 Maes i mi arweinydd, wrth gwrs, ac mae gweithio ar y 8 yma ymlaen yng nghyrch, Energym Gwneud Sryd a Gwneud Transbôr Cymru, yn 2023. Mae y 1 yn y gydag ymlaen i ddim yn cyfle i ddechrau ymlaen i ddim 4, 5 a 6 i gydag. 4 yn ddigon i ddangos i gydag ymlaen i ddau, lleoedd i ddim yn cyflaen i ddaw i gyffredin COP 15. 5 yn ddigon i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i gydag. Item six is the consideration of the committee's work programme. Are we all agreed to take these items in private? We are agreed, so items four, five and six will be taken in private. Our next item is gender item two, which is the evidence session as part of our scrutiny of the outcomes of the 15th UN biodiversity conference, otherwise known as COP 15. I refer members to the papers that they've received for this item. In the summit in Montreal, a new global framework was agreed for halting and reversing biodiversity loss across the world. To take stock of COP 15 and what its outcomes mean for Scotland, the committee will hear from a panel of Scottish and UK based experts in biodiversity policy. On behalf of the committee, I'm very pleased to welcome Dr Daniela Diz, Associate Professor of International Ocean Governance, the Lyle, I forgot that right, Lyle Centre, Harriet Watt University, Professor Colin Galbraith, chair of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. I would have liked to have welcomed Professor Peter Hollingsworth, but unfortunately he's unable to attend due to a family bereavement. I'm sorry for him and I'm sorry that we're going to miss his evidence, but we have also got Dr Deborah Lang, the Chief Officer for Scottish Environmental Link, and joining us remotely we've got Dr Ruth Mitchell, the Head of Biodiversity and Ecosystems Group, the James Hutton Institute. Thank you all for accepting our invitations and we're delighted to have you here. There are a series of questions, the first of which is going to come from the deputy convener, Fiona Hyslop. Good morning and thank you very much for joining us today. Looking at COP 15 and the outcomes, in terms of translating these outcomes into actions, how will it be ensured that these targets will be delivered at global level when obviously previous agreements have failed to do so? Has there been progress with what the global implementation mechanisms for biodiversity should look like? Bear in mind that we've just seen the signing of the High Seas Treaty at the weekend and maybe it might come to you first, Dr Daniela Diz, as you are the Associate Professor of International Ocean Governance. I'll maybe ask you to come in first on that please. Thank you. I was just in New York just back and so I'm a little bit jet-lagged on all of that. We had to extend our stay in New York until yesterday because of the overnight negotiations but previously the IH Biodiversity targets under the Convention on Biological Diversity none of them had been achieved but I think that in light of the global biodiversity framework that was adopted in COP 15 I think there has been some strengthening of the processes for implementation and reporting that's a little bit different from the previous IH Biodiversity targets so I think that that provides an enhanced opportunity for countries and state parties to actually implement the global biodiversity framework as opposed to the previous globally agreed targets and of course the treaty that was the text of the treaty in New York that was agreed upon not yet adopted but agreed upon can help with the implementation of the global biodiversity framework as well. The Convention on Biological Diversity applies to both areas within and beyond national jurisdiction so the High Seas Treaty has if it enters into force before 2030 because all the targets of the global biodiversity framework are supposed to be implemented by 2030 so hopefully the agreement in New York will be entering into force before then in order to help achieve those targets especially target 3 on marine protected areas, protected areas in general and other effective area-based conservation measures and also target 14 on mainstreaming biodiversity into policies and so on which includes for example environmental impact assessments and strategic environmental assessments. I'm just sticking on that the High Seas Treaty clearly Scotland's waters go way extensively into the Atlantic so there are obviously issues about near shore but also as you said that kind of international connections where you know we've got the High Seas Treaty in particular so what do you think that what implications do you think that has for Scotland? I think it's a positive outcome because it can protect, it can prevent harm from transboundary harm as well so some of the implications would be that activities even that could take place within national jurisdiction that could have an effect on areas beyond national jurisdiction with their strength and mechanisms for sharing environmental impact assessments and making sure that some of those activities don't pose threat in areas beyond national jurisdiction decision making will still be at the national level, there's no global level decision making but there's still mechanisms for enhancing information sharing consultation on impact assessments also from other nations that could pose impacts on areas beyond national jurisdiction including the High Seas and also activities on the High Seas that could pose threat within national jurisdiction and also marine protected areas on the High Seas that could protect some of the biodiversity that would benefit Scotland because ecosystems don't know jurisdictional boundaries so in that sense I think it's a positive outcome. Thank you very much for joining us coming from New York as you have. Can I maybe come to Colin Galbraith and again more broadly why do you think that the COP 15 outcomes have got more chance to get delivered than perhaps previous agreements have? I think they have got more chance to have been implemented but it's still a challenge and it's a challenge at the global level because historically we've not hit around the world, we've probably not monitored and reported properly and I think the opportunity now is with regular reporting hopefully every two years back to CBD to the convention and effective monitoring then there is more information coming through and there's more opportunity to comment in the years ahead but if you look at the targets that are in there take one for example by 2030 to have 30% land and sea protected areas that actually is only seven years away so we need to take action now and be seen to take action now not just in Scotland but globally and I think really the key here is about reporting and monitoring to make sure that we've got data and information going in for regular reporting, regular discussion at the global level, so it is still a challenge. I go from days where you're optimistic about the delivery to pessimistic about the delivery at the global level and I think we really need to keep our eye on the ball here in terms of what the United Nations does and how it coordinates that reporting so I think I'm given half an answer that says it's a real challenge you know we've still got to learn from previous mistakes going forward but the CBD targets are a fantastic step forward you know they're very clear in terms of global wording they're very ambitious in terms of global wording so I think there is an opportunity now in the next year or two to really you know push forward on that delivery. Dr Deborah Long can maybe ask you if you've got any comments on the global implementation and what you think about the COP 15 outcomes? I agree that I think it's the scale of the challenge really that's pulling people together and I think that's why we stand a much better chance this time of making progress because everyone is aware of the scale of the challenge and the fact we're going to have to work together. If I can give you a little bit of a homework there's a Wild Isles series coming up on BBC that starts on Sunday I would definitely recommend you watch that it's UK wide but most of it will be filmed in Scotland I'm sure and it will give you a real insight into why we need to be acting now and why the global biodiversity framework is so important. In terms of translating it into what happens in Scotland I think there are it is ambitious there's no doubt about it but the things that are good about it is that it's action focused so if you look at the targets they're very action focused which is great but there is clearly a need for speed as Colin said there's only in effect seven growing seasons before 2030. If you're a gardener, if you're a forester, if you're a farmer seven growing seasons is nothing so that really underlines the need for speed and for action and the ways we can achieve that is to mainstream biodiversity so that it achieves the same level of power if you like as the climate change plan for example. We can make sure that it gets delivered right across Scotland so it's not just stuck in one or two divisions and we need to bring people on board which is where I think programmes like Wild Isles will really help because it really illustrates why we need to act now. Can we be bringing Dr Mitchell remotely if you've got any comments on global implementation Colin? Thank you very much for inviting me. I think it's a really nice ambition there but I think the real key is going to be the implementation of them and the actual action that takes place so Deborah has already mentioned the importance of mainstreaming across different departments and I think that's something that's really important not just at the global level but also locally in Scotland as well. They're getting biodiversity up there across all different departments so it's not just seen as something for people directly involved in the environment but people involved in business and economics and society that biodiversity is up there with the climate crisis. That's my first point. I think the targets need to be translated into smart targets so that they're very specific and measurable and achievable and time bound. We've already heard the importance of making sure that they're time bound. As has already been mentioned, we need the appropriate funding and monitoring to achieve those targets. Translating those targets into things that are actionable and the funding and monitoring is really important. It would be helpful to be to advise us what that might look like in terms of our on-going scrutiny. I'd like to help us with giving a view on what influence or leadership did the Scottish Government or indeed Scottish institutions including our scientific community provide at COP15 or the run-up to negotiations which is a key period and for example what impact did the Edinburgh declaration have? I chaired the UK joint niche conservation committee so I have to be evenly spread across the UK in terms of what I say but I may be slightly biased towards Scotland. Prior to CBD, we produced a joint statement from the four agencies from NatureScot, Natural England, NRW, Wales and Northern Ireland. That statement laid out key issues that should be addressed at CBD. Following that up with the presence of the minister at the conference itself and with the Edinburgh declaration really had an impact. I think a lot of my work historically has been on a translation from the academic scientific world into practical conservation action. I think what you saw in the lead