Natural England

Steps towards a revised Country Code (AP03/04)

FOR DECISION

Background

1.    We put a paper (AP02/30) ‘Steps Towards a New Country Code’ to the Board in September 2002. The Board agreed proposals for consultation on a new Code.   The Board advised that the Code needed to be supported by explanatory material; that it should provide simple and positive messages; and that it should be targeted in different ways for different audiences.

Relevant Powers or Duties

2.    Since 1951, the Country Code (which was revised and extended in 1981) has fulfilled the Countryside Agency’s legal duty under section 86(1) of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 to prepare and publish ‘a code of conduct for the guidance of persons visiting the countryside’.

3.    Section 20 of the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 gave the Agency an additional duty to produce guidance on conduct, rights and obligations on access land, both for visitors and for those with legal rights over the land, including the owner or tenant and any owners of sporting or common rights.

Progress to Date

4.    Since the September 2002 Board meeting we have formalised our working relationships with CCW for the consultation phase of the Code development, with the aspiration of producing a common Code for both countries.   Countryside Agency and CCW staff participated in internal consultations on the format for the new Code, the messages that should be included in it and strategies for effective promotion.   COI Communications consulted Agency Board and CCW Council members and selected stakeholders (National Farmers Union, Country Land and Business Association, English Nature, Ramblers Association, National Trust, Youth Hostel Association, National Park Authorities) on approaches to developing and promoting a new Country Code.

Consultation findings

5.   The responses to the consultation have provided steers on how to develop and focus the external consultation process for the Code.   The responses indicate that:

a)      the style and format of the current Code is dated and dictatorial - the new Code should be welcoming and positive. The new Code should aim to affect a change in attitudes and resulting behaviour in the countryside;

b)     the launch of the Code should be linked to the commencement of open access rights  - which is planned for summer 2004;

c)      a key objective of the new Code should be to build a sense of shared responsibility among all users of the land. The suggestion of mirror codes for land managers and users was seen as potentially divisive. The new Code should aim to be inclusive;

d)       the Code should be a thematic grouping of issues rather than a long list of points.   This would enable flexibility in the way the themes could be communicated to different audiences. The new Code should consist of no more than 5 themes to make it as memorable as possible. The messages should be positive rather than ‘do nots’ and should be linked to symbols to give them a visual component, ensure message consistency and help overcome language barriers;

e)        members of staff within the Agency considered the most important messages to be knowledge of rights and responsibilities, consideration of others, safety and wildlife. Confidence in using the countryside, welcome, respect and enjoyment were also seen as important. Agency Board and CCW Council members and selected key stakeholders considered that gates and boundaries, access, fire, safety and litter were the most important themes under which specific messages could be delivered; 

f)         the Code should explain consequences and should not be prescriptive;

g)      promotion to young people should be made through their leisure activities as well as via education and the national curriculum. A suggestion has been made to OS to include the Code on the maps used by walkers, cyclists and riders;

h)      the partner organisations consulted to date are extremely keen to help promote and launch the Code. The internal consultation process has identified many potential partners and contacts who could be asked to participate in the external consultation process;

i)        the term ‘Code’ should be reviewed depending on the agreed content, as it could appear to be a little dictatorial and unwelcoming (but it is the legal term).

j)        setting up a countryside helpline would be a helpful supplementary way of giving countryside users access to advice on how to enjoy the countryside wisely.

Further external consultation

6.    We recommend that the Code should have a broad umbrella campaign theme that will encompass all aspects of desired attitudes and behaviour from all groups in contact with the countryside.   This wider consultation process will engage stakeholder groups by capturing their views on a range of suggested themes to run through the Code. They will be invited to gauge the relevance of these themes to their constituency. Themes could be configured in a variety of ways.   Possible themes for consultation could include Respect, Enjoyment, Awareness, Protection, Welcome, Access, Partnership and Education.   Potential consultees would include DfES, Farming and Countryside Education, British Horse Society, Ramblers Association, BMC, CLA, Countryside Alliance, NFU, Black Environment Network, MIND, SCOPE, LGA, Forestry Commission, Association of National Parks, English Nature, Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB.   Other consultees could include promotional partners and sporting and health promotion organisations.   We hope that Board members will continue to be involved design, launch and promotion of the Code to help spread its messages.

