The consenting landscape for marine planning in Scotland is undergoing rapid and consequential change. A combination of new national policy, the roll‑out of regional marine plans and legislative reform is reshaping how decisions are made in the marine space. For developers and operators—particularly in renewables and infrastructure—these changes will materially affect consenting risk, programme certainty and site selection.
A new national baseline: National Marine Plan 2
The most significant upcoming reform is National Marine Plan 2 (NMP2), which will replace the current 2015 plan and provide the primary statutory framework for decision‑making in Scottish waters. Exact timescales for its publication have not been confirmed but it is expected to be issued before the end of 2026.
NMP2 is intended to address increasing spatial pressures, as highlighted by Open Seas’ successful landmark legal challenge in April 2024 against the Scottish Government’s failure to refer to the NMPs environmental policies when issuing variations to licences for scallop dredging and nephrops trawling, whilst also better integrating climate and biodiversity objectives into marine planning. It will also align more closely with terrestrial planning under NPF4, pointing to a more streamlined approach across land and sea.
Developers face policy uncertainty in the short term, however, as the content and direction of NMP2 are still evolving. Projects progressing now may find themselves assessed against a materially different policy framework at determination stage, particularly where environmental effects and spatial conflicts are concerned.
Increasingly plan-led system: rise of regional marine plans
Scotland’s system of regional marine planning is now accelerating, with plans adopted for Shetland in December 2025 and Orkney in February 2026; the plan for the Clyde region is at an advanced stage and others are expected to progress in the coming years.
Regional marine plans sit below the NMP but carry significant weight: consenting authorities must determine applications in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This reflects a clear move toward a spatial, plan-led system, analogous to terrestrial planning.
There is potential for regional marine plans to create site-specific policy support and/or constraints for proposals, with greater granularity on acceptable locations and uses. Developers will also have to contend with reduced flexibility at application stage where proposals conflict with plan spatial priorities; this underlines the increasing importance of early-stage site selection and engagement with emerging regional marine plans.
Legislative changes seeking to balance delivery and conservation objectives
The Marine Recovery Fund (MRF) is a government‑led, developer‑funded compensation mechanism, introduced in December 2025. It represents a structural shift in how habitats compensation is delivered in the marine environment:
- A move from bespoke, developer-led, project-specific measures.
- Towards pooled funding and strategic, government-led ecological interventions.
- While participation is voluntary, it is accepted that any developer seeking to use the fund for the delivery of compensation measures requires to make a financial contribution to it.
The MRF aims to overcome the historic problems facing offshore developers, namely, that while adverse impacts on protected habitats and species may be anticipated, there are scale constraints on providing compensation; delivery risk and/or timing is problematic for implementation and scientific uncertainty hinders the identification of project-specific impacts and compensatory/mitigation measures.
It is best understood as a market-style mechanism for environmental compensation, embedded within the consenting regime for offshore wind. The explicit policy aim is to unlock large volumes of offshore wind capacity whilst also delivering commensurate biodiversity protection.
An equivalent Scottish MRF was consulted upon in September 2025 and continues to be developed.
Of course, this is in addition to the procedural changes introduced in December 2025 for consenting electricity infrastructure projects under the Electricity Act 1989, relating to mandatory pre-application consultation and the triggers for a public inquiry that we have blogged about previously.
While the overall policy direction behind such procedure reform is encouraging for developers, the interim problems related to increased timescales, costs and risks of legal challenge while the changes ‘bed in’ are less welcome.
Overall trends
Across all sectors, several high-risk themes emerge:
- Policy flux: NMP2 introduces near-term uncertainty but will ultimately raise the bar on sustainability and spatial justification.
- Spatial constraint: Expansion of regional marine planning will likely reduce the range of viable development locations.
- Environmental risk: More robust ecological requirements increase both cost and potential for legal challenge notwithstanding the fundamental support for offshore development at scale.
- Regulatory complexity: Greater integration of planning, licensing and energy consenting regimes demands careful coordination.
For developers and operators, the clear message is that front-loading strategy is now critical: early site selection, policy alignment and stakeholder engagement will be key to managing risk in the increasingly plan-led and environmentally driven system comprising marine consenting.
Contributors
Senior Associate
Partner