up to the Montreal conference would very much that Scottish input into a UK discussion and then into a global discussion. In terms of leadership generally, the reality is that the world does look to Scotland in terms of leadership in terms of leadership in terms of nature conservation. Historically, we have looked at many issues around species management, land use management, marine conservation in particular that we have heard about as well. We have in the next year or two a real opportunity to take what we are doing here in Scotland and come on to the biodiversity strategy itself and to show the world what we are actually doing in a very positive way. That is not saying that it is perfect, no country at the minute is perfect in terms of implementing the outcome from the conference. Scotland by having a strategy document drafted beforehand that will then modify and develop as we begin to digest the targets properly is in a really good position to influence that wider debate going forward. That wider debate from my perspective is both within the wider UK and in our remit in JNCC and very much to take that into the global discussion the global discussions that will happen over the next year or two. I think what I am saying is that Scotland has been hugely influential. The potential is there to be as influential going forward but we have got to keep our eye on the ball in terms of what we are trying to do here in terms of delivery. One example, we talk about 30 per cent protected areas to put our land and sea area into that sort of scale 30 per cent protected but behind that we have still got to look at is that being effective we have still got to look at monitoring, we have still got to look at the species populations, the overall habitat health to make sure that within protected areas we are doing the right thing as well. It is about targets, numerical targets, it is about ecological targets as well to say what is really happening and then to make sure that things are really getting better. We have a history of monitoring really well in Scotland and in the UK. I think that there is a real opportunity coming in the next year or two to be more influential than maybe we have been. I see you nodding, perhaps you might want to comment. I think that one strength of the Edinburgh process as well has been not only the adoption of the global biodiversity framework in terms of its own decision 15 slash 4 but also COP decision 15 slash 12 which was around sub-national governments also having a voice in the whole process and in the implementation and reporting and monitoring of the global biodiversity framework and the commitment from the party so the UK is a party to the convention to actually work with Scotland and other nations to actually report as a whole on the implementation and make sure that that happens. There are a few timeframes that I think we should watch for in terms of complying with what was agreed upon in Montreal. The NBSAPS, the National Biodiversity Plans and Strategies that the UK will have to update and review to align with the global biodiversity framework is due by COP16 so that will be in the fall of 2024 so making sure that the UK Government as a whole is working together with the Scottish Government will be very important in that respect to make sure that the Scottish strategy for example is taken into consideration in the NBSAPS as a whole and also in terms of reporting there are two important dates 2026 will be the first stock take type of reporting deadline for at the CBD and then 2029 so making sure that whatever we do here in Scotland in terms of reporting and review mechanisms align with those timeframes I think will be important as well. Can I maybe ask Dr Ruth Mitchell about Scottish institutions and their role in the lead-up to COP and after this and perhaps what you might want to reflect on what contribution your own institution had? I think certainly the research institutions play an invaluable role in providing the underpinning research to underpin the understanding of some of the biodiversity crisis so looking at the impacts of both direct drivers on biodiversity such as pollution or climate change or land use but also the indirect drivers so the societal changes that drive biodiversity loss indirectly. At the James Hutton Institute we've done a lot of work in relation to storage which is important not only for the climate crisis but also for the biodiversity crisis as well and for the biodiversity that's imported in those habitats but we also do a lot of work on a lot of other habitats as well in terms of looking at many of our honourable habitats in Scotland such as our Atlantic rainforests how we can restore them. I think it's really important that we have that underpinning research to understand how the biodiversity is changing or why it's changing and then what we can do to try and reverse those changes and also to provide the monitoring to look at the success of actually developing monitoring techniques to monitor the success of the restoration and the implementation we're putting in place because there's a lot of new techniques out there that we can now use nowadays to try and monitor biodiversity. Finally, what do you see Scotland's places internationally and globally in the biodiversity crisis both in the lead-up and outcomes from COP 15 and where do you see Scotland globally? There's just two quick points that I would make. One is I think Scotland is showing the way through the Edinburgh Declaration. Scotland has lots of opportunities to bring national, local, regional authorities, organisations together to work together to deliver the targets and that's shown very well in the Edinburgh Declaration which when you think about it bringing the subnational, regional, local, city authorities together between them they manage an awful lot of land and a lot of biodiversity so their contribution together through the Edinburgh Declaration will be a big step forward I think for the global biodiversity framework. The second way I think Scotland can demonstrate leadership is by testing out approaches and one of the key areas I think is when you look at the pattern of land ownership that we're going to need to find ways of building nature networks to reconnect nature together and that's going to have to cross ownership boundaries so I think there's a great opportunity there for Scotland to be able to demonstrate what that looks like because it's not going to be an easy thing to do but because of the way Scotland is set up and because of the way Scotland can put in place mechanisms that ensure regional, local, land managers and owners and local communities come together I think there's a good chance there for Scotland to be able to test the approach and show what can be done. Interesting point about international convenership I think that you're making, thank you. That's about Camino. Thank you very much and I'd like to apologise at this stage, my good manners deserted me at the start of the session when I should have welcomed Mercedes Villalba who's joining the committee today. I will give you some chance to answer questions at the end and I'm sorry for not introducing you earlier my mistake. The next questions come from Liam. Thank you, Camino. Good morning, panel. Dr Mitchell, I'll come to you first. You talked about implementation of the COP 15 outcomes and you talked about translating into smart targets making things achievable and time bound and you talked about funding and monitoring. Do you think that the new Biodiversity Strategy and Delivery Plan align to the GBF targets and indeed those items that you've spoken about and how translatable actually are the targets coming out of COP 15 into domestic Scottish policy? I think the key will be in the delivery plan because the strategy at the moment still has some further work to do on it to make it perhaps as smart and as specific for those targets as we need. I understand from NatureScot that they have started translating across from the targets from COP 15 to the Biodiversity Strategy. I think that perhaps those links need to be made really clear. I definitely think that there's further work to be done in terms of making the targets smarter in terms of making them more specific and targeted and time bound. Thank you. Deborah Long, we've only got seven years to Dr Mitchell's talked about how more must be done and when he talks about the new Biodiversity Strategy and Delivery Plan, more must be done and we need to get the plan together. Deborah Long, have we got time really? Time is definitely short. We should have been doing an awful lot more before now, but we are where we are. There are definitely areas where we can and we must pick up the speed. I think that the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy is a good start. As Dr Mitchell says, delivery plans are going to be really key. If they are in five-year delivery plans, which they will be, the first delivery plan takes us practically up to 2030, so that delivery plan has to hit the ground running. It has to have the specific smart targets, but it also needs to bring everyone on board because this can't be delivered by NatureScot on its own or any of the public agencies on their own, so it needs to bring everyone on board. I think that there are certain mechanisms that we can make sure that we bring enough people into this to achieve the speed and the momentum that we need within the next five years. One of that is mainstreaming, so it's not just the environment director that's concerned with this, but MPF4, for example, is helping to contribute towards the targets. The land use strategy is helping to contribute to the targets. One of the biggest things that we could do in Scotland is to tackle the deer management issue in the uplands because that would address what are the targets that we have discussed today in terms of halting biodiversity loss in biodiversity-rich areas. If we could tackle that, that would take us a long way towards where we need to be in 2030. There are lots of other examples, but I think that the key thing is that let's mainstream it, let's take responsibility for it at cabinet level so that everyone out there can see that this is really, really important and we do want to meet the targets and let's bring as many people on board as possible because we all need to be involved if we're going to be successful, which we need to be. I think that the worry seems to be if there is a degree of complacency. One of the things Colin Galbraith, that I would like to explore, said earlier on that the world does look to Scotland to show the world what we're doing, which I found quite surprising given that it was mentioned at the IHE targets and Scotland failed to meet the IHE targets. Nine of the 20 I think were met and the ones that were met were personal view perhaps, but not perhaps quite the key ones that we need to be meeting. On that note then Colin Galbraith, the GBF talks about increasing the ambition on finance for biodiversity. Target 19 actually talks about scaling up finance for biodiversity. We've just had a budget. In your view, has that been met? I think that there are several issues in there. The world does look to the UK and it does look to Scotland, for example, as well as for leadership. I'm convinced of that. I haven't worked in international nature conservation for about 30 plus years and we do have something to offer in there in terms of the historic approach to