On 9 October, RTPI Scotland submitted a response to the Scottish Government consultation on Scotland's Fourth Land Use Strategy. Read the response below.

About the RTPI

The RTPI Champions the power of planning in creating sustainable, prosperous places and vibrant communities. We have over 27,000 members in the private, public, academic and voluntary sectors. Using our expertise and research we bring evidence and thought leadership to shape planning policies and thinking, putting the profession at the heart of society’s big debates. We set the standards of planning education and professional behaviour that provide our members, wherever they work in the world, a unique ability to meet complex economic, social environmental and cultural challenges.

1. Do you find Map Figure 1 to be a helpful representation of current land cover?

Yes

2. How can we most effectively represent housing and renewable energy alongside current land cover maps?

We agree that the use of spatial data and maps to show varying spatial contexts and relationships are incredibly useful and vital to evidence-based decision making.

In relation to housing, it would be useful to get a sense of what the housing emergency looks like spatially. In this regard, land use maps that show the following spatial data would provide us with a sense of where there is the most need, as well as how our use of Scotland’s land could better tackle the housing emergency and help us to direct our future actions in a more targeted way:

We agree that the use of spatial data and maps to show varying spatial contexts and relationships are incredibly useful and vital to evidence-based decision making.

In relation to housing, it would be useful to get a sense of what the housing emergency looks like spatially. In this regard, land use maps that show the following spatial data would provide us with a sense of where there is the most need, as well as how our use of Scotland’s land could better tackle the housing emergency and help us to direct our future actions in a more targeted way:

• existing homes
• homes under construction
• housebuilder category (i.e. SME, self-build, housing association, volume housebuilder etc.)
• tenure type (social, private, owned, rented etc.),
• Homes that are classified as “affordable”
• Homelessness rates
• Vacant and derelict sites

In relation to renewable energy, land cover maps that show the location, type and lifespan of renewable energy projects would be useful to see what land types are hosting renewable energy infrastructure. It would also be useful to see where and how renewable energy projects are impacting on Scotland’s natural environment in both positive and negative ways and the extent to which they are enhancing Scotland’s natural environment.

3. What sort of information about current land use would you find useful? (and how would you use it?) 

With the right data, maps are a powerful tool to display the health and condition of our land, the relationships and interplay between different land uses, and the impact of our land use activities on nature, the economy, communities etc. Such maps can give us an overview of the national picture but can also be used to provide more localised insights – helping us to make important associations between national impact and local actions.

With the above in mind, in addition to housing and renewable energy, we also believe that maps that can show the quality of land cover, as well as land cover type, would be highly beneficial. Mapping ecosystem services in particular would provide decision makers with greater understanding of the state and condition of our natural environment, where deficiencies may be present, and allow them to identify the sites that would offer the most benefit in terms of enhancement. Some examples of where this is already being done include:

• Liverpool City Region’s EcoservR tool for mapping natural capital assets and ecosystem services. A useful presentation about this work can be accessed here.
• Liverpool City Region’s Ecological Network
• Ecosystems Knowledge Networks Tool Assessor, which includes 8 tools on mapping ecosystem services
• Greenspace Information for Greater London CIC (GiGL) Areas of Deficiency in Access to Nature

Maps that show policy designations would also be of great value. For example, areas where renewables (such as onshore wind) are encouraged, protected landscape areas, sites allocated for development etc.

4. Do you agree that these are the key areas that need to be delivered by Scotland’s land?

Yes

5. Are there any important land uses that you feel are missing or underrepresented in this list?

This list captures some environmental, agricultural, built environment, and infrastructure land use elements, but these should not be regarded as the only key land use areas that require commitments, targets, and ambitions.

For example, the only infrastructure commitment in the list is around renewable energy targets. We believe this list should also include the other infrastructure needed to support our commitment to, for example, expanding and strengthening Scotland’s active travel network and prioritising sustainable transport in line with Scotland’s National Transport Strategy. Also of importance, is that our use of land honours Scotland’s commitment to sustainable and equitable access to green space. Digital infrastructure is another missing element – data centres, for example, are increasing in demand but have a significant water, environmental and energy footprint.

Historical buildings and heritage sites of and archaeological and cultural significance also play an important role with respect to community wellbeing, identity, as well as the tourism economy and should not be ignored as a key land use area.

