3.1
The ability to inspect forestry EIA documents allows interested parties (including members of the public) to access key environmental information. This is important for ensuring effective participation, providing the opportunity for interested parties to inform decision-making and empowering them to become involved in matters which could affect the quality of their daily lives. Access to environmental information also allows for greater transparency and accountability of public authorities.
3.2
This is specifically recognised in the Aarhus Convention[1] which sets out that ‘in the field of the environment, improved access to information and public participation in decision-making enhances the quality and the implementation of decisions, contributes to public awareness of environmental issues, gives the public the opportunity to express its concerns and enables public authorities to take account of such concerns’.
3.3
In response to the NGO’s concerns over the level of documentation being published by Scottish Forestry, Scottish Forestry explained that despite the relevant documents not being available for inspection on a website, they could be requested and provided by email. Scottish Forestry considered it was therefore compliant with its statutory duty as the required documents were made available for inspection by ‘other electronic means’, as permitted by Regulation 23(1)(a) of the 2017 Regulations.
3.4
In ESS’ view, providing relevant forestry EIA documents on request by email can legitimately be used to satisfy the duty to make them available for inspection through other electronic means, provided the ability to access the relevant documents is not restricted or too onerous for the requester. In this connection, ESS considers that interested parties must be able to effectively search for information and for it to be made available in a suitable format, language and level of technical detail. In short, the system for identifying and providing the relevant forestry EIA documents must afford effective and easy access to interested parties. This view has been informed by the reasoning of a recent High Court judgement[2] over what methods of access to environmental information qualify as publicly available and easily accessible.
3.5
In ESS’ view, the information published on Scottish Forestry’s website relating to forestry EIA documentation was not fully comprehensive. The information was incomplete and only available for a time-limited and very short period (ranging from four to six weeks dependent on the type of document).
3.6
Consequently, the incomplete nature of information provided by Scottish Forestry significantly restricted interested parties awareness of (and ability to identify) documents that may be of interest to them which, in turn hindered the overall accessibility to such an extent that it did not allow for inspection of relevant forestry EIA documents. ESS accordingly considered that Scottish Forestry’s approach was not compliant with the requirements of Regulation 23 of the 2017 Regulations.
3.7
In ESS’ view, the failings identified were within Scottish Forestry’s ability to rectify and there was no immediate risk of significant harm to the environment or human health. In light of this, ESS invited Scottish Forestry to resolve matters informally.
[1] United Nations Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, 1998
(https://unece.org/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf)
[2] Surrey Searches and others vs. Northumbrian Water and others in the High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (28 June 2024)