nature conservation. I think where we are now, as Deborah said, in terms of that mix of land-use species management, terrestrial and marine, there's something we can offer to say, well this is how we're doing it, what do you think to the other world? On finance, there's never enough money going into nature conservation. It's as basic as that. I think when you look at the new framework that we have from CBD, we will undoubtedly focus on the 2030 targets unrightly, but actually there are 2050 targets in there as well that are more profound. You're just to read a little bit. By 2050, the integrity, connectivity and resilience of ecosystems will be maintained, enhanced and restored. That's goal A in the new agreement. That is a huge challenge. I think that we've got to do several things. One is absolutely look after what we have now. As Deborah said, we're only seven years up to 2030 but let's really protect and look after what we have right now because for the next five to seven years, this is what we're going to have. Then by 2030, let's get the innovative plan that the strategy is beginning to build towards in place, but also keep an eye on that longer 2050 plan, which again, the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy is 2045, there is a longer term view there. But actually each of these time phases becomes really important and really important that more resource comes into it progressively. So are we in the right place now? No, I don't think any country is, frankly, following the Montreal Agreement in terms of finances. I think we've got to look and make clear arguments as to why the very scarce budget should be deployed in this way. It is about quality of life, it is about maintaining green space, it is about looking after our fresh water, our uplands, our marine environment for the good of people and for the good of nature. We are entirely dependent on the ecosystems around about us and it's how we get that message over that will then hopefully lead to greater resource coming in. But there is one enormous job to do across the whole of government in Scotland and in other countries to deliver that. Thank you. Daniela Diz, I'll make this the last question for just now. Are there any priorities or targets that this committee needs to be particularly aware of, that we need to be saying that that is the key target that we need to prioritise, or are there any targets that will be particularly difficult to be achieved in your view that this committee needs to be focusing on? Thank you. I think that in terms of prioritisation, I think just building on what Colin was saying, there is a lot that Scotland has been doing already and more focus also on the biodiversity strategy could put efforts on to build upon what has been achieved, the one of the things that is referred to in this strategy perhaps not so much is blue carbon and it's important for this committee in terms of delivering nature-based solutions and even though salt marshes is referred to and there are a number of places it's referred to also. Pitlands of course is super important but in terms of carbon sank, there are other ecosystems and marine ecosystems. Scottish government has done audits for example in the Orkney identifying several other marine ecosystems that play a very important role in carbon sank and storage and it's much broader than salt marshes and seagrasses so it goes on to kelp, bryo zones, brittle star ecosystems, a number of others. So making sure that its strategy rightly says that it will be identifying ecosystems for restoration and protection but looking through the lens of also blue carbon and ensuring that nature-based solutions so that's in relation to target eight but it also is across cutting issue I think that you can integrate that into target three marine protected areas and other effective area-based conservation areas. Other effective area-based conservation measures is also an area that I think is growing in attention globally. FAO has produced guidelines for fisheries sector for example to align with the CBD criteria from 2018 on other effective area-based conservation measures or OECMs and that could also be further explored in more in depth either through the delivery plans or further elaborated in the strategy. It's also related to target three on 30 by 30 because it's marine protected areas, protected areas terrestrially and OECMs that will help achieve that 30 by 30. Target one also on special planning Scotland has done a lot with respect to marine special planning and I think that the qualifiers in target one integrated equitable biodiversity inclusive marine special planning is also an area that Scotland could lead and help lead and provide leadership to the world and of course target two on restoration I think the biodiversity strategy the Scottish one has put a lot of emphasis on restoration ecological restoration and I think in light of all of those different ecosystems it's an area that Scotland can provide leadership and target five is not really mentioned in the strategy as far as I could see and it relates to fisheries of course forestry as well but fisheries is not explicitly mentioned in target five at the moment but it does you can look at if you look at it it talks about bycatch it talks about ecosystem protection of ecosystem vulnerable ecosystem so those type of terms are already included in the strategy but it doesn't refer to target five and ecosystem approach of fisheries for example ecosystem of implementation of ecosystem approach more broadly and and as Deborah mentioned a mainstreaming of biodiversity across all sectors across all policies and legislation is really key and that's target 14 so I think it is challenging all of those are challenging areas as well but I think those are areas that Scotland has been providing leadership but it could be further enhanced to show the world and just one final thing on target 14 I think it's really CBG has adopted guidelines on voluntary guidelines previously in the past on biodiversity inclusive environmental impact assessments and biodiversity inclusive strategic environmental assessments for both terrestrial and marine ecosystems and I think you know taking a look at those guidelines and seeing how that could be integrated into UK and Scottish legislation would be a step forward towards the implementation of target 14 on mainstreaming very grateful unless anyone else wants to respond to that question thank you very much Liam we're going to come back to Fiona for another question so the the two of the notable targets of the global framework are the 30 by 30 target and the restoration target and obviously for restoration to be completed or underway on at least 30 percent of degraded terrestrial inland and coastal marine ecosystems so what scale the challenge is that is this and I also declare on the nature champion for Scotland's extraordinary blanket bulks and obviously our peatland restoration is absolutely huge so interested to heal you you say what that in particular but what scale of challenges does this bring us for diverse biodiversity conservation in Scotland and if you can maybe be a bit more specific now about what type of programmes you would expect to be seeing for us to be meeting those targets by 30 by 13 and the restoration target and if I maybe come to you first Dr Ruth Mitchell if that's okay and then to Deborah thank you very much I think the real key here is the word effective in the target because I think it's very easy for things to be protected on paper but for that not to actually have the effect actually on the ground so I think there's a lot of work going on to work out how we might sort of designate or protect on paper 30 but the key is going to be making sure that that's really effective so already in many of our protected areas we've got land that's protected but there's still many damaging activities going on both on protected land and in protected sea areas so it's not just about the designation it's about what actually implementing that on the ground that I think is really key and my first point yeah is there anything else you want to see Dr Mitchell that sorry Deborah okay so on 30 by 30 there are three elements really that we need to consider as part of 30 by 30 it is a big challenge and what it's going to take is that we need to expand from if we take the land example for example about 17 percent of Scotland's land at the moment is designated and protected and managed for nature to increase that to 30 000 we're looking at a number of almost 980 000 hectares needs to come into protection for nature so that's a big challenge it's not impossible because within that we can start to look at the OECMs that Daniella mentioned so that can help but it is a big challenge to expand that area we then need to improve the condition of the protected areas that we already have they're not as good as they could be and we need to be making sure that external impacts that are impacting on protected areas are minimized so they're not having as much of an impact and the other areas that we need to start to connect them together and connectivity ecological connectivity between protected areas and the areas outside and between habitats outside protected areas is going to be the fundamental thing in my view that will take us toward ecological resilience and that's what we need for the future we need our ecosystems to be resilient so they can continue to maintain the ecosystem services that we all rely on not just species and you know green access to nature for our health and our mental wellbeing but it's also flooding it's also productive soils it's also pollination it's all of those things that we need to build and I think connectivity is going to be one of the biggest elements of that in terms of nature restoration we need to be looking both at habitats and species there is more that we think we can do on the species side in the Scottish biodiversity strategy the target in the Scottish biodiversity strategy isn't as ambitious as the one in the global biodiversity framework so we think that needs to have a bit more of a look at and then in terms of how we actually do that one obvious area of work is looking at the agricultural subsidy because that needs to come back to the finance point that is a portion of money of which needs to go towards conserving biodiversity on the ground and by that what we're calling for from link is to put 70% of that funding to work towards 70% of that funding going towards nature and climate friendly farming if we do that then that means we're also contributing towards the 30x30 target for farmland and farmed land across Scotland is about 70% of our landscape so that's a big chunk then of course we've got woodland we've got forestry strategy up for review at the moment very very welcome to see that and the more we can use that to be looking at natural regeneration to connect our areas of forestry together to look at including more native species to look at making sure that schemes that happen are assessed on a long enough timescale that people will actually go in for them so for example at the moment if you go for a natural regeneration scheme you've only you've only got five years to prove that's going to work five years isn't very long for a forester that needs to be much longer it needs to be something like 15 so that people are more encouraged to go for it then two other quick points upland i've already mentioned deer if we