Author: Lesley Riddoch

THE Local Government Boundary Commission plans should be stopped until after proper debate, says Lesley Riddoch

Is the SNP – or indeed any mainstream Scottish party – serious about breaking up Europe’s largest councils and devolving power to Scotland’s communities? Despite warm words, and mention of local government reform in Nicola Sturgeon’s programme for government, you’d have to wonder.

Last week the Local Government Boundary Commission produced a report that will make the difficult business of democracy in some parts of rural Scotland almost impossible.

But despite widespread criticism, it will doubtless be rubber-stamped by the Scottish Parliament unless MSPs decide to represent the interests of local people not party whips or the Holyrood timetable.

The Boundary Commission review was hardly covered by the national press – why bother when the net change is just two fewer wards and four fewer councillors across Scotland and the Commission’s admirable aim is the restoration of parity in the ratio of councillors to electors?

The only wee snag has been unintended, anti-democratic and apparently unforeseeable outcomes. Some of the new wards are enormous and mean councillors must use ferries (time-consuming and weather dependent) to reach every part of their new super-sized wards, some of which also split natural communities.

There’s worry that all these problems may further deter folk from standing as candidates in the 2017 local elections and (ironically) increase costs as mileage and the number of overnight stays rise.

Take Argyll and Bute as an example. The Commission recommends that part of the Cowal peninsula is merged with the neighbouring island of Bute to form a single council ward. Sure – why not? Hardly anyone lives there and there’s a year-round ferry. Sorted.

Meanwhile, the southern part of Oban is being separated from the town and merged into the ward which includes the council headquarters in Lochgilphead, an hour’s drive away. Neighbouring Ardrishaig will now be in a different ward to Lochgilphead despite centuries-long human connections between the two (and connected school and postal systems) but the entire length of the Crinan Canal will be one ward – suggesting boundaries that suit administrators rather than local people.

The previous structure of three wards each producing three councillors elected by Single Transferable Vote will become two enormous wards each producing four councillors. This gets rid of one councillor (saving £16k) and will be marginally more representative of votes cast – just a shame the miserably low average turnout (38 per cent) gives a hollow ring to any claims for enhanced representation.

It’s a similar story across Scotland. Highland Council will have six fewer members, and the Western Isles four fewer, whilst some city areas acquire more and Orkney and Shetland remain the same.

Highland Council leader Margaret Davidson has described the changes – due to kick in before next May’s local elections – as “undemocratic and damaging” and has accused the commission of ignoring critical feedback during its long consultation process.

“When last discussed at the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, just about every local authority was against what the commission was proposing. We asked for the process to be put on ice until after the local elections. It’s not the loss of councillors, it’s the loss of democratic representation.

“For example, the most demanding ward – central Inverness – is losing a councillor, so the often delicate and difficult workload on those remaining will be substantially increased. In Caithness, they’re ignoring natural communities and just dividing the county in half.”

From the perspective of a distant planner it may make some kind of sense. But to locals like veteran Rothesay councillor Isobel Strong – it’s crazy.

“Councillors are obliged to attend Community Council meetings so if all four councillors come from Bute it will be almost impossible to attend evening meetings without a dash to the last Colintraive Ferry at 9pm.

“I fear communities won’t feel represented by someone who lives such a long way away. Commission members should come and travel the routes involved to see whether they would do this job in the depths of winter when ferries are cancelled because of storms.”

In many ways though, the Boundary Commission is hardly to blame for making the job of local councillors even more pressurized, remote and unappealing. The main problem – the massive physical size of Scotland’s so-called “local” councils and its tiny councillor cohort – is not one they can fix.

Scotland currently has 32 councils and 1,223 councillors.

Norway (with roughly the same population) has 429 councils and 10,785 councillors. Compare our statistics with any modern European democracy – or even the rusty old ones. Our councillor cohort is ten times smaller while our councils are ten times larger than the European average. This is the problem the Scottish Government has not yet opted to tackle.