Geodiversity is also a critical missing element from the list, providing the foundation for Scotland’s biodiversity, habitats and ecosystems. Protected areas exist to safeguard our geodiversity and these commitments should also be recognised in this list.

In addition to the above, we note that “Industrial construction” is included in the list alongside “residential”, but the associated commitment only addresses the “residential” aspect to deliver affordable homes. What is the industrial commitment?

6. How do you think data and mapping can evolve to better support our understanding of future land use and national ambitions—including the impacts, benefits, opportunities and trade-offs of change?

Data is critical to broaden and strengthen our understanding and knowledge of the impacts of our use of land. There are currently a large number of organisations collecting data related to land use in a variety of different ways. There is great potential for this data to be harnessed to help broaden our knowledge about the current state of Scotland’s use of land and the interconnected landscape, environmental, social and economic outcomes.

Spatial data and maps are powerful tools that can expand our understanding of how our actions (or inactions) on particular sites provide cumulative impacts at the national (and even global) scale. They can enhance communities’ understanding of their places, the relationships between different land use patterns, and the direct and indirect benefits of land use interventions – for example, the role of urban greening to enhance biodiversity.

There remain challenges associated with the collection and collation of data in Scotland, including siloed approaches to data collection, inconsistencies with respect to the terminology used, and the quality of data. To ensure the data that is collected is able to be harnessed effectively, it is vital that these issues be addressed at the national level. The Improvement Service have done some important work in this regard, through its spatial hub which was launched in 2016 and which provides access to quality-assured Scottish local authority data in a consistent format. The IS data hub is another tool that matches and cleanses public sector data to improve consistency and efficiency by analysing multiple data sources.

Improving and expanding our collection, collation and management of data could prove vital to give us an accurate picture about the many areas that impact on the state of our land, nature and communities. Spatial data focused on ecosystem services, geodiversity, heritage and archaeology, housing, and infrastructure are just some of the areas where mapping could assist decision-makers to target necessary actions to tackle the nature crisis, housing emergency, and reach net zero.

To make the most out of our spatial data, we need to better utilise the tools we have available to us in an integrated and consistent way, ensuring collaborative and efficient approaches are taken to enhance our shared knowledge and understanding.

7. What tools, data, or approaches would help improve this understanding over time?

As mentioned above, the Improvement Service are already doing a lot of important work in this area to improve the consistency and quality of data – particularly those held by public authorities. We would like to see further commitments to support and expand on this work.

We are also aware of the vast amounts of data contained within reports and other documents that are submitted in support of planning applications. Much of this valuable data is locked within PDF documents but could prove to be a valuable resource if the raw data contained within them was made accessible. Scraping the data contained in such reports, or altering the way such reports and documents are submitted to enable the data to be harnessed beyond their immediate purpose (i.e. to support one planning application) we can see would be valuable exercise.

8. Do you think the description provided captures what is meant by 'integrated landscapes'?

No

9. Do you agree that integrated landscapes are the most effective approach to addressing Scotland’s land use ambitions ?

Yes

Please give reasons for your answer.

We agree that integrated landscapes are important to maximise land use benefits.

The description of integrated land use contained in this section of the LUS4 defines it on the basis of “two or more activities on the same area in a way that enhances the overall benefits”. Although this is not incorrect, it is perhaps a simplistic interpretation of integrated land use. This definition defines “integrated” only in the immediate and physical sense of the word (i.e. the physical presence of two or more activities in an area at the same time), it does not have full regard to the importance of taking a long-term approach to “integrated land use” – i.e. considering both the existing and future use of land in an integrated way. It also does not consider integration with respect to the decision-making mechanisms and practices that are employed across governance levels and sectors. Although these are mentioned later in the section to give examples of integrated land use in action (e.g. Regional Land Use Partnerships), this aspect is not captured in the initial description of what is meant by “integrated land use”.

10. Have we identified the right factors influencing land use integration? 

Yes

11.  Which of these factors do you feel are the most influential?

All the factors identified in the list have a role to play in influencing land use integration. The influence each plays will largely depend on the particular context of the situation. However, we can foresee historic practices, education, financial pressures and awareness being particularly key in many scenarios.

12.  Are there any important factors we have missed? 

All of the factors mentioned in the list certainly do influence integrated land use. However, they should be recognised as examples rather than an exhaustive list.