can tackle the deer the distribution and the number of deer across Scotland at the moment that means that we will be bringing an awful lot of our uplands back into better condition so we be looking at arctic heath we'd be looking at lichen communities on the cairngorn plateau for example we'd be looking at montane woodlands we'd be looking at peatlands all of those things would benefit from having lower deer densities and can i just ask you deba we have heard from him in his questioning about public finance there's also an understanding that private finance would need to be mobilised to get anywhere near some of his targets and there's obviously question marks as to whether that's been done in an appropriate way in terms of international carbon offsetting etc but can you maybe give me your personal view or indeed Scottish environmental links view as to whether or not we should and be using private finance to do some of this restoration and what would be the optimum programme that is equitable but also reflects the need to meet these targets but to have balance in that finance system for the private interests which are obviously extensively investing as we've just seen recently i don't think we'll do it without private finance to be honest i don't there just isn't going to be enough public funding to be able and charitable funding to be able to tackle this so i think we do need to look at private finance i think we need to be careful and we need to learn the lessons of the 80s so that we don't end up in situations where we've got a lot of forestry being put on on peaks for example so we need to learn those lessons in terms of the balance there is obviously got to be a very clear balance between benefits to the local community of private finance within going into nature and climate schemes but we also need to be putting in place risk management strategies so that private finance is actually benefiting biodiversity and carbon and there are a few mechanisms that we do need government to be putting in place so that we know that we are that private finance is going into the the right kind of action in the right kind of place so there's the right tree right place argument there's also how do local communities benefit from that it's a global benefit if you're conserving ecosystems how do the local communities benefit from that and how do we distribute the benefits of private finance coming into a biodiversity credit market which is not well developed at the moment there's a big big role there for government to make sure that any biodiversity credit market and we're still doing the thinking on what this might look like but it has to ensure that what comes out at the end is restoring nature into the long term so any scheme that just looks at five years or 10 years if you're looking at a financial scale timescale then 10 years is is pretty good but if you're looking on an ecological timescale then 10 years is the blink of an eye so it's trying to match up those two timescales and I think there's a really important role there for government to look at the risk in terms of time and scale of action as well because we want it to be spread across at the landscape and across local communities so that everyone benefits from it and with the convener if I can bring in the other are we okay for time we're fine deputy convener Daniela you want to come in on this and on how what programmes are needed to meet these targets and if you've had any any reflections on what you've heard from the other panelists as well on this point yeah no I completely agree with Deborah I think we need to be careful we've learned some lessons elsewhere in the world where you know the communities have been especially with mangroves for example in in some african countries there's some carbon credit schemes where the local communities weren't very you know listened to so it's important to have all the accountability in place and checks and balances from government to make sure that private financing is streamlined in a way that doesn't undermine local interests and local community's interests but I think I agree that there is need for private financing in the interface between the CBD and the UNFCCC I think what was achieved in Montreal can really enhance what has been ongoing at UNFCCC there is a dialogue between oceans and UNFCCC going on at the moment and even though the IPCC has only developed methodologies for assessing carbon sinks and also emissions from the graded areas for in terms of marine ecosystems especially for seagrasses and mangroves there is an opportunity now that with the CBD that those other blue carbon ecosystems that we mentioned before can also be further developed in terms of scientific methodology for assessing their role in carbon sink but also in biodiversity benefits and ecosystem services so I think that the GBF has provided that bridge I think that that is needed between the climate regime and the biodiversity regime and there is a lot of opportunity to build on that but with caution and I think with the government playing an important role in terms of regulation and ensuring the checks and balances in place so that nature-based solutions can be you know in the definition that was adopted by UNEA last year or before I think it was last year can also be achieved in that context so it doesn't but nature-based solutions doesn't harm biodiversity because there isn't you know there was one of the fears with the term nature-based solutions they need to be increasing biodiversity actually and biodiversity positive outcomes rather than something that uses nature but it could pose a threat as well but also for the benefit of local communities and everyone. Do you think that Scotland is underdeveloped in utilising its marine assets or seas around it for that twin-track approach of tackling biodiversity loss the crisis there but also the climate crisis in terms of that carbon that carbon sink aspect? I think so but I think Scotland is not alone and all nations in the world I think have under utilised that but I think that the studies that Scotland has been put forward I think can be built upon and really Scotland has the great opportunities to provide leadership to the world in in in this context. Thank you very much. Okay there are some supplementaries on this I think Mark has got one and Jackie's got one and then we're going to mark some questions that he's got but Deborah because you mentioned the word agricultural subsidies I think it's only fair that I remind the committee that I am part of a family farming partnership. We are in receipt of agricultural subsidies and we are managing land at Woodland just so there's no dubiety about that but it has been declared to the committee before and it is on my register of interest so I'm going to go to Mark for your supplementary and then over to Jackie. We've spoken quite a bit about 30x30 and that's the headline I suppose of the framework I mean it does make me think about the other 70% then and you know Deborah you've already spoken about agricultural subsidy reform. I was thinking about the marine space I mean is it enough for governments to designate marine protected areas put in place management measures police them or should we really be looking beyond that to wider ecosystem management you know looking at the impact for example of dredging and trawling on inshore areas I mean is there a danger there I say it that the 30x30 focuses all the attention on the parks if you like and we lose the kind of need for ecological coherency across management of wider seas. Daniela would you like to come in on that? Sure yeah and I think that was one of the even in the negotiations of the jubi affid with something that a lot of countries emphasised that you know there's so much push for the 30x30 target that some countries felt like well what about the rest of the targets and but I think that all of the other targets can really contribute to that other side of the 30x30 and they need to be implemented equally so target one on spatial planning that's not just for the 30% that will be protected it's for areas you know surrounding that 30x30 by the the rest of it everything needs to be sustainably managed it's 100% sustainable management we have obligations under the convention biological diversity and marine environment we have obligations under the UN convention the law of the sea to protect and preserve the marine environment and it's 100% so the jubi affid just tries to I think streamline so what are the priority targets and actions that need to be put in place to implement those legally binding obligations that we have elsewhere or under the convention itself so target one certainly would contribute to that on spatial planning target two on restoration it's not just focus on the 30% that would be protected it's also outside target foreign species threatened species and other species that need to be conserved it's not only within the 30% and so on fisheries management and forest you know in five and the mainstreaming of biodiversity that we talked about before target 14 it's across all policies and instruments so we need to be for everything so of course the focus has been a lot on 30x30 but it is a I think an effort for all targets combined and for the 100% sustainable okay I don't know if others want to briefly add to that otherwise we'll move on but yeah okay if I could just briefly I mean I think there is a danger 30x30 in itself is a fantastic target and a real step forward you've got to look at 30x30 in the context of climate change as well and we have the 20 emergencies of nature loss and climate change and how then do we meet the 30x30 target what are we actually protecting how sustainable is what we protect so I think 30x30 will probably dominate hopefully we'll look at the effectiveness and not just a number if you like in terms of the scale but the other parts of the agreement from Montreal are really profound in terms of what they mean for how we manage our land how we manage our seas so I think to your question is there a danger it dominates yes there is I think we can have a wider debate and discussion over the years to come but let's look at it as that twin track of nature loss and climate together from a nature conservation point of view that really begs some really profound questions what are we trying to restore what level of restoration do we want how do we prioritise and these are issues we need to grapple with going forward yeah long-standing issues in conservation I think forever might also refer to Deborah as well so can I bring Jackie in why not yeah and just say if we can tie the two up together Jackie thank you yes if I could come to Deborah if you don't mind you've mentioned a couple of times now about gear management could you maybe go into to more detail about it you know could you explain to us what you think the issues are round about gear management and what the solutions would you think are needed to address those issues yes and I'd also like to say something about marine as well but I'll do dear first so if you look at the state of nature report this is produced every three years by a community of ENGOs but also includes NatureScot, Royal Botanic Garden Scotland so public agencies as well and that looks at the state of nature across Scotland and it also looks at key drivers of change and when you look at the uplands one of the key drivers of change are deer numbers and the sort of thing we're