Executive Summary
The Scottish Government launched a public consultation to gather views from the public on the draft Grangemouth Industrial Just Transition Plan (JT Plan), which aims to guide the Grangemouth industrial sector to sustainably decarbonise and reach net zero by 2045. The consultation opened on 7th November 2024, closed on 6th February 2025 and contained 40 questions.
The questions were structured according to the following parts, relating to various aspects of the JT Plan:
Part 1: Baseline
Part 2: Industrial Vision 2045
Part 3: Action Plan
Part 4: Challenges to a Just Transition
Part 5: Monitoring and Evaluation
Alma Economics was commissioned to conduct a thematic analysis of consultation responses. Overall, the consultation received 31 responses. The respondent profile was broadly split into 5 individuals and 26 organisations.
Responses to the consultation were manually reviewed, following which, thematic patterns (recurring themes) were analysed, and singular cases, diverging opinions, and minority views were identified. Recurring themes were analysed based on synthesis across all questions, and were classified as ‘general views’, ‘strengths’, ‘challenges’, and ‘recommendations’.
Provided below is a summary of findings structured according to the five parts of the consultation, with a focus on recommendations put forward by respondents.
Part 1: Baseline
Respondents provided their views on the baseline section of the draft Just Transition Plan, including on the extent to which the baseline reflects the realities of the Grangemouth cluster. Respondents widely felt that the baseline section does not accurately reflect the current circumstances in Grangemouth. Building on this, respondents highlighted a range of gaps and inaccuracies in the baseline data, particularly relating to outdated socioeconomic figures, omissions of key businesses, and gaps in information on employment, environmental impacts, and local infrastructure. Many emphasised that the baseline must provide a complete and up-to-date picture to effectively support a just and realistic transition.
Respondents provided the following recommendations to enhance the baseline section:
Update baseline data to reflect current businesses, socioeconomic conditions, and full supply chain expenditure.
Include clearer data on employment risks, workforce trends, future roles, and skills needs.
Use a longer time range for data analysis and include demand forecasts and supply chain mapping.
Add details on the refinery’s future, its economic value, and the strategic role of the port.
Include accurate and current environmental data, including 2023 emissions, biodiversity, natural risks, land use, and low-carbon initiatives.
Map hazardous waste streams, treatment capacity, industry synergies, and innovative reduction technologies.
Add information on the regulatory environment, utility and waste services, and innovation projects.
Correct factual inaccuracies (e.g. product flows, GVA figures) and align data with monitoring indicators.
Provide financial data on companies and clarify the definition of ‘core operators’.
Adopt a collaborative approach involving government, industry, academia, and independent bodies.
Use diverse, high-quality data sources across sectors.
Include context on renewable energy limitations, brownfield land, and the drivers of emissions reductions.
Part 2: Industrial Vision for 2045
Respondents provided their views on various aspects of the Industrial Vision 2045 (“Vision”), including its impact on the Grangemouth industrial cluster, the cluster’s capacity to provide reliable opportunities, and the quality of life of Grangemouth’s residents. Respondents identified a range of perceived challenges in achieving the Vision, including difficulty securing funding for both immediate support and long-term projects, balancing competing interests and priorities of key stakeholders, attracting and retaining a skilled workforce, and keeping Grangemouth competitive during transition. Through questions answered in this section, respondents provided recommendations to address these identified challenges.
These recommendations relate to changes to be made to the Vision, the Transition Pillars, Transition Outcomes, and wider policy recommendations for the Scottish Government to improve industrial opportunities at Grangemouth and safeguard the energy security of Grangemouth.
Changes to the Vision
Respondents suggested various proposed changes to the Vision, including recommendations on additional elements that could be included in the Vision. These suggestions include:
Include a digital economy strategy and a circular economy framework in the Vision.
Include clear milestones for the Vision as well as goals that can be achieved in the short and medium term.
Stronger support for the workforce, with more emphasis on the well-being of the workforce.
Amendments to the Transition Pillars
Respondents put forward specific recommendations relating to the Transition Pillars, including:
Incorporate broader circular economy principles in the Transition Pillars
Emphasise the role of digital technologies in enabling net-zero transitions.
Strengthen references to workforce transition.
Make specific changes to certain pillars, such as the inclusion of other synthetic fuels like methanol in Pillar 2; and highlighting the difference between CCU and CCS in Pillar 3.
Improving Just Transition outcomes
To improve Just Transition outcomes, respondents suggested that the Scottish Government should:
Make outcomes more specific and measurable with clear timelines.
Provide stronger governance and tracking processes
Prioritise jobs, skills and economic opportunities within the outcomes; and consider the economic viability of assets within the outcomes.
