1.1.1 The Scottish Government consultation paper on Local Heat & Energy Efficiency Strategies ( LHEES) and Regulation of District Heating is one of a number of consultations on the draft Climate Change Plan, the draft Energy Strategy and related activity.
1.1.2. The consultation asked for views on the planning at local level of heat decarbonisation and energy efficiency programmes within Scotland's Energy Efficiency Programme ( SEEP) and also on supporting the development of district heating in Scotland. This was a policy scoping consultation, designed to gather views to help inform further development of the proposals prior to more detailed consultations. It ran from 24 January until 18 April 2017. In addition to inviting responses to the consultation questions, two events were held in Inverness and Edinburgh at which over 130 members of the Heat Network Partnership Practitioner Group from across Scotland discussed the proposals.
1.2. Respondent Profile
1.2.1. There were 87 responses to the consultation: 80 from organisations and seven from individuals. Respondents were assigned to respondent groupings in order to enable analysis of any differences or commonalities across or within the various different types of organisations and individuals that responded.
1.2.2. A list of all those organisations that submitted a response to the consultation and agreed to have their name published is included in Appendix A. The following table shows the numbers of responses in each analysis group.
|Business & Industry||24|
|Network, Professional or Trade body||18|
|Third sector & Community||9|
1.2.3. The local government category includes local authorities, local authority officer responses and related bodies such as the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities ( COSLA).
1.2.4. The organisation categories with the highest numbers of respondents were 'business & industry', 'network, professional or trade body' and 'local government'.
1.3.1. Responses to the consultation were submitted using the Scottish Government consultation platform Citizen Space or by email or hard copy.
1.3.2. It should be borne in mind that the number responding at each question is not always the same as the number presented in the respondent table. This is because not all respondents addressed all questions; some commented only on those areas of relevance to their organisation, sector or field of interest. The report shows the number of respondents who replied to each question and the following table outlines the respondents that commented on each of the sections of the consultation:
A: Scope and Content of LHEES
B1: Proposed Regulatory Approach for District Heating
B2: Planning, Zoning and Concessions for District Heating
B3: Connecting Users to District Heating Networks
B4: Connecting Surplus Industrial Heat
B5: Technical Standards, Consumer Protection and Licensing
B6: Enabling Activity and Additional Areas for Consideration to Support our Regulatory Approach
Respondents answering some or all of each section
|Business & Industry (24)||21||19||19||17||16||14||18|
|Network, Professional or Trade body (18)||15||11||10||9||7||8||8|
|Local government (17)||17||14||16||15||14||17||17|
|Third sector & Community (9)||8||6||8||8||7||6||6|
|Public sector (7)||6||7||6||6||6||6||5|
|Total respondents (87)||79||69||71||67||62||61||65|
1.3.3. Some respondents (eight) did not use the consultation questionnaire and, instead, presented their views in a report or letter format. Wherever possible, researchers assigned relevant sections of these documents to the relevant questions in order that all comments on similar issues could be analysed together.
1.3.4. Some of the consultation questions contained closed, tick-boxes with options for 'Yes or No'. Where respondents did not follow the questions but mentioned within their text that they agreed or disagreed with a point, these have been included in the relevant counts. This information is presented in table format at the relevant questions (including one question where a tick box was not used but many respondents gave a definitive answer; yes or no; within their reply).
1.3.5. In a number of cases, respondents ticked yes, or made supportive comments, but went on to raise queries or concerns that, they felt, would need to be addressed before the proposal could be implemented. Where relevant, these responses have been included in a column headed 'proviso'.
1.3.6. The researchers examined all comments made by respondents at each open question and noted the range of issues mentioned in responses including reasons for opinions, specific examples or explanations, alternative suggestions or other related comments. Grouping these issues together into similar themes allowed the researchers to identify whether any particular theme was specific to any particular respondent group or groups. When looking at group differences however, it must be also borne in mind that where a specific opinion has been identified in relation to a particular group or groups, this does not indicate that other groups did not share this opinion, but rather that they simply did not comment on that particular point.
1.3.7. While the consultation gave all who wished to comment an opportunity to do so, given the self-selecting nature of this type of exercise, any figures quoted here cannot be extrapolated to a wider population out with the respondent sample.
1.3.8. A small number of verbatim comments, from those who gave permission for their responses to be made public, have been used in the report to illustrate themes or to provide extra detail for some specific points.
1.3.9 Researchers also examined the report produced on views expressed at the two consultation events and summaries of the key points raised at these events have been included beside answers to relevant questions throughout this report.