looking at is that the carrying capacity of Scottish upland habitat so we're talking about montane woodlands and above if you like it's roughly five deer per kilometer and some areas of Scotland have got 64 deer per kilometer so when you look at the numbers if you look at a graph deer numbers have gone up massively since the 90s and that's the scale of the problem really and the impact that that's having not just in upland areas I mean you see the impact of roedif for example in lowland areas as well but it means that it limits woodland regeneration so natural regeneration of trees is very very difficult when you've got high levels of deer at that number it also tends to increase where they concentrate erosion so it's not just deer that do this you know any any people humans cattle will erode soils if there are too many of them on a single path you only have to go up a munro to be able to see that so what we need to do is if we can manage the deer populations to bring it down to a carrying capacity it means those habitats then are in a much better condition to be restored and to hold more of the native species that should be living there so that's why I think if we can tackle the deer population in Scotland and bring it down to a level that's much closer to the carrying capacity of Scottish habitats then I think that that would be a massive win not easy and I know that what I'm saying is very controversial in some areas it's not easy but I think it is a big win and if I remember rightly figures what you're saying is meaning that the deer themselves are starving if I remember correctly correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's what I found out before there is an animal welfare issue there where you've got too many deer and the habitat just can't support them so there is definitely it it's an environmental issue and it's an animal welfare issue as well where there are too many deer okay and just to finish to convener and so would you so would your suggestion would that be a call that you would suggest or would that be moving them on to to other grounds if possible I think there's too many to keep moving them around to be honest and in the absence of um I mean we lost the natural predators to deer a very very long time ago so there's there's all that there is to control them at the moment humans so we do need to increase cull levels I think and then the other you've mentioned it already is that there just isn't enough food for them so yeah I think we are looking at at deer control the other advantage of this is is at the moment we put Scotland puts a huge amount of funding into fencing if we could if we could divert some of that funding from fencing into deer management it means that we've got an active longer term larger scale solution to to one of the biggest drivers of of change in Scotland's uplands okay thank you thank you convener thank you back to um sorry monica that's a very brief supplementary one a brief one on the night i'm sorry i'm just worried about time i've got my makes one is it on is it on okay sorry um it was just on that um sorry to um grill you now on sustainable deer management day but since it's come up I just wonder you might not want to put a number on this but in terms of culling what is the extent of that um I read recently I think there's you know millions of deer in Scotland but when you're talking about sustainable deer management is there a an optimal number in mind it depends on the habitat so some habitats can carry more deer than others so it would be very much a you know a situation for each habitat it would need to be assessed on a on a habitat basis i'm afraid so there's no there's no magic number unfortunately no simple answer thank you okay um mark back back to you um yes if I could pick up with with the flow for for marine um because I think um Deborah Long wanted to ask that and I just wanted to ask Dr Mitchell if she had anything to add on that not on the marine area at all okay I was going to come back about biodiversity credits at some point but okay feel feel free I was just going to just agree that the issue of biodiversity credits is something I think that um we as Scotland do need to um look into further because I think there's a danger of multiple different credits being devised and systems being devised and the potential for unintended consequences if they're not used um correctly and we don't understand the science behind how these credits are being devised so I think it's really important that we understand that the fundamental science behind how those credits are being calculated because biodiversity is not simple with carbon it is essentially one measure you can measure carbon where with biodiversity you've got a whole range of different species and if you benefit some species or you benefit some habitats that might have negative consequences on other habitats so I think as the potential market for biodiversity credit develops we really need to be aware of unintended consequences okay Deborah can I go back to you on marine yes I was just going to you are some is it enough the 30 percent is it enough to focus on on 30 by 30 and no it's not that the other 70 percent we do need to be looking at connecting habitats together both on land and at sea but specifically at sea I wanted to point out that although we've got 37 percent of scotches seas under marine protected area designation if you look at that less than one percent is strictly protected but if you look at an example of where it's strictly protected lamblash bay is the example that's always given the benefits of strictly protecting that area that that then gives to local communities to the fishing community is significant so if we and we do need to expand our less than one percent strict protection up to the 10 percent within the target and make sure that the 37 percent we've already got as marine marine protected areas are protected for nature then the benefits are much much more than just protecting for nature it benefits local communities coastal and fishing communities to okay and convener i'm just going to move on to some other questions around supply chains and consumption i mean it's good to see the framework recognising this as an issue and I suppose every every time we buy clothing or we buy food that's been imported it's always we drive an electric car it's always something that you know is forefront of my mind about what is the impact of that wider supply chain on the planet and biodiversity um did you know if we've got enough clarity at the moment about the impact of supply chains and consumption in in scotland i mean is there that transparency in terms of corporate reporting or government reporting on this whole area colin did you want to start with that if i could maybe make a start on that i mean i think the answer to that is no um in jncc we've developed an indicator that looks at global consumption in your per country and we did take that to the meeting in montreal and it's being used as one of two i think it is indicators by by cbd in terms of this is how you could calculate your national sort of draw on the world so we're very happy to circulate details of that around to the committee to let you have a look at that one of the key targets in the framework is to cut global food waste by half and you think back to the in that consumption indicator and you think back to the potential damage that could be reduced on the environment if we could cut food waste by half if we could look at developing a common indicator that's used around the world to tell countries where they're at uh that would be a major step forward and it's certainly something that we will progressively take back to the next cbd cop on the one after as well in terms of looking at the methodology to do that because we do need to understand much better our our global footprint whether that's scotland uk or or any other country around the world it's it's a big issue to try and get hold of in just in terms of how we report that and how we calculate it is very much work in progress for us so i think i'm agreeing with you mark that we don't understand it well enough we do need to because it has major implications in terms of how we impact on the world we don't just offshore problems that we actually solve them going forward the circular economy bill is just closed for consultation and that's where that's the opportunity i think for scotland to use the mechanisms within that bill to decrease our carbon our ecological and our material footprints and there are several ways we can do that one is to design out waste so that we're not producing waste at the end of the system increasing recycling and repair repairability so when you've got products coming onto the market making sure that you can actually get them mended and also putting in place a polluter pay so that at the end of a product's life that goes back to a manufacturer so that you're not just putting it into landfill where it will just sit for decades so building those kind of responses into the circular economy act i think would be really powerful and do you think that's best done on a sector by sector approach so we're looking at consumption or consumption targets are the very obvious sectors where the impact in terms of climate biodiversity is quite acute and we need to focus and we perhaps have levers in some areas but not not in others i think it's a good place to start it's a very practical place to start but we mustn't lose sight of the overall vision which is to decrease our material carbon and ecological networks if we focus too much on a sector by sector approach there's the risk that we'll miss the overall goal but it's a practical place to start okay um daniela do you wish to come in on this or yeah just briefly one example that i think needs to be uh further thought through um you know in terms of it's very difficult i agree with colin and debra on on the challenges and also the the way forward and where to start but just one example that we need to think further is you know for example you mentioned renewables and electric cars for example and um and then what does that mean you know in terms of deep seabed mining for example that could be a lot of arguments has been used in terms of we need to start deep seabed mining because we need the minerals for electric cars and all of that is that so further investigating if that's true if recycling could be um uh an alternative and what is the methodology that needs to be put in place to make sure that recycling is an option uh of those materials or or um yeah broader and in-depth discussion about those trade-offs i think is needed yep um dr mitchell do you want to come in on this just to quickly agree with colin about the risk of potentially um offshoring our our biodiversity footprint there was a statistic i read the other day that i think implied the UK was a fifth worst country in terms of exporting its biodiversity footprint to other countries so while we try and improve um things within scotland or the UK we need to make sure that obviously we don't have unintended consequences aboard yep thanks for that point back to you convene okay thank you very much monica i think you've got some questions thank you convener it's been great to have so many um experts with us today so it's been a really um fascinating session i wanted to ask about the the global biodiversity framework um so we know that the targets seek to integrate action