Make specific language changes for certain outcomes, such as outcomes 5 and 15. For Outcome 5, suggestions were made to consider mentioning active travel rather than just ‘improving public transport’, and use the term ‘climate resilience’ rather than just ‘resilience’. For Outcome 15, suggestions were made to consider dropping reference to Scotland’s Biodiversity Strategy, as the objectives presented are not solely about biodiversity.
Broader industrial opportunities at Grangemouth
To ensure the Vision 2045 enables more reliable opportunities at Grangemouth, respondents suggested:
Continuous evaluation and adaptation strategies to maximise positive outcomes and alignment with the Transition Plan.
Prioritise community engagement, and align with wider UK Government efforts and investment priorities.
Capitalise on supply chain opportunities resulting from the transition. The most commonly identified domestic opportunities were in renewable energy infrastructure development, while international opportunities were identified in exporting green fuels, clean technology expertise, and consulting services.
Provide incentives for private investment and set clear decarbonisation targets that align with international markets, to improve supply chain opportunities.
Safeguarding energy security in the future
Some respondents also provided recommendations on how Grangemouth could safeguard energy security in the future:
Include CCS as a part of the future industrial base.
Create a balance between current operations and the introduction of new technology, as well as between climate goals and the community’s needs.
Add clear milestones, and include short, medium and long-term plans for safeguarding the future of energy security.
Finally, respondents once again reiterated the need for a national, coordinated approach.
Part 3: Action Plan
Consultation responses revealed a mix of optimism and concern about the Grangemouth Just Transition Action Plan. Many respondents acknowledged the Plan as a welcome and necessary starting point, outlining actions across policy, skills, investment, and community engagement. However, respondents also raised concerns about the Plan’s ability to fully deliver a Just Transition as currently framed. Key challenges identified included the lack of a detailed financial strategy, complex regulatory and planning systems, fragmented stakeholder efforts, and insufficient mechanisms for monitoring progress. There were also concerns about diverging priorities among stakeholders, political and funding uncertainty, inadequate governance, and the risk of industry decline before new opportunities materialise.
Throughout their responses across this section, respondents provided recommendations to address the perceived challenges outlined above and improve the Action Plan. Thematically, these suggestions relate to improving clarity on governance and coordinated leadership; providing sustainable investment and improved funding, simplified regulation and streamlined planning, focus on skills and workforce; better engagement with community; and effectively balancing the various competing priorities of stakeholders.
Clarity on governance and coordinated leadership
Establish clear roles and responsibilities for each action in the Plan, including identifying lead and supporting organisations; and assign specific actions to those best positioned to lead and support regional coordination that links Grangemouth to wider Forth Valley opportunities.
Strengthen the Grangemouth Future Industry Board’s mandate, authority, and improve its visibility.
Regularly review the Action Plan (e.g. every five years) to monitor progress and allow for adjustments.
Improve governance through better integration of public and private leadership and create stronger alignment between national, regional, and local policy efforts.
Closely coordinate with the UK Government on shared infrastructure and regulatory responsibilities.
Manage potential conflicts in stakeholder priorities by fostering a shared purpose and reducing fragmentation.
Clarify the sequencing of actions and delivery timelines.
Build flexibility to adapt to external risks, including global disruptions and environmental factors.
Sustainable investment and improved funding
Provide long-term, sustainable funding to support innovation, infrastructure development, and workforce transition.
Clarify funding sources cited in the Action Plan, and provide transparency around responsible stakeholders, and their respective responsibilities.
Align funding timelines with project delivery requirements to reduce delays and uncertainties.
Promote co-investment opportunities and develop a strong investment case for Grangemouth as a transition hub.
Simplified regulation and streamlined planning
Simplify planning and regulatory procedures to reduce delays and make investments more attractive.
Improve clarity on the role and function of the proposed Grangemouth Regulatory Hub, including providing information on how it will interact with the National Planning Improvement Hub.
Ensure planning and regulatory frameworks are aligned with the Just Transition objectives, and that they offer fair treatment to domestic producers compared to global competitors.
Focus on Skills and Workforce
Develop a skills strategy for Forth Valley that reflects regional labour needs and anticipated future demand.
Improve collaboration between key stakeholders, such as the Government, industry, colleges, and training providers to deliver targeted, adaptable upskilling programmes.
Establish employer-education forums and improve coordination between regional skills initiatives.
Better engagement with Community
Ensure mechanisms exist for meaningful community involvement, and improve clarity around key community roles such as the community manager.
Improve community awareness and understanding of the Just Transition Plan through consistent communication and updates.
Support community participation in shaping the transition, by building on strategies like the Falkirk Community Engagement Strategy and the Grangemouth Community Action Plan.
Part 4: Challenges to a Just Transition
In this part, respondents provided their views on a range of matters related to the Just Transition plan, including mitigation of challenges facing Just Transition, and policy changes the Scottish Government can undertake to enhance the economic contribution of the cluster, and unlock opportunities at Grangemouth. While respondents provided a variety of suggestions, which have been listed below, common recurring themes across these suggestions related to increased support for Grangemouth’s workforce, better alignment of efforts between SG and the UK Government, and the need for streamlining of regulations and planning processes.
