New national park in Galloway could cost region £500m by 2035, report warns

Scottish Government plans to create a new national park in Galloway could cost the area more than £500 million by 2035, a new report has warned.

A study concluded that if the proposed new Galloway national park is to have a planning regime similar to the country’s two existing national parks “the region could experience a cumulative loss of around £543 million GVA (gross value added) by 2035”.

If Scotland’s third national park is established there, the report – produced by BiGGAR Economics for Scottish Renewables – said it will “almost certainly reduce deployment of onshore farms in south-west Scotland by making it more difficult for developers to secure planning permission for developments near the park”.

It said designating a national park in the area could “affect the deployment of onshore wind in the region” with this in turn having an immpact on economic activity in the area.

The report added that, if the proposed national park in Galloway adopted a similar planning regime to existing parks in the Cairngorms and Loch Lomond & the Trossachs, “the region could experience a cumulative loss of around £543 million GVA by 2035, around 470 fewer jobs/year might be supported at the peak of activity, and the region could miss out on around £64 million in community benefit funding”.

It comes as projections from the UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero indicate that Dumfries and Galloway could generate up to 3.2 gigawatts (GW) of energy from onshore wind by 2035 – with projects having the potential to support up to 624 jobs annually at the peak  of activity, while community benefit payments to the area could amount to £146 million by 2035.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Government’s onshore wind policy aims to achieve 20GW of capacity by 2030 as part of efforts to boost renewable electricity and move away from fossil fuels.

In light of that, Scottish Renewables chief executive Claire Mack said: “The proposal to designate a new national park in Dumfries and Galloway must be weighed carefully against the significant economic and environmental contributions of renewable energy projects currently in development.”

She added: “Research by BiGGAR Economics shows that blocking onshore wind developments alone could lead to fewer jobs, lower investment, and lost opportunities for communities.”

She added: “That’s just part of the picture – the study didn’t include the impact of losing solar, battery storage, or transmission projects, which would make the economic hit even worse.

“A national park designation should not come at the cost of clean energy, green jobs, and vital infrastructure.

“Any decision must consider what local communities stand to lose, not just what they might gain.”

A spokesperson for Action to Protect Rural Scotland said: “A national park in Galloway would benefit genuinely locally-owned businesses in the area, rather than the foreign-owned multi-national companies who seem to fear a national park might curtail their profits.

“A national park does not rule out community owned and smaller scale renewables, which would benefit the area, but it could reduce the massive pressures Galloway faces from the industrialisation of their landscapes.

“A study by APRS and SCNP estimated that a national park in Galloway would support or create 700 to 1400 jobs with this number growing over time. Whereas the basis for the Scottish Renewables study was that, if wind capacity in the area of the proposed park were to double by 2030 (the business as usual scenario) there would be around 470 additional jobs, a fraction of the number created in a national park.

“We know modern renewables installations are designed to need minimal local input and the profits and the power will be exported outwith the area.

“The renewables industry doesn’t want to stop a national park in Galloway because it cares about the local economy. They are afraid that a national park would mean there will be more scrutiny of their proposals.”