The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Public Attitudes to the Environment in Scotland

CHAPTER SEVEN VIEWS ON SCOTLAND'S NATURAL HERITAGE

This chapter examines public concern over natural heritage issues in Scotland. After assessing the importance of protection and conservation issues in comparison to other key environmental issues, the chapter then looks more closely at public perceptions of wildlife and habitat protection including matters of responsibility. Finally, the chapter explores public awareness of and attitudes towards National Parks in Scotland.

7.1 CONCERN ABOUT PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE, AREAS OF CONSERVATION INTEREST & NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE

Initiatives to enhance and extend the protection enjoyed by a wide range of wildlife and natural habitats in Scotland have been important features of both public policy and activity by non-governmental organisations. The work being done by the Scottish Executive and Scottish Natural Heritage reflects a range of priorities deriving from domestic and European policy aims and from international obligations. For example, Scotland has made significant progress towards identifying sites to contribute to the 'Natura 2000' network of wildlife conservation sites across the European Union ⁶⁷

Media interest in wildlife protection issues remains strong - certainly in relation to the more high-profile of wildlife crime incidents and threats to vulnerable habitats. The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 strengthened the penalty system delivered by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 by introducing custodial sentences and enhanced police powers to improve nature conservation and deter wildlife crime. In addition, the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 reforms legislation dealing with the Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) system and further improves measures to combat wildlife crime.

Alongside governmental initiatives there have been significant purchases of land by conservation charities as well as a developing, and public, emphasis by traditional land managers, such as farmers, on their role as custodians of the countryside. For example, the Rural Stewardship Scheme, which builds on past initiatives such as Environmentally Sensitive Areas, brings benefit to the environment and contributes to sustainable agriculture by encouraging farmers to adopt environmentally friendly practices and maintain particular habitats and landscape features.

Thus, it is clear that the strength and scope of the protection afforded to Scotland's natural heritage has increased dramatically in recent years and, at the same time, many of the environmentally damaging effects of land management practices have diminished with significant reforms to agricultural support mechanisms.

Despite this enhanced protection, Chapter 2 showed that levels of concern for 'protection of wildlife', 'protection of areas of conservation interest' and 'new development in the countryside' increased among the general public between 1991 and 2002. Given this, what are the public's views on Scotland's natural heritage, how well promoted and protected do they think it is currently and how do these perceptions vary between different groups of people?

7.2 TYPES OF COUNTRYSIDE USER

As a person's concern for natural heritage issues is likely to be related to exposure to them, respondents were asked about their use of the countryside. Table 7.1 shows that over a third of respondents went out walking in the countryside or at the coast at least once a fortnight (35%), and a further fifth did so at least once a month (18%). A quarter of respondents never did so. Driving in the countryside was the next most prevalent activity with a fifth of people saying that they did this at least once a fortnight (20%) and the same proportion doing so at least once a month (21%). However, a third of respondents never drove in the countryside for pleasure. While 14% of respondents engaged in active outdoor pursuits such as hiking, horse riding or cycling at least once a fortnight, two thirds never took part in these type of activities. Just 8% of respondents said they went 'hunting, shooting or fishing' once every six months or more.

Sample size for each row = 4,119

Using this information about use of the countryside it is possible to construct a five-fold typology of countryside users by which to examine attitudes to the natural heritage issues explored in this chapter. This is described in Figure 7.2.

* This typology is hierarchical. Respondents were allocated to the first category in the table which applied, even though other categories might also apply.

** This category includes 3% of respondents who drove in the countryside, but carried out no other activity.

Analysis of the countryside user typology by socio-demographic characteristics reveals some interesting patterns (Table 7.2). For example, over a third of those with degrees or professional qualifications (37%) were 'frequent users of the countryside for active pursuits' compared with fewer than one in ten people with no qualification (9%). As might be expected, age was also related to the type of activity undertaken in the countryside. Around three in ten people aged between 16 and 44 used the countryside frequently for active pursuits, compared with 8% of those aged over 65 years. However, over four in ten people aged over 45 years were frequent walkers in the countryside, compared with two in ten 16-24 year olds.

Car and dog ownership were also significant. Over a third of those without access to a car were non users of the countryside (36%) and four in ten people with one car were frequent walkers (40%). A third of dog owners were frequent active countryside users (32%) compared with two in ten respondents from non-dog owning households (20%).

Regression analysis showed that car ownership, urban or rural location, tenure type, educational attainment, age and sex all had an independent relationship with frequency of countryside use ⁶⁸. Therefore, people most likely to be frequent users of the countryside were those from remote rural areas, private renters, those aged between 45 and 64, those with professional qualifications or degrees and men. These variations between tenure types and respondents' urban or rural location is shown in Figure 7.3.

7.3 THE IMPORTANCE OF WILDLIFE AND HABITAT PROTECTION

Protecting wildlife and habitats was felt to be important by almost everybody questioned for the Public Attitudes to the Environment survey. Only 2 in every 100 people said that it was not very important or did not know if it was important. Despite the vast majority of people thinking that wildlife and habitats protection was important, this degree of concern did vary depending on certain socio-demographic characteristics.

For example, older respondents were more likely than the young to say that it was a very important matter (Table 7.3). Six in ten people aged between 16 and 24 years said the protection of wildlife and habitats was very important (61%), and a further third (37%) thought it was quite important. By way of contrast, over seven in ten people aged 45-64 years (74%) said it was very important and just a quarter (24%) said it was quite important. The perceived importance of protection also increased quite dramatically with increasing educational attainment. Although over six in ten people leaving education with no formal qualification said it was a very important matter (63%), over 8 in 10 people with degrees or professional qualifications thought the same (82%).

The survey found that the tenure and location of respondents' homes were also related to views on wildlife and habitats protection. For example, three quarters of owner occupiers felt it was a very important matter (73%), but only 62% of social renters shared this degree of concern. Although two thirds of people from urban areas thought that protection of wildlife and habitats was very important (67%), strongest concern was found among people living in accessible rural areas where over eight in ten people (82%) thought that this was very important.

Over eight in ten frequent active countryside users (82%) thought that wildlife and habitat protection was very important and this concern fell to around seven in ten among frequent walkers and occasional active users (71% and 68% respectively) (Table 7.3).

Logistic regression analysis was undertaken to identify which of the various characteristics that were related to views on the importance of wildlife and habitats protection, had an independent effect once the effect of other variables had been accounted for ⁶⁹. This found the most significant relationship was with use of the countryside, followed by highest educational qualification, age and whether respondents lived in an urban or rural area. In other words, those most likely to see wildlife and habitats protection as very important were those who frequently enjoyed active countryside pursuits, those with the highest level of educational attainment, older people aged 65+ and those who lived in accessible rural areas.

« Previous | Contents | Next »