Transcript Document

SCCD Year 4 reporting
Review of leadership, governance,
partnership and area-wide action
Phil Matthews
Partner
CAG Consultants
1
Introduction
• CAG reviewed sections 1 (Governance),
•
•
•
3 (Area Emissions) and 5 (Partnership
Working)
Analysis done using a standard template
– based on PBD Guidance and RPP
CAG also working with SSN to consider
ways of enhancing future reporting
Looking to highlight good practice and
also provide commentary on the
variations in current reporting
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
2
Governance, Leadership and
Management
Reviewed against 6 criteria:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provide clear, consistent and comparable
information
Link climate change reporting with existing
reporting requirements and the Councils own
performance improvement agenda
Show clearly how climate change is being
integrated into council and Community Planning
agendas, especially through Single Outcome
Agreements (SOAs)
Highlight key achievements and initiatives
Demonstrate how local authorities are assessing
impact and influence
Show how the council is communicating with the
community - reports should be easy to understand
and available to the public
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
3
Clear, consistent and
comparable information
• All reports apart from Fife (which
•
•
•
prepared a detailed ‘carbon report’)
were in line with the template and
guidance
Significant variation in the level and
presentation of information, particularly
for area emissions
Some councils provide detail on specific
work, others more general statements
Need for greater use of data and
evidence
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
4
Link climate change reporting
with other reporting
• Not clear from many reports whether
•
•
•
•
•
the LA has a climate strategy or what
reporting arrangement are
Limited reporting on targets
Mixed level of detail on governance
structures
Some councils have senior
officials/Members involved in climate
change
Focus of some, particularly smaller
authorities, on corporate action
Public Bodies Duties do appear to be
driving a refresh of governance in a
number of authorities
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
5
Integration with Community
Planning and SOA
• Most provide some information on CPP
•
•
•
and SOA
Detail on reporting structures in many,
a few less clear
Only very few report on progress
against CPP indicators and targets –
Perth and Kinross a good example
Again Public Bodies Duties noted as a
driver for action
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
6
Highlight key achievements
• Many examples of good practice
contained in the reports:
– Green economy – Borders and Orkney
– Carbon management – Fife
– Strategic framework – Sustainable
–
–
–
–
Edinburgh 2020
Area indicators and reporting – Perth
and Kinross
Procurement – South Ayrshire
Engagement – Stirling
Collaborative working – Glasgow and
Clyde Valley Green Network
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
7
Assessing impact and influence
• Only a few provide a detailed framework
•
•
•
for action at the community level
Financial and Carbon Reporting – very
limited – Fife only council to provide
detail
Many refer to e.g. renewable energy
developments that are not related to
local authority action
Limited reference to use of appraisal
tools or SEA/Sustainability Appraisal
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
8
Communicating with the
community
• Some reports more accessible to the
•
•
•
•
public than others
Good use of diagrams and visual
information in a few
Many LAs engaging with staff,
particularly around CMP
Community wide engagement less
evident. Often based around Climate
Challenge Fund
Many examples of stakeholder
engagement
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
9
Area emissions
• Most LAs provide data on production
emissions (DECC), far fewer on
consumption
• Many provide trend data and
sectoral data
• Reporting of action on specific
sectors (e.g. Energy, Waste,
Transport) more limited
• Behaviour change – Climate
Challenge Fund, also Eco-schools
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
10
Area emissions
• Energy – some good practice e.g.
•
•
•
•
Aberdeen CHP, Argyll and Bute Energy
Action Plan
Homes and Communities – most
focus on UHIS etc, otherwise limited
Business and Public Sector – CPP
working
Transport – not widely addressed, no
mention on negative impacts
Land use – some areas such as Argyll
and Bute huge sink potential
Waste – in general only reporting
against requirements
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
11
Recommendations
• A more detailed reporting template
would be helpful to local authorities
and in analysing progress
• Particularly useful would be:
– To note whether a LA has a climate
–
–
–
strategy and if so what it covers
To provide clear guidance on what
trend data on area emissions is
expected
To ask specifically for information on
procurement and behaviour change
To provide information under all 6
headings for area emissions, as in
RPP
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
12
Contact
Phil Matthews
CAG Consultants
94 Orchard Brae Avenue
Edinburgh EH4 2GB
[email protected]
www.cagconsultants.co.uk
SCCD Year 4 review: SSN
Quarterly
13