There are many other factors which have the potential to influence land use integration, including the use of nature-based solutions which have the potential to deliver a variety of benefits including biodiversity enhancement, urban cooling, flood mitigation etc.

13. Would the inclusion of case studies help to illustrate the practical delivery of integrated land use?

Yes

14. Would the inclusion of information on ecosystem services and opportunities for increased benefits help to illustrate the wider value of integrated landscapes?

Yes

15. Do you agree that the role of LUS4 should be to influence policy makers and regulators in order to create an enabling environment that incentivises and/or supports land managers, communities and partnerships to further integrate land use/management?

Yes

16. Are there other ways in which LUS4 could support alignment and integration?

We agree that there needs to be alignment between LUS4 and other existing and future policies, plans and strategies. This alignment (if effective in practice) would represent a shift away from siloed approaches towards embedding and operationalising the Place Principle in practical terms, which RTPI Scotland has long called for.

Stage 2 proposes to prepare a detailed portfolio of actions that focus on enabling more integrated, resilient and sustainable land use. We fully support this. However, actions to support sustainable land use should not be considered static as they will be constantly evolving. Consequently, this portfolio should not sit as a static document but instead should be a live and agile digital platform that integrates effective monitoring that allows for the transparent delivery of LUS4.  This would create the environment for a truly collaborative, aligned, integrated and transparent approach to LUS4’s delivery that embeds the Place Principle.

In addition to the above, we reiterate our support for the mapping of ecosystem service data, as well as other spatial data to support an integrated land use approach – e.g. geodiversity, heritage and archaeology, the use of nature-based solutions etc.

17. Do you agree with the proposed approach to developing a new vision and integrated set of objectives for the Land Use Strategy?

Yes

18. Which approach would you prefer for LUS4?

Establishment of a refreshed set of principles (if this is your preference, please tell us what you think they should cover and how you envision their application)

We see the value in adopting a set of principles to help guide decision making in a way that achieves the objectives and vision of the Strategy.

We agree, however, that there is overlap between the current principles set out in LUS3 and those principles set out in other adopted documents and frameworks that have emerged since LUS3’s adoption.

We do not consider such overlap or the reinforcement of existing principles as particularly problematic. However, in our view this presents as an opportunity for LUS4 to directly link to these other relevant strategies, plans and frameworks rather than simply independently repeating or reinterpreting the principles contained within them. This approach would clearly signpost and reinforce the alignment that already exists between the Land Use Strategy and, for example, NPF4, Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy, the Draft Environment Strategy (the consultation for which has recently closed), and other relevant policy documents, and promote an integrated approach in policy and decision-making practices.

19. To what extent do you agree that the draft indicators provide a strong basis for measuring progress toward improved outcomes under the Nature and Climate theme?

Disagree

If you selected "Disagree" or "Unsure", please tell us why

We broadly agree that these indicators are a useful starting point. However, they are all focused on quantity (i.e. hectares of new woodland, peatland and 30 by 30 sites). Thera are no indicators included that capture the status, condition and health of specific land uses. For example, the proportion of SSSI sites in an excellent or favourable condition – NatureScot has released its latest figures on this for 2025. The condition and health of our peatlands, woodlands, and other land types is just as (if not more) important than the quantity of land coverage and should be included as vital indicators in this section of the LUS4.

In addition to the above, we note that nature-based solutions capture more than just peatland restoration and woodland creation. There are other vital carbon sequestration actions that can be (and are being) taken to redress the carbon imbalance. For example, the integration of urban greening into land development projects is a vital way that we can integrate carbon sequestration into our built environment. In this regard, we draw your attention to the Balance white paper produced by Anderson Bell Christie, which sets out the practical measures that they believe can be taken in the construction and planning sectors (amongst others) to drive forward sustainable construction practices to help us decarbonise our places and achieve net zero. Enabling the outcomes of such measures to be mapped would greatly enhance our understanding of the wide-ranging impacts of integrated land use approaches.

In addition to the above, we note the inclusion of an indicator related to the 30 by 30 Framework. However, no indicator has been included relating to the Nature Networks Framework. This is a missing element that should be addressed in the final LUS4. 

We also see opportunity to provide more concrete links between these indicators and the policy outcomes of NPF4. For example, Policy 3 of NPF4 calls for the enhancement of biodiversity. There needs to be an indicator that helps us measure and monitor our delivery of this policy outcome on the ground.