Mitigating challenges facing Just Transition
To mitigate challenges to the Just Transition, respondents made the following suggestions for the Scottish Government:
Work with the UK Government to mitigate the impact of the refinery’s closure (with a suggestion being made to deliver Scottish Trades Union Congress’s proposal).
Provide funding for critical infrastructure upgrades to ensure a smooth transition.
Streamline regulations and planning processes.
Take a more active leadership role in addressing challenges, track progress, and be transparent and clear about the challenges and priorities associated with the transition.
Better promote the general value proposition offered by Scotland.
Enhancing the economic contribution of the manufacturing cluster
To enhance the economic contribution of the manufacturing cluster, respondents suggested that the Scottish Government:
Work closely with industry and provide them with long-term incentives for investment. Calls were also made for enhanced support to businesses, in terms of information-related issues, e.g. streamlining complex application processes and implementing a fast-track system for SMEs.
Build the sustainability of long-term manufacturing jobs, addressing any challenges faced.
Improve the quality of renewable energy jobs.
Ensure alignment in approach with the UK Government’s industrial strategy.
Unlocking opportunities at Grangemouth
When asked about policy changes that can unlock opportunities at Grangemouth, respondents suggested the following:
Provide direct intervention to workers whose jobs are under threat.
Increase support for programmes that create job opportunities for workers.
Provide stronger support for renewable energy, including enhancing renewable energy incentives and streamlining planning processes for green infrastructure.
Increase financial support for sectors impacted by Just Transition.
Collaborate closely with businesses and educational bodies, and rebuild trust between key stakeholders.
Improve collaboration with stakeholders with competing interests, such as industry, workers, and community.
Improve clarity and transparency on the CCUS programme.
Continue support for Project Willow.
Align with international strategies and policies for low-carbon fuels and standards.
Streamline the regulatory process by simplifying planning and consenting arrangements and adopt a collaborative approach to regulations.
Part 5: Monitoring and Evaluation
Respondents provided recommendations on improving the monitoring and evaluation framework proposed in the Just Transition plan. Suggestions were made in relation to outcomes, indicators, monitoring approach and process. Key challenges perceived by respondents in relation to the monitoring approach, included data-related challenges (such as lack of data availability, data quality, and challenges around interpretation of data), outcome-related issues (with some outcomes being identified as lacking substance), and challenges relating to balancing input from various stakeholders. Some respondents also highlighted previous experiences with monitoring timelines, noting that timely monitoring is likely to be affected by the time lag of certain datasets.
Improving monitoring and evaluation framework outcomes
To improve monitoring and evaluation outcomes, respondents made the following suggestions:
Link outcomes to proposed actions to improve assessment.
To improve measurability and clarity of outcomes, adopt SMART outcomes, differentiate outcomes where they can benefit from being made more specific, and combine outcomes where they overlap (e.g., combining outcomes 2 and 3, which are both aimed at reducing inequality).
Make specific language changes to certain outcomes, such as outcome 5, (with respondents suggesting that the Scottish Government should consider using the term ‘climate resilience’ rather than just ‘resilience’, as well as explore the optimisation of land use to provide services and resources).
When asked about publicly available data indicators that can be used to track JT outcomes, respondents suggested:
labour market indicators (e.g. number of jobs, unemployment percentages)
environmental indicators
community indicators (e.g., NHS figures, SIMD indicators); and
Project Willow report.
Changes to monitoring and evaluation indicators
While most respondents felt that the indicators should not be changed, the few respondents who provided suggestions recommended that indicators be reviewed regularly to ensure clarity and robustness.
Streamlining the approach to monitoring and evaluation
Respondents suggested that the SG have an ongoing review and correction process for its monitoring approach, and maintain close dialogue with key stakeholders.
Some respondents suggested that the proposed monitoring framework should include a mechanism for community feedback and related adaptation, monitor progress towards job creation (with a focus on those who lost their jobs during transition).
When asked about what a sensible monitoring system would look like, respondents provided suggestions related to the frequency of monitoring, the monitoring process, and the flexibility of the monitoring system. They recommended that the monitoring system must include certain features such as annual data collection, stakeholder surveys, regular meetings.
On the frequency of monitoring, recommendations were varied. Some suggested a more frequent monitoring approach, with progress being monitored every six months or quarterly. Others suggested an annual monitoring approach. Relatedly, a few respondents suggested phasing the monitoring for the project, with more frequent monitoring at the start for more urgent areas.
Respondents advocated for the monitoring framework to be made flexible, to allow for updates and improvements.
Calls were also made for more clarity on the current monitoring system, with respondents suggesting there be clear communication on progress towards outcomes to stakeholders.