Thus Argyll and Bute has 31 councillors – but in Scotland it’s considered a big council. When you apply multi-member wards and proportional representation to such a ludicrously small councillor total across such a massive rural area, you get the current democratic shambles. It’s not the STV electoral system that’s at fault – it’s the massive size of councils and the tiny size of the councillor cohort.

Of course folk fear that more councillors will mean more expense. That’s partly because we pay councillors £16k per annum – not enough for a person of working age to get a mortgage but enough to trigger bean-counter complaints.

In the old days, councillors just reclaimed loss of earnings. But the massive size of some councils made it hard for folk to do council work in their spare time.

Argyll and Bute hold council meetings during the day because it takes so long for representatives to reach its Lochgilphead HQ. If Argyll and Bute was broken down into five or six smaller councils, meetings could be held at night as they are elsewhere and businesses might be happier to let staff nip off for the occasional daytime meeting as they do in much of the rest of Europe.

In short, big is not beautiful, more economical or more democratic when it comes to local democracy. And this underlying structural problem must be addressed first.

In a logical world, the Boundary Commission Review would be halted in its tracks and reviewed after a vigorous debate about a genuinely local government system for Scotland.

But is that coming along the tracks any time soon?

Author: University of West of Scotland

‘I don’t smoke; don’t drink. The only thing wrong with me is my health’ – new report

A series of interviews with people living in two towns in Ayrshire has highlighted the impact that wider social issues have on people’s health – and need for local communities to be at the centre of solutions.

The report from the University of the West of Scotland links the experiences of austerity, de-industrialisation and welfare reform over the last 40 years with people’s experiences of ill-health.

It adds further evidence of the need to tackle root causes of poverty and inequality when facing the health issues of deprived communities. It also notes that tendency for public health campaigns, even ones which are well-meaning, to suffer from ‘lifestyle drift’ where the poor are often blamed for their problems.

The report is based upon the interviews with people living in Kilmarnock and Cumnock, where they told researchers about the issues which they saw affecting their communities – often directly related to government social policies.

In one extract John, an ex-miner, describes how other people might judge those in poverty:

“We’re going way back to the Victorian times here, like…They think if you’re in poverty, it’s through your own making, and if you’re in bad health, like myself, it’s through my own making. [They’ll think] I’ve probably drunk all my days and, I’ve took drugs and I’ve partied to the early hours of the morning and it’s all self-inflicted. That’s how a lot of people will look at it, and the way the government’s at it just now, anybody that’s on benefits – there’s got to be some reason why they’re on benefits.”

“Nearly every day I’m picking this paper up, I’m reading aboot the life expectancy wae me and [compared to] maybe staying doon in London…They’re absolutely kicking you every way they can, like. And if you’re in a poor area, you’ll always be in a poor area…”

The report concludes that local communities should be at the centre of addressing these issues, noting that “not only do many policy makers and practitioners have something to learn from them, so too does a significant section of the research community – ourselves included”.

This study was part-funded by the University of the West of Scotland-Oxfam Partnership and NHS Health Scotland, which also funds CHEX.

You can read a summary on the Herald website here and an opinion piece here.

Author: Volunteer Scotland

Many volunteers don’t have the time for a traditional role but would contribute if volunteering was a bit more flexible.

Micro-volunteering can offer flexibility, providing small, bite-size chunks of volunteering for people to complete at a time that suits them, either on a regular or one-off basis. Micro-volunteering can take place online or in person. Help from Home enables people to ‘Change the world in just your pyjamas!’ and support organisations through online actions such as signing petitions, completing questionnaires, translating and proofreading. Other organisations, including larger national charities, offer community-based roles such as writing to your MP or MSP about a particular issue, taking part in a community event or baking a cake for a local fundraiser. The RSPB has a page on the volunteering section of its website asking ‘Got less than an hour?’ offering people opportunities to support the organisation by fitting smaller volunteering activities into their own free time and lifestyle.

