Comments on World Heritage Management Plan 2024-2034
Posted on: April 15, 2024
There is a clear need for the final version of the Management Plan and Action Plan to have Key Performance Indicators and specific areas of action with expected outcomes and outputs.
The Cockburn Association welcomes the development of a new Management Plan and Action Plan for Edinburgh’s World Heritage Site.
We consider that there is significant work to do to ensure that they become effective management tools. This is especially the case for the two-year Action Plan, which requires clear management targets and KPIs.
In setting out its full response, the Association identified six critical areas for the ongoing management of the WHS which we would expect the Action Plan to address including climate mitigation, general disrepair of traditional buildings and the declining quality of the streetscape and public realm across the WHS.
Our full comments can be found here – https://www.cockburnassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Cockburn-Association-WHSMP-AP-consultation-response-FINAL-15-April-2024.pdf
Cockburn Response
The draft Management Plan now covers a period of 10 years versus the previous plan’s 5-year lifespan. We assume that this is to align with City Plan 2030 although there is no specific explanation for this change. It would be helpful if this were explained. A ten-year plan period could mean that there is little scope to respond to changes in policy or circumstance. However, the introduction of a two-year Action Plans is a pragmatic response to allow these concerns to be managed.
The draft Plan appears to be a roll-over of the existing plan. Given the issues and challenges that we set out in our full reponse, we question if this is entirely the right approach.
The Association agrees with and supports the aims of the draft Plan as set out in para. 2.2. We also support the five themes set out in the Action Plan, being awareness and appreciation; climate emergency; conservation and maintenance; control & guidance; and a sustainable visitor experience.
In accepting the structure of a 10-year main Plan with a 2-year Action Plan, we would expect the latter to have SMART targets embedded in it. We would expect a final version of the Plan and Action Plan to have Key Performance Indicators and specific areas of action with expected outcomes and outputs.
Failed rainwater goods in the WHS.
The Management Plan must drive a data-driven approach to policy formulation and action-setting. This is currently missing in the draft Plans. We appreciate that a State of Conservation Report has been prepared, but its data must be used to inform the plan, influence its approach, and drive activities (with measurable targets).