to tackle climate and nature crises um together so you know we all understand that these are indeed interlinked i wonder if we could maybe hear some examples of the sort of obligations that these targets create in practice in terms of how countries seek to tackle the climate and nature crisis together so maybe just come round to panel starting with you daniella yeah well those targets are policy instruments they're not legally binding per se but they were adopted under the framework of the convention which is an international treaty so one could think that yeah it provides for the means of implementation of the convention and the obligations contained under the convention uh and they need to be taken very seriously of course they're political commitments but to implement legally binding obligations that they have under the convention and also under other conventions like UNF triple C climate and love the sea on on on oceans and and and others conventional migratory species and and so on so examples is that they're quite broad and wide in range which is really great so they bring together um means to implement legally binding um frameworks like in a way that they haven't done that before so there's a lot of uh for example um language around ecological connectivity across the across the gbf that helps not only implement the obligations under the convention biological diversity but also the convention migratory species um there are commitments around yeah trade and supply chains and so on that can help uh achieve obligations under the the site is convention on trade of endangered species um it helps implement the obligations under the the law of the sea in terms of protection of the marine environment through the 30 by 30 and also the convention biological diversity its obligations on in-sea to conservation and also sustainable use under article 10 of the convention so all of the other targets that we refer to are also contributing to sustainable use of biodiversity not only the protection of that 30 percent um and so it puts in place a good framework for actually achieving global uh legally binding uh obligations under a number of different conventions not only the convention biological diversity thank you daniela collin i think just i'm thinking a very couple of practical examples you know if we meet 2030 in terms of the the protected area target and do that to restland marine but a couple of examples you know if we expand our peatland area for example then we will get the double whammy if you like a better you know more and better nature more and better carbon potentially you're linking into an economic argument in there as well so there is a multiple win here that when you take the 20 by 30 target it looks quite stark here it's just a number but actually when you look at the potential that's behind that either in peatland or in woodland the same example you know if we expanded our native woodlands and our native woodland protected areas allowed natural regeneration that debra took us into in terms of deer management then you would have a resilient ecosystem which is really important because with climate change comes greater disease risk and we've seen that in monocultures around the world where you have a monoculture woodland or a monoculture anything it tends to be really quite vulnerable to disease and to massive disease outbreaks as well so in woodland getting back to larger more connected better managed protected areas across the UK and across Europe actually you would get a more resilient system that actually would benefit locally as well so you could have local woodland management you would have ecotourism behind that as well so what looks like quite stark and you know academic if you like on paper when you begin to try and translate that into on the ground action there are multiple benefits there and I come back to in Scotland I think we're actually pretty good at showing that to the rest of the world and it's that kind of example peatland restoration for example I would argue that we really do lead the world in terms of what we're doing we can do a lot more but actually it's about turning the agreement here into something that's very real that benefits us all going forward so in that sense I'm quite optimistic we could do it. If we look at the four goals of the global biodiversity framework I think it very clearly maps out what our obligations will be in implementing them if we look at increasing the area of natural ecosystems then that is clearly an obligation to improve the extent and condition of natural ecosystems so they can function more effectively into the future into the long-term future say 100 years from now that relates back to climate change obviously there's the restoring habitats and ecosystems and the species that live there there's an obligation there to be to be doing more than we're already doing at the moment one area where I think we need to put more energy into is in the sharing the benefit so the third goal is to share the monetary and non-monetary benefits and I think we could be doing more in terms of how local communities benefit from action on nature and climate change Colin's absolutely right we need to do both together and then the final one is on implementing how do we implement all of this obviously we need the finance we've we've already talked about that we also need I think we do need the political will and leadership we need to see that this is a commitment from government and that together we are going to act and save and help promote and save Scotland's amazing wildlife and landscapes but then as part of that government can't do it on its own it's not just about doing this it's about enabling and supporting all of civic society to come on that journey as well so I think there's another big piece there a part of an obligation in order to be able to to ensure that we implement the four goals as we go along and just one last thing the avian flu outbreak has really illustrated the impact of what's happening at the moment it's clearly an emergency and it's clearly getting bigger and it's getting worse and what that does is it really highlights the need for us to step up on nature restoration not just at sea but also on land and the avian flu is a really big wake-up call I think for us all to to muck in really and and get on this journey together thank you that's a really important point and I'll come next to Ruth please thank you yeah I mean broadly speaking I think it goes back goes back to the points I was making at the beginning that to address both the climate and the biodiversity crisis we need to mainstream biodiversity across all the different sectors I think that's a word that all the panellists have said repeatedly throughout this session is the importance of getting that mainstream across the different sectors we need to address what we call the indirect drivers so the societal drivers the government drivers and the politics the institutions so that our policies are really joined up and that biodiversity is addressed in our agricultural policies and in our forestry policies as well we've already said that our climates need targets need to be smart so I just reiterate that again and yeah again reiterating the importance of funding and I think that's really important that we have funding to conserve what we've got at the moment but also to restore habitats and species and then finally obviously to fund the research that we need to do to monitor that biodiversity and to find out how we're how those direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity impacting biodiversity and just perhaps a couple of specific examples of where climate change and biodiversity sort of link up there's been a lot of examples of woodlands often chosen as an example of how you can meet both the climate and the biodiversity targets and it can but I think we need to be really careful as the others have said about the right tree in the right place because the wrong tree in the wrong place can have negative impacts for both biodiversity and climate and we need to be aware of the other habitats we've got in Scotland that can also benefit climate and biodiversity a lot of our soils store a lot of carbon and many of our soils in Scotland are very carbon rich so not just our peatlands but our other soils on our heather mollans are also very carbon rich so we need to be aware of the carbon that we're storing in that and then also the biodiversity that's important on some of those upland mollans like some of our breeding waders and things so there's just a couple of examples there are some very specific Scottish habitats but yeah that our native woodlands can conserve a lot of biodiversity as well so it's that balance I'll stop there. Thank you Ruth, that's really helpful and you said about the right tree in the right place I'll also declare an interest that I have as the Parliament's nature champion for oak. My next question is around the EU's nature restoration law so if I may I might just stay with you Ruth and if others in the panel want to contribute please just catch my eye. So the committee has previously heard from stakeholders about the significance of the development of the EU's nature restoration law. I wonder to what extent you are monitoring the development of EU law in your different institutions? Are there areas where the EU is showing particular ambition or are notable in terms of how they might translate COP 15 outcomes and where should Scotland be seeking to keep pace if you're able to help with that set of questions Ruth that would be helpful. I think the other panelist might be better placed to answer it than they but generally I think the EU is showing considerable ambition in the restoration laws and I think Scotland would do really well to try and match that ambition that's coming out of those restoration laws so that would be my hope. Thank you for that very succinct answer no one's catching my eye call in would you like to have a go? Just briefly I mean in JNCC we try to keep an eye on good law developing in any country not just in the EU now I mean we do genuinely take a global look at it so very happy in future again to help in any aspect of that I think the restoration side of it is really really important and I come back to the twin emergencies between climate and nature laws its restoration is going to be fundamentally important but we need to be very clear what we're restoring back to and that may challenge us in terms of the future in terms of what the parts of the countryside should look like or will look like and I think collectively and globally we've not really seized yet the profound change that climate change is bringing we've seen the beginnings of it but not the the main part of it and I'm not sure we've yet grappled the whole profound nature loss that we're seeing globally in terms of the need for restoration so in a limited resource world I think there are big challenges there about restoration how we prioritise and how we target but we're certainly on the case in terms of keeping an eye on the legislation that you talk about thank you Colin and you'll probably be aware of the current revision process on going in the the European Parliament currently regards to the directive on protection of environment through the criminal law several committees have recommended the inclusion of a crime of ecocide in this directive as part of the division process is this an area of law