20. Are you aware of other data sources that could be used to monitor progress towards these outcomes?

Yes

If yes, please highlight them

As previously mentioned, NatureScot holds data on the condition of SSSI sites in Scotland, the latest 2025 figures for which have now been released. Also the Improvement Service’s spatial hub includes a vast range of useful spatial land use data that could prove useful.

It is also relevant to note that there is already a monitoring framework that has been created in relation to the draft Environment Strategy that captures a lot of this already. As actions are taken forward to further develop indicators for the LUS4, it would be useful for these to have regard to the data that has already been collected and analysed for the purposes of the Environment Strategy Monitoring Framework, and other monitoring frameworks that have been created for other purposes. Finalising the indicators having regard to other existing monitoring frameworks, could also assist in highlighting gaps in LUS4 that could otherwise be easily overlooked. It will also ensure that we are pulling together our data and resources efficiently and effectively to clearly understand the data gaps.

21. To what extent do you agree that the draft indicators provide a strong basis for measuring progress toward improved outcomes under the Jobs, Skills and Economy theme?

Disagree

If you selected "Disagree" or "Unsure", please tell us why.

We broadly agree that these indicators are useful.

However, there is a gap with respect to heritage and the skilled jobs required to restore, regenerate and maintain our heritage land, buildings and assets to preserve our architectural, archaeological and cultural heritage, support the tourism economy, ensure the resilience of our heritage buildings and assets and that they contribute to net zero.

22. Are you aware of other data sources that could be used to monitor progress towards these outcomes ?

Yes

If yes, please highlight them

Historic Environment Scotland are working with the Institute of Conservation to develop a Heritage Skills at Risk Register. This register will help to identify the skills that are at risk of disappearing and could provide useful data to monitor a heritage skills indicator under the jobs, skills and economy theme of LUS4.

23. To what extent do you agree that the draft indicators provide a strong basis for measuring progress toward improved outcomes under the Community, Places, People and Equity theme ?

Disagree

If you selected "Disagree" or "Unsure", please tell us why.

We broadly agree that the indicators included in this section are useful. However, we believe there should be an indicator dedicated to affordable housing and homelessness rates. Although the rural poverty indicators do include consideration of housing costs, in light of the housing emergency and that access to affordable housing is a recognised challenge for rural areas, we believe that a dedicated affordable housing indicator is required.

The health and wellbeing indicator in this section is focused entirely on time spent in green or blue spaces. Although this is one attribute of improved health and wellbeing, it is not in itself an indicator of health and wellbeing. It must be coupled with other indicators and attributes, including other place-based indicators. In this regard, the Improvement Service have published a series of place and wellbeing indicators that would be useful for this purpose. Public Health Scotland also have mental health indicator data available on their ScotPHO profiles tool.

In addition to the above, there are a number of other indicators that LUS4 would benefit from including:

• The number of communities with local place plans – this could be incorporated into the “community participation” indicator
• An indicator of community benefits generated from, for example, renewable energy schemes.
• An accessible places indicator which could capture the proportion of communities in Scotland that have adopted local living or 20-minute neighbourhood principles. In this regard, the Improvement Service have published technical guidance on how to map a 20-minute neighbourhood.
• An indicator which tracks coverage of up-to-date local development plans. LDPs have an important role to play in delivering the integrated land use outcomes set out in LUS4, and so local authorities having up to date LDPs is critical to the successful delivery of this Strategy.

24. Are you aware of other data sources that could be used to monitor progress towards these outcomes?

Yes

If yes, please highlight them

As mentioned above in our response to question 23, the Improvement Service have published a series of place and wellbeing indicators, which could prove useful to the further development of LUS4 indicators.

The Improvement Service have also published technical guidance on how to map a 20-minute neighbourhood, which could assist in the development of a place accessibility indicator.

Public Health Scotland also have mental health indicator data available on their ScotPHO profiles tool.

25. Are you aware of any ways in which the proposed vision and objectives need to consider the different experiences, both positive and negative, current or future, of the following groups?

• island communities

• young people, (children, pupils, and young adults up to the age of 26)

• those with protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation); and/or

• groups or areas at socio-economic disadvantage (such as income, low wealth or area deprivation)?

No comment.

26. Are you aware of any potential costs and burdens that you think may arise as a result of the vision and objectives within this consultation? If so please give details?

No comment.