Micro-volunteering could be a one-off contribution or could be a regular commitment of a small amount of time.

The Institute of Volunteering Research (IVR) identified eight common features of micro-volunteering activities in their report The value of giving a little time: Understanding the potential of micro-volunteering.

1.            Duration – it involves small increments of time

2.            Access – it is easy to get started and do

3.            Immediacy – it is quick to start and complete, and requires minimal planning

4.            Convenience – [the volunteer] decides when and where

5.            Level of formality – no formal agreement between the organisation and the volunteer is usually needed

6.            Frequency – it can be a one-off or repeated

7.            Activity – it involves discrete actions

8.            Location – it can be online or offline, onsite or offsite.

These pages will tell you all you need to know about setting up micro-volunteering in your organisation – and if you’re already offering micro-volunteering opportunities, we’d love to hear from you to find out what you’re doing and to learn from your experience so far.

Thinking about micro-volunteering

There are different ways to approach micro-volunteering: you could break down existing roles into separate tasks to be completed individually, perhaps offering greater flexibility for your current volunteers; or you could identify new activities that would bring added value to your organisation and potentially attract a new audience for volunteering. Think about what the need is for your organisation, how micro-volunteering can support your aims and enhance your volunteer offer.

Talk to your existing volunteers to get their ideas and opinions about the sort of tasks that could be completed by someone with minimal knowledge of the organisation and to ensure you don’t take away any tasks that people enjoy doing as part of a larger role. You can also offer new micro-volunteering opportunities to your existing team, who might be glad of the additional flexibility or alternative ways to contribute to the organisation.

If you’ve got roles that could be completed by someone at home, over the internet or on a smartphone this enables more people to take part when they’re available. Think about how you define volunteering within your organisation – do campaigning and fundraising activities count as volunteering? What about following, retweeting or liking you on social media? One popular smartphone app is Donate a Photo from Johnson & Johnson – would an activity like this count as micro-volunteering for your organisation?

Consider the resources, time and money you’ll need for micro-volunteering. The input from volunteers may be more sporadic and take less time than traditional roles, but support is still needed to make the volunteering effective and mutually beneficial. Agree who is responsible for each step in the volunteer journey, from promoting micro-volunteering opportunities through to rewarding and recognising people who volunteer in this way. Also think about how you’ll record the amount that people are contributing through micro-volunteering so that you can share with others the difference your volunteers are making.

Budgeting for micro-volunteering depends on the nature of the role, the location of the volunteering and any additional resources required; for example, if you’re asking people to travel within their local community, you’ll need to cover their travel expenses. As with all volunteer roles, it’s important to think through the costs involved and be sure you’re able to support micro-volunteering effectively.

Getting started with micro-volunteering

Since micro-volunteering involves small amounts of time, potential volunteers may not have much time to look for opportunities. Think about where to promote your roles in your local community and consider using online platforms such as Help from Home. Do you have followers on social media who you could ask to complete a short task when it’s needed, or do you have ongoing opportunities that you could advertise more permanently on your website, like the RSPB?

Remember that your potential audience includes people who wouldn’t otherwise be looking for volunteering because they feel they don’t have enough time available. One way to attract new people is to ask your existing volunteers to spread the word among their friends and families – and to complete some micro-volunteering themselves by sharing a message through their own social media channels to promote your new roles.

One of the key differences between micro-volunteering and more traditional roles is that volunteers are in control of how, when, where and for how long they participate in micro-volunteering opportunities. This shifts the balance in the selection process towards the volunteer, who will choose the organisation and the opportunity that best suits them. Two examples of micro-volunteering opportunities for which people can choose exactly when and how often they want to volunteer are Casserole Club and Free Cakes for Kids UK.