that Scotland needs to be proactively looking at in terms of keeping pace do you have a view on that? I think one of the areas I looked at years ago was one or two South American countries who have a right to wildlife law and I think I'm right in saying that Ecuador in particular have a right to wildlife law now that is really radical and really revolutionary but in that particular case I think it came through the Galapagos Islands which are a quite unique global resource so there are examples around the world of different legal frameworks being put in place I think we need to be very clear on the purpose of any such law going forward and I think much of what we do in nature conservation is based on the voluntary principle in terms of collaboration in terms of partnership and maybe that in terms of restoration is a very good principle to hang on to going forward but you know I say again we're very happy to help if we can give any further information on law from other countries thank you thank you monica um there's still quite a few questions to go in time is is short so it flies when you're having fun so Jackie some questions from you and then I'm going to go to mark and then I'm going to come to Mercedes my question kind of follows on from what Monica was saying so I will leave it in your hands about who best answers it since time's short but it was regarding Monica mentioned the EU but I was wanting to find out about the best practice international best practice on biodiversity what what does it look like did did cop 15 managed to shine a light on on the international best practice of governance I'm not sure who'd be or could there be more could more be done well struggling to work out who's going to answer maybe if I could help you if I come to daniella and then go to Colin and then I'm afraid we'll have to move on to our next question is it right yeah I don't think that cop 15 managed to shed a light on that yet because we're just developing so we'll see that in the reports that come back the so the first report on the implementation of the gbf are due the the first cycle of the reports is due in 2026 so that's when we'll have a better sense of course there has been assessments by the global biodiversity outlook the last one is global biodiversity outlook five that looked at implementation of the each biodiversity target so the set of targets that came before but that was more on a global level and in an aggregated way so we'll have national reports and on the gbf specifically in 2026 and and I think that there is no country that does better in biodiversity overall I think that in some sectors in some instances in some habitats they can do better than others but it's a it's a mixed match but that's my opinion so they could learn from each other just just briefly I mean I think it is interesting I mean what does best practice look like I think there's something in nature conservation now about very clear targets real delivery a clear overview in terms of context where does that fit and then government support and potential funding the key part of that I think is community buy-in it's actually getting ownership locally and regionally for what's being done whether that's oak woodlands in ergail or whether it's upland areas in Aberdeenshire so that community buy-in is really important and I think some of the areas that I've looked at previously are in the what you would call the developing world in Africa and actually there are some really good examples of community ownership buy-in government support in Africa but you could argue actually we're moving in that direction as well there are great examples of community buy-in in parts of Scotland in terms of nature conservation management so I think one thing that would be really helpful is to pull together a list of good examples that would genuinely answer your question perhaps better than we have today but we shouldn't always jump in look abroad I think what we're doing here is actually fantastic across Scotland and across the UK you know we have a nature of Scotland award I think every November and when you see what's been done by local communities at that it's an award ceremony it's the Oscar for nature conservation but when you see the enthusiasm from children in schools around the country or local communities then we are doing an awful lot really well we could do more but let's let's look at home as well as abroad okay thank you you very much and Mark you've got a question and I'm going to come to you again my final question is I think predominantly for yourself Colin it's about the role of the JNCC in terms of providing that UK wide governance in relation to these international agreements that we're that we're signed up to and then I think slightly separately to that just again the JNCC's role in terms of cooperation so we have a very live example of that which we're considering at the moment as a committee with the energy bill and the establishment of offshore wind mitigation and a lot of complexities there over devolved and reserved boundaries so without opening up a huge cano world could you just address briefly those two points around governance and how cooperation work the JNCC sure I mean JNCC is a UK body it's the committee that I chair I've chaired it now for two and a bit years it's made up of the four countries so Nature Scott has got two representatives on the committee England Wales Northern Ireland and then we have five independent members and the independent chair so we are genuinely a body of the four countries of the UK our remit is very much UK overseas territories and international and I think what I'm keen that we do is that we take examples from around the UK and take that into the international arena as well as translating back down from agreements like CBD into the four countries so we're very much of that making as it were and it's a it's very much a partnership between the four countries and that's something I'm keen very keen to encourage that we actually take account of what's happening in the four countries rather than just being top down then we're bottom up as well if I can put it that way in terms of co-operation then we do work extremely closely with the four countries on marine issues in particular our remit is really beyond the 12 mile limit it's the countries will manage most of what's within the 12 mile limit our input and expertise it's very much beyond that in terms of marine protected areas renewables etc but we do work a devolved system countries are increasingly dealing with developers in particular offshore areas so the working arrangement right now is really constructive and very positive I think there's also an efficiency in there in terms of the collective scientific expertise that we can deploy along with colleagues in NatureScot or NRW in Wales or wherever so I'm very happy to follow up discussions with you about that if that's helpful can I just ask if you advise the UK government in relation to the energy bill offshore wind mitigation we have we have an hour involved in the UK government discussions about that yes okay okay I mean if there's anything you can forward to the committee on that matter it'll be very useful as well thank you okay thanks very much and if you are going to forward it can I just remind you to do it to the clerks and then we can we can all get get side of it Mercedes you've been sitting very quietly and patiently I've got I think you've got some questions yes thank you Carina and thank you to the committee for accommodating my involvement today so I'd like to ask a couple of questions depending on time the first relates to a point that Dr Deborah Long made regarding the need to mainstream the targets across different policy areas and sectors so I think other witnesses have mentioned that too so if we could hear from Deborah Long first then potentially the others if there's time so I'd like to know what role you see for land reform in ensuring successful implementation of the COP 15 outcomes in Scotland and if there are any specific interventions around this that your organisation would like to see yeah that's a big one so in terms of mainstreaming I think the only way that we're going to meet the targets both of the global biodiversity framework and the Scotch Biodiversity Strategy is to mainstream across planning for example so that MPF4 takes account of biodiversity as well as meeting net zero so I think there's a balance it's not a balance we need to do both so we can't do one at the expense of the other so that's one area in terms of land reform specifically there are two elements to it it's ensuring that land management on behalf of the nation is contributing both towards net zero and towards meeting the biodiversity targets I think that's a really important principle that needs to be part of the land reform discussion but then I'm also going to come back to the involving local community so that they benefit too so there's not just the planet that benefits but local communities benefit as well we see that already through wind farm locations on land for example how are we going to build a process that ensures that local communities benefit too from flood management from woodland creation from whatever the nature solution might be how do we ensure that they benefit too so I think there are those two principles that needs to be kind of a golden thread through land reform as we go forward thank you very much I don't know if we could put it to if any of the other witnesses would like to it's not really for us and JNCC to comment on land reform actually in the sense but when you look at nature conservation around the world how land is managed becomes really important and maybe that's slightly separate from ownership so you can see good examples and bad examples around the world of nature conservation on a whole suite of land ownership scenarios so for us management and monitoring of that in terms of the effectiveness of that becomes really the the better way to look at it thanks very much the other question relates to a couple of comments earlier on as well one comment was around the role of private financing and then I think we heard from Dr Long about the need for I think it was 980,000 hectares of land he said needed to be protected for nature and so I'd be interested to hear how you think we can ensure that that target for land protected for nature can work in harmony with our other needs as a nation in terms of food security and economic resilience for rural communities how can they work together no no no no no but reasonably it's a huge question that but if you'd like to tackle part of it and then probably come to Colin briefly to Ruth and see if we can get an answer to Ty and Daniela if at a push I won't exclude you so I think the short answer is it comes back to the same principle of right management right place so it's not a case of we just do one thing with a piece of land land can do multi can lead to multiple benefits so I think it's where are those multiple benefits and food production is one of them it's not just about producing food it's also about conserving biodiversity and putting carbon into the soil or into the vegetation whatever it happens to be so I think there's multiple benefits how can we maximize that but also how can we minimize any negatives so any negative land management that's contributing to carbon emissions or contributing to the decline of biodiversity those are the ones that we need