statutory Biodiversity Duty reporting process, but could also be via mechanisms such as Community Planning Reports. Identifying targets and measures early on should ensure monitoring is effective. These measures could be captured via existing plans, policies or strategies, or a bespoke Nature Networks Strategy could be prepared.

Potential measures of success are outlined in the Nature Networks Framework and include; 

  • The health of the important places for biodiversity that the networks connect together (ecosystem health)
  • The progress of Local Authorities in mapping Nature Networks
  • The progress in implementing Nature Networks
  • The effectiveness of ecological corridors/connections (Connectivity Indicator(s))
  • The effectiveness of the Nature Network in delivering other benefits, for example connecting people and nature

Monitoring and reporting may focus on one or more of the following areas:

  • Inputs – such as the resources being invested, such as finance, time, people
  • Processes & activities – such as area of habitat created
  • Outputs – the immediate results achieved
  • Outcomes – the short-medium term results (1-3 years)
  • Impacts – longer-term results achieved after 3+ years.

At a regional level, responsibility for monitoring and reporting could be held by any member of the delivery partnership, however Local Authorities will likely wish to retain oversight of their own area within the wider regional Nature Network. 

Further guidance on national governance, monitoring and reporting will be issued by the Scottish Government in due course.

Appendix 1: An overview of the process of designing a nature network

The various stages in designing a Nature Network locally and regionally are summarised in Table 2 below (adapted from Natural England Research Report NERR082). This is not intended to be prescriptive, and Local Authorities and other partnerships are free to undertake the spatial mapping and project design/ delivery phase in whichever manner best meets local needs. We suggest that you refer to the national Vision for Nature Networks. 

Steps 1 -3 are likely to be led by Local Authorities, and may take place via the Local Development Plan process, or via coordination of a partnership tasked with identifying and spatially mapping the Nature Network. Alternatively, an externally appointed contractor or NGO may be undertake spatial mapping on behalf of a Local Authority and/ or partnership. 

Steps 4 onwards may be led by any stakeholder or delivery partner, but it is expected that the Local Authority will retain oversight of progress on the delivery of the Nature Network within their area, and will continue to coordinate data for monitoring and reporting purposes. 

The Nature Networks Toolbox contains further guidance, tools and resources which can assist with the steps outlined below. 

View table version of Overview of the process of designing a Nature Network. 

Step 1: Evidence gathering to create an indicative spatial Nature Network

  1. Option to establish a core group at this stage. Consider roles/responsibilities/stakeholders for core group. Option to consult with this group to assist with data gathering. 
  2. Understand the place and assess what aspects of nature are special about an area or have been degraded or become threatened
    1. Landscape character 
    2. Geology & soils
    3. Natural processes (e.g. hydrological, geomorphological)
    4. Biodiversity 
      1. Identify existing and potential core sites for biodiversity (30 by 30 sites, plus locally important sites for biodiversity). 
      2. Identify opportunities for expansion and joining up existing areas and for improving their natural functioning
      3. Review matrix (land between core sites)
        • Identify important species and habitats
        • Identify opportunities to improve connectivity
  3. Existing networks/corridors/features/priorities (e.g. Green Networks)
  4. Assess what aspects of nature could be restored or created, taking into account current and potential national importance
  5. What opportunities are there for new or enhanced ecosystem service provision (including Natural Capital)
  6. Think about networks rather than about individual sites

Think about opportunities for multiple benefits (e.g. socioeconomic considerations, connecting people with nature, and Place considerations).  

Lead: Local Authority

Step 2: Identify and involve stakeholders in preparing and subsequent refining the initial indicative spatial Nature Network.

Develop a stakeholder map, including land ownership and ecosystem service provision and usage

  1. Using data and tools from Step 1 to generate initial indicative map(s)
  2. Optional- Hold a workshop to review the initial mapping and to refine it
  3. Use a variety of tools to present relevant data
  4. Identify opportunities
    1. For ecosystem restoration and habitat creation
    2. For restoring natural processes
    3. For new and enhanced ecosystem service provision
  5. Use participatory approaches to engage with the wider community to encourage support and to refine the mapping further

If you wish to set up a defined governance group, to be included here, see Step 4. The use of a Terms of Reference can be useful as a minimum for any group. 