7.    We will ask consultees for opinions on the tone of the sub-themes, rather than bullet points and wording. We will ask for additional information and potential consequences appropriate for their particular audience. The results of the consultation will be used to populate matrices consisting of target audiences against messages. This will help tailor the messages using a common framework and identity for the Country Code. (An example of this in practice is the Tread Lightly! campaign by the US Bureau of Land Management (www.treadlightly.org)).   We propose that the matrices will form the statutory Country Code, although the Code will not be presented to audiences in this format. 

8.   A matrix approach has the following advantages:

Ÿ         messages can be tailored to audiences;

Ÿ         it acknowledges the multiple uses of the countryside; 

Ÿ         it can engender mutual respect;

Ÿ         delivery can be via multiple channels; 

Ÿ         it can accommodate the complex nature of multiple messages.

Ÿ         it facilitates closer long term working relationships with partners, buy-in to the concepts of the Code and adaptability for branding and ownership

9.   The possible disadvantages of a matrix approach are:

Ÿ          the multiplicity of messages may lead to a perception of a bureaucratic and unfocused product; 

Ÿ          there is potential for loss of Agency control of messages with partners being selective in their message selection;

Ÿ          it is potentially difficult to distil messages to a succinct format that will be readily understood;

Ÿ          concerns raised in the consultation process, and fed into the matrix, may lead to inflated or unsatisfied expectations of their positioning in the eventual Code and a loss of trust

Ÿ          message tailoring can lead to main themes being lost and a parochial approach to the Code.

10.   The matrix approach could itself lead to confusion.   As with the Tread Lightly! campaign, a common Code logo or style would be appropriate to link all strands and codes specific to particular activities.

11.   Some Board members may question the need to spend so much time and money on a bottom-up consultation.   We have taken the view, backed by NCAF, that such an approach is essential if we are to secure full buy-in and widespread free promotion of the final project.   Consulting now on a few short statements of guidance may seem more straightforward but could undermine the long-term effectiveness of this project.

12.   The consultation could also ask whether the term ‘Country Code’ (the present widely used term) should still be applied and if not, request suggestions for alternative presentation of this statutory item.

13. The consultation process will feature two elements, workshop groups with key stakeholders to gain input on message priorities and delivery methods and an external consultation paper.

14.   The workshop groups, run by COI Communications, will work with stakeholders to raise awareness of the Code and build promotional partnerships. We would like a Board member to be the ‘champion’ for each group.   Groups could be organised to focus on a particular theme or all themes and be made up of members of different constituencies. Alternatively, groups could run for key stakeholders with common audience sectors such as Education, Users, Land Management, Social Inclusion, Access, Natural Heritage.   On balance, we recommend a theme based approach, with a cross-section of stakeholders giving their perspective on all themes, this is the best option to deliver maximum information. 

15.   A wide external consultation in the form of a paper will be run in parallel with the workshop groups.   The consultation paper will be on the Agency and CCW websites, advertised in Countryside Focus and posted on Agency learning networks. It will consult on suggested themes, messages and title for the Code and suitable promotion strategies. Consultees will be asked to submit examples of best practice for the Code and its promotion.  We suggest that public engagement on promotional ideas should be sought at a later stage, once the Code is agreed.

16.   The consultation will run between March and May 2003.   As part of this process, model communications strategies will be developed among stakeholder groups during the workshop sessions. COI Communications will analyse the results of the workshop groups, combine these with the consultation paper results and then develop the final communications strategy for a new Code by July 2003.  

Finance and Manpower Consequences

17.    Resources for this work are provided for in the Corporate Plan within our work on recreational infrastructure that’s easy to enjoy. The staff and financial implications will be dependent on the approach we take to the design and launch of the Code. The current provision in the Business Plan has £250,000 for the Country Code work in this year.   The overall cost will be clearer once a proper project plan is in place.   The Country Code project will be managed by the Project Board now established for the whole access to open land project. 

Next Steps

18.        The development and launch of the Country Code will be subject to the results of the consultation. Phase 1 of the consultation will conclude following COI Communications’ presentation of the communications strategy for the Code. Phase 2 will then commence with the drafting, design and testing of the new Code. 

19.        During the internal consultation, consultees recommended that the launch of the Code should run in tandem with the regional commencement of the new open access rights in England. Agency staff attending roadshows held during the consultation on draft maps have noted a high level of concern amongst rural communities that the new rights will lead to more frequent instances of behavioural problems amongst visitors across a wider area. The launch of the Code in Spring 2004, prior to commencement of access rights in England, should help allay these fears and show that the Agency understands their concerns and is promoting appropriate behaviour.

Risks and Mitigation Measures