Unless your micro-volunteering requires specific skills, such as a particular language or the ability to drive, you probably won’t have much of a selection process for these roles – and even then you may need to rely on self-selection by volunteers so that they complete a task that they are able to do. For some roles, you might want to complete background checks for volunteers – think about the time and commitment this asks of people and whether the role you’re offering is suitable for micro-volunteering.

Many micro-volunteering roles don’t require advance registration, they simply ask for a task to be completed and submitted. Others, including English Out There use existing channels such as Facebook, asking people to connect with them online and to volunteer from there. Think about how you can capture individuals’ details when they choose to volunteer. Rather than a full application form, could you ask simply for a name and email address? Do you need any further details to be able to provide the appropriate support for the role?

You might find that you have almost no contact with individual volunteers. In this case, the key to successful micro-volunteering is attracting the right people in the first place. This will depend upon providing clear instructions, purpose and outcomes at the point of advertising the role, which might be the only information the volunteer has about both the role and the organisation. Make sure your advert is as clear and concise as possible, like this micro-volunteering campaign from Crea8ing Careers.

One of the advantages of this approach to attracting volunteers, with minimal communication between the organisation and the individual, is that all volunteering will be completed proactively by people who believe they can do the role and have chosen to contribute to your organisation. One of the biggest disadvantages, however, is that you won’t know when someone will choose to volunteer, when the tasks will be completed or to what standard. If you’ve got something that needs to be completed by a certain deadline, it might be best to ask existing volunteers or supporters if they would like to take on the role.

Micro-volunteering doesn’t usually have an induction. You may have some information that you need to share with new volunteers, such as how to complete the task and the impact it will have, but ideally your micro-volunteering activities should be straightforward and self-explanatory, to ensure they can be completed quickly and easily. You could perhaps offer people a chance to find out more about your organisation via a website or e-learning link, so that those people who do want to engage with you have the chance to do so in their own time, without this being a requirement for their volunteering.

Making a difference through micro-volunteering

As with all volunteer roles, it’s important to keep in mind an individual’s motivation for volunteering and aim to provide mutually beneficial opportunities. Perhaps people have limited time because they have full-time work or family commitments, but they still have skills that they would like to use or develop through volunteering. Perhaps someone wishes to contribute to an organisation that fits with their own values, but wants to do so quietly, without recognition or praise. Or perhaps someone’s lifestyle means they are only available to volunteer overnight.

If people are interested in the wider work of your organisation, think about how you can communicate with them and keep them up-to-date. Would they like to be included in regular updates and newsletters, or would they like to attend any events? Think about how you can ask people for their communication preferences rather than assuming all volunteers would, or would not, like to receive news and updates from you.

It’s also important to ensure all volunteers know who to contact if they’ve got any questions or concerns. Identify a point of contact for all micro-volunteering roles and then ensure that there is an alternative contact available should the named person be away for any reason. If a volunteer has a question, chances are they’ll need an answer immediately to be able to complete their volunteering.

You’re unlikely to have regular one-to-ones with volunteers so think about how you want to share key messages such as thanks and praise with individuals. It can be particularly difficult to communicate with volunteers who are completing micro-volunteering tasks online at any time of day or night, and it’s therefore important to ensure that the roles you promote as micro-volunteering require little or no support from a manager or supervisor.

Building on the success of micro-volunteering

Once you’re up and running with micro-volunteering, record the contributions people are making. Think about how you can celebrate micro-volunteering within your organisation and also how to share your success, and learning, with other organisations.

Even if someone only participates once through micro-volunteering and so only gives you a few minutes of their time, it’s important to recognise this and thank the volunteer for their contribution. Rewards should be appropriate and proportional, so think about the best way to say thank you; if you’ve recorded each volunteer’s email address then perhaps sending an email is the most appropriate way, but you could also have immediate, automated responses if someone has uploaded photos or information into a database. If someone has contributed via social media, you could thank them by mentioning them in a post or tweet.