Lead: Local Authority

Step 3: Prepare indicative maps

  1. Agree on local/regional aims for the nature network to refine and finalise mapping 
    1. Biodiversity goals
    2. Natural capital goals
    3. Ecosystem service goals
    4. Other societal goals, such as access to nature
    5. Integration with existing features e.g. green network
  2. Identify constraints and opportunities
    1. Ecological issues e.g. soil types, likely climate change impacts, natural processes
    2. Consider potential for negative effects e.g. INNS, pests, diseases & identify mitigation measures 
    3. Landscape issues e.g. cultural expectations
    4. Cultural issues e.g. population make-up
    5. Key land uses within the area and potential conflicts. 
  3. Agree areas of uncertainty including aspects requiring a search for compromise
  4. Agree scale of the Nature Network if not Local Authority area (e.g. catchment, city region etc). 
  5. Ensure connectivity with neighbouring areas to enable regional and national delivery. 
  6. Build resilience
    1. What are the pressures?
    2. Think about social resilience
  7. Design the nature network in line with Framework Principles and using the suite of rules of thumb
    1. Make sites better
      • Big enough, complex, messy, dynamic
      • Enhance natural processes
      • Develop buffers where possible
    2. Make existing sites bigger
    3. Create new sites
    4. Improve connectivity
    5. Improve quality of resources for wildlife in the wider countryside
  8. Develop a suite of measures against which progress can be assessed.
  9. Consult on maps and refine. Network is dynamic and likely to change over time, however the “final” map should be incorporated into the Local Development Plan as a minimum. Agree who is responsible for updates. 

Consider including Nature Networks in other plans, policies and strategies as appropriate. 

Lead: Local Authority 

Step 4: Develop a project team (partnership) for the delivery of nature network

N.B. An existing partnership may provide this function, or a new partnership can be created. Examples of existing partnerships include LBAP Delivery Partnerships, Community Planning Partnerships, Regional Land Use Partnerships or Green Network Partnerships or community level groups.

  1. Develop an organisational and governance structure (including identifying lead organisation/individual who will coordinate activity & retain oversight) 
  2. Identify leads (teams) for each delivery project
  3. Teams to develop aims and objectives for their component of the project
  4. Delivery partnership and/or project teams work together to ensure an overall integrated plan
  5. Implement plans

Start immediately, but think long-term in terms of scoping and working up projects. 

Lead: Delivery partnership 

Step 5: Implement the plans

  1. Work with the planning system
    1. National Planning Policy Framework 4
    2. Positive Effects for Biodiversity
    3. Green-Blue Infrastructure
  2. Working with farmers and landowners 
    1. Use of agri-environment/ forestry grant schemes where practicable
    2. Benefits of farm clusters
    3. Landscape Enterprise Networks (LENs) 
    4. Renewable Energy Clusters 
    5. Landscape Scale Collaboration
  3. Detailed ecosystem management
    1. Tailored to improving and using natural processes (nature-based solutions)
  4. Working with Nature Finance and existing codes (e.g. Peatland and Woodland Codes)

Lead: Delivery Partnership (oversight). Individual land owners/ managers or organisations. Community groups. 

Step 6: Undertake monitoring and surveillance to allow evaluation of nature network

  1. Develop a programme to monitor progress of spatial mapping & local/ regional project delivery and that takes into account local and national objectives. Make use of existing monitoring and reporting routes where available (e.g. Biodiversity Duty Reporting, Strategic Environmental Assessment reports etc). 
  2. Refine implementation plan as it progresses in the light of evaluation (adaptive management)
  3. Contribute to national monitoring and reporting as these come on-stream (further guidance to be issued). 
  4. Undertake management interventions scientifically to grow the evidence base.

Lead: Still TBC – Local Authorities to retain oversight for their area. 

Contact

Nature Networks

[email protected]