to tackle and in relation to hazardous subsidies I know that that was one of the targets that came out that's a really key point so there's the agriculture but there's also forestry forestry could be doing much much more in order to build carbon and to maintain and restore biodiversity and so can I ask just a very brief follow-up so you do believe that it's possible on one piece of land to not only protect nature but also produce food maybe produce resources like wood for example for building materials absolutely we've got agroforestry agroecology we've got organic farming those are just three examples off the top of my head thank you Colin very very briefly I mean I think what's interesting is some of the really good examples of nature restoration and nature management in Scotland and across the UK now are actually privately funded so there is actually a lot of private money coming in to nature recovery for a multitude of reasons so in terms of the overall question is it possible to get multiple benefits from the same area of land absolutely I agree with Deborah that it's about how that land is managed in the long term view that's taken in terms of managing land as well so private finance I think is important to deliver the targets here and that's that's good I think there are examples in Scotland that could be used internationally about how it can be done and yes there's more to do on agriculture and forestry Ruth do you want to come in briefly yeah just to say I totally agree that you can get multiple benefits from the same piece of land for example at the hut and there's been work done on intercropping and so in different species mixtures together that can benefit not just the cropping yield but also the biodiversity and also I'd say that if we have a more diverse land with different habitats the systems are generally more resilient it goes back to what Colin was saying about if you have monocultures of things then you're more at risk than we the changes in climate or from pests and pathogens so if you've got that mixture of species be that different habitats or different crops within your farming system or within your woodland then your system is going to be more resilient as well as delivering more benefits Daniela briefly yes I agree with previous speakers agriculture has been mentioned it's included in one of the targets as well organic farming I think as well I'm not an expert on terrestrial ecosystems but I I know those practices and in the marine ecosystem just an example in the northwest Atlantic the northwest Atlantic fisheries organization which the UK is a member state have recently adopted in September last year a threshold for ecosystem level fisheries which is a groundbreaking math methodology and also decision making tool for implementing the ecosystem approach to fisheries which at times can be quite elusive and difficult to implement on the ground and I think that example can provide a lot of insight for other regions as well including for Scotland and that is a mechanism where both food security and biodiversity can coexist okay thank you very much now those of you that are observant will have seen that I haven't asked a question at all during this panel I've saved mine to the end and interestingly it leads directly on from the last question so it it is perfectly placed having spent 40 years of my life doing environmental management one thing I've learned is you can't be all things to all people and you can't be all things to all species so for example managing Cappacalli in Abernethy forest can't be done without control of pine martens which are the biggest threat to Cappacalli and we spent millions of pounds on it similarly I am taken by Deborah's comment about deer it's about carrying capacity and the capacity not being the one that damages the environment sheep are as big a threat in my mind as our hares on the high montane places of Scotland who will clip their heather in the bloober is to such an extent that they can't grow and therefore management is a difficult balance so on the basis that I'm not wanting to make Scotland exclusive for any species or see it being made exclusive for any species I think there is room for zoning where we accept that we can achieve things for different species in different zones therefore making it overall as on a national basis that we are achieving something for all of Scotland a quick yes or no answer would suffice but I suspect I may not get it from the panel and I'll just go round the table to ask whether the panellists feel that zoning could play a part in ensuring species and the habitat enhancement across Scotland and uh Ruth why don't you start your remotely and then I'll work round the table from uh Deborah through to Daniella thank you yes I think um zoning essentially could if you think of it in terms of a land use strategy so I think it's really important to have a land use strategy that's also got an implementation plan thank you uh Deborah it's it's really difficult um I I think zoning if if you're talking about protected areas for example you could argue that a national park is a zone even though it's it's got very different land management systems within it I think the key issue is um an issue that Ruth mentioned earlier actually diversity is the key to resilience moving forward and we need our ecosystems to be much much more resilient than they are at the moment and that resilience won't be achieved through mono cultures so I think bringing diversity into every system and every zone if you wanted to call it that is absolutely key to making sure that we will restore biodiversity and halt climate emissions and actually have a livable planet going forward so I think if you can manage diversity within your zones to maximise connectivity then yes but but connectivity and diversity is the key for me Collin it's an interesting concept and not one that I really thought greatly about I have to say in in the way you've explained it I mean we we do have natural zones across the UK in terms of habitat climate and I think to look at the management within each of these is something that happens anyway would be very interesting so I'm going to duck out a bit and say I'd really quite like to take that concept away and think about it a bit more in terms of what it would mean um diversity is important linking to local communities is important so you don't want communities not to be able to experience the full range of Scottish UK biodiversity in their particular part of the country so it's an interesting concept we do have zones let's think a little bit more about it if that's not too academic an answer I think it is a tool but I agree with Deborah that biodiversity that diversity should be mainstreamed across it as well I know that in the marine environment for example in the context of when you think of marine spatial planning there is that inherited tendency to think that it includes zoning and I know that my experience in Canada for example is that marine spatial planning couldn't involve zoning per se because some sectors wouldn't agree with that although when you think about you know offshore wind or so on it has some element of zoning so it is I can't give you an answer no answer but it is a tool but biodiversity mainstreaming is important in that I'm interested and I'll be interested here Colin due course whether you take from it I mean the resilience is really important and you know to hear that we're now at the stage where in southern Scotland we may have meet reached maximum golden eagle numbers is really exciting to me and and yes we need to spread that out across the country but it needs to be done in a way that ensures biodiversity so thank you it's been a really interesting panel I could have spent all morning asking all the questions I think we all could have done and I thank you very much for your contribution and I'm now briefly going to spend the the meeting to allow us to set up for the next bit thank you okay thank you we're now going to move back to agenda item three which is consideration of petition PE1866 this petition was lodged by Daryl Cooper in May 2021 and it calls on the Scottish Parliament to introduce legislation so that wheelchair users are able to face back at frontwards while traveling in a bus I refer members to the paper for this item which provides some background information and outlines possible action at our meeting on the 1st of November 2022 the committee considered the petition and agreed to keep it open the committee agreed to write to COSLA to ask how local authorities were delivering improvements for wheelchair users on public transport it also agreed to make representations to the UK government on its upcoming review of the rules which govern accessibility on public transport I'm now going to turn to committee members to for your views noting in particular the options that are set out in paragraph 18 of the paper which are to keep the petition and await the outcome of the review by the public service sorry public sector vehicles accessibility regulations which are expected later this year before agreeing further action or to close the petition on the basis that the committee has exhausted all the options to progress the petition at this stage but we could also agree a part of this to write to the house of commons transport select committee who are undertaking an inquiry on accessible transport to inform them of the petition and the concerns it highlights and ask them to let us know the outcome of their inquiry are there any views from members in relation to this monica thank you convener and I think the position raises really important issues and I know that I think we'll all be grateful to the positioner for the work that they have done it's a little bit frustrating I feel it would be good if we could do more at this committee but I understand the reasons why and recognise that it will be looked at in the house of commons so I think it is important that we write to the transport select committee just to consolidate that the work that has been done here in the views that we've obtained and hopefully they can keep us informed okay thank you uh dipt convener and I agree with that I think the the issue has been brought to our attention we've brought it to other relevant authorities attention the issue of legislation which was the point of the petition is reserved but I do think and in writing to the house of commons transport select committee if they are looking as it's suggested that they will be looking at the issue of accessible transport we draw to them attention that issue specifically about front-facing wheelchair users and ask if they can come back to us if the wants have conducted their inquiry but I think our job as a committee has probably come to a reasonable conclusion at this point okay I'm just looking round committee members I think we're all agreed and Monica was agreed as well is is that we should write to the committee to make them aware of our concerns in this area and of the petition and ask them to inform us of the outcome so that we can consider this in the process but that but this has come to a natural conclusion as far as the petition is concerned and therefore we should close it obviously writing to the petitioner to ensure that they're aware of what we're doing and why we've done it so is committee agreed we are agreed thank you that concludes our public meeting and we're now going to go into private session