It’s essential to aim to build a good relationship with all your volunteers, even if you’re not in regular contact with someone who is micro-volunteering. By contacting someone to say thank you you also create an opportunity to share more information with the individual about how to engage with your organisation in other ways. You could ask for feedback about their experience – perhaps a micro-volunteering task could be completing a survey about volunteering. You could also share information about the impact their volunteering has had, to encourage people to return to your organisation next time they want to volunteer.

Remember that volunteers’ motivations and availability change over time. Someone who starts out with micro-volunteering could perhaps in future contribute in other volunteer roles and give you more of their time, skills and energy. Offering an excellent experience of micro-volunteering might therefore lead to a long-term relationship between the individual and your organisation. Don’t be afraid to let volunteers know about other opportunities that have a greater time commitment – but also be clear that a one-off contribution through micro-volunteering is just as valuable to the organisation. Either way, micro-volunteering can be a great benefit for your organisation and for the individual as well.

Author: Jane Bradley, The Scotsman

A panel of the Great Tapestry of Scotland which was stolen last year from a Kirkcaldy art gallery is being replaced by the seamstresses who created the original work.

The section, which tells the story of the ancient Rosslyn Chapel, was taken from Kirkcaldy Galleries in September, where it was on display as part of a tour of Scotland.

Now, a team of workers from the Roslin area have begun work on a replacement for the panel, which is due to be completed by the end of the year, in time for the tapestry to be hung at its new home in the Tweedbank Centre early next year.

Jan Rutherford, manager of the tour and exhibition of the tapestry, said there would be some minor differences to the original panel, which was designed by artist Andrew Crummy. She said: “They are restitching to the original design, but with slightly different stitching and a few additional elements created by Andrew to distinguish it from the original. It is impossible to replace something like that, so whatever we did was going to be slightly different.”

Seamstress Fiona McIntosh, who is working on the new panel, said the seven-strong team were devastated when the original work was stolen. “We were absolutely gutted,” she said. “We have been given an opportunity to improve on the original version.”

The Great Tapestry of Scotland features 160 separate panels, each of which took about 500 hours to create with more than 300 miles of woollen yarn.

Alistair Moffat, co-chairman and historian for the tapestry project, said: “The wonderful thing about the women of Roslin doing this again is that it absolutely defeats the philistines who stole the panel.

“It is marvellous that they have got the courage and persistence to say ‘You’re not going to beat us’.”

Author: Ian Swanson, Evening News

COMMUNITY campaign group Leithers Don’t Litter has been hailed as a model for local anti-litter drives across Scotland.

The initiative – launched last year by advertising guru Gerry Farrell and his wife, Zsuzsa – was praised by MSPs as setting an example which could be followed nationwide.

The group, which has won the backing of hundreds of residents, organises an “adopt a street” scheme where volunteers collect litter, and works in schools to promote respect for the environment.

Its Facebook page has become a platform for residents to highlight problems and seek advice on issues from flytipping to bin collections.

During a debate in the Scottish Parliament on litter, Lothian Conservative MSP Cameron Buchanan said Scotland was “dirty” and singled out Leithers Don’t Litter for its action to tackle the problem.

“Such initiatives can make a difference in local areas and are setting the exact example that we need to see replicated on a national scale,” he said. “Gerry and Zsuzsa Farrell, among others, are running a determined campaign that is spreading the message about the problem and what we can all do to help.

“They are right to highlight the difference that comes from adopting a street and using a simple litter-picker.

“If locals make that effort for their communities and such initiatives spread across Scotland, we will see the lasting difference that we need.”

Mr Buchanan said education was the key to tackling the “scourge” of litter. He said: “We have to educate people not to leave litter, and that education has to start in nurseries from the age of three or four.”

Edinburgh North and Leith Labour MSP Malcolm Chisholm also praised the “amazing” Leithers Don’t Litter campaign and said he wanted to join in after he stands down at the election.

He said: “It has been going for only a few months but it has engaged large numbers of people in the community. When I have a bit more time on my hands in seven weeks, I want to get involved in the campaign. It is one of the best community initiatives that I have seen.”

Mr Chisholm also urged tougher action on dog fouling.

The Evening News revealed recently that more than half the dog-fouling fines dished out across the Capital in recent years have never been paid.

He said: “There should be a national initiative and campaign about this problem of dog fouling. However, it has to be backed up by enforcement. The offence must be given higher status. It is very serious antisocial behaviour.”

Mr Farrell watched the debate and said he had been really pleased with its tone.

“There was a lot of enthusiasm for trying new ideas and a recognition that some of the old methods had not really worked,” he said.

“It’s great to feel Holyrood is open-minded across the parties, as is the council, sitting up and listening and approving of the idea we liberate our communities to get on and do the job and show an example.”

Author: Julie Samuel

The Ecology Centre is an established (1998) social enterprise nestled on the eastern shore of Kinghorn Loch in Fife. We actively use nature and the environment as a tool to improve quality of life. We enable young people to experience and learn about the natural world, provide fulfilling volunteering opportunities for all ages and abilities and offer unemployed adults training opportunities.

The organisation was established operating from rented space in old farm buildings which gave no long term security.  For over 10 years we have been trying to secure a permanent site for The Ecology Centre.  In 2014 we eventually managed to buy 5 acres of land adjacent to the farm site, on behalf of the community.  In 2015 we were awarded a Big Lottery grant to build our own Centre that would be our new home.  Today we boast a well-equipped Men Shed, flexible event spaces, a catering standard kitchen, offices and volunteering facilities overlooking Kinghorn Loch. Our new building complex consists of upcycled shipping containers and a purpose built passive haus designed building that is ultra-low energy, requiring little heating.

We are pleased to announce that we have now opened our doors to social enterprises and businesses across Scotland who may wish to use our unique venue to host their events. “The Nest” is the perfect venue to stage workshops, training days, conferences or parties.  It is a flexible space with fantastic views across Kinghorn Loch. 

To find out more please contact us on: 01592 891567 or email: admin@theecologycentre.org

Author: David Ross, The Herald

It’s to be a carnival of sheep thrills. A festival celebrating a rare breed of seaweed-eating sheep that invites revellers to help round up the flock and repair boundary walls is set to attract crowds to Orkney.

But the fortnight-long event is distinct from Scotland’s traditional festival fare such as T in the Park and Summer Sessions in Glasgow, which boasts some of the world’s biggest bands wowing throngs of devoted fans over a multi-million-pound sound system.

Instead, the “revellers” attending the festival on the remote island of North Ronaldsay can hone their drywalling skills and help to repair storm damage to sheep dykes that prevent the rare ovine breed from polluting their gene pool with impure mates.

It is hoped shoring up the island’s defences will also help reduce the likelihood of the ancient breed of sheep succumbing to copper poisoning from the island’s grass, because it disrupts an enzyme in their immune system.

Festival organiser Kate Traill Price said the first-of-its-kind festival will help to promote the island and teach visitors unique agricultural skills

She said: “The BBC’s Countryfile programme featured the sheep dyke earlier this year and highlighted our continuing efforts to keep it maintained.

“Following that broadcast we were inundated with generous offers of help from people throughout the country, so we came up with the idea of the festival as a way of both utilising that assistance and highlighting what a wonderful place North Ronaldsay is.

 “The festival is unique and offers volunteers the opportunity to work alongside our community in conserving our rare and iconic breed of sheep,” she added.

“It’s going to be a real hands-on experience, but also lots of fun, with many other activities planned during the two-week long event.”

It is not yet known how many festival-goers will attend the event, which runs from July 25 until August 5.

North Ronaldsay mutton is exported from the island and prized as a delicacy, thanks to its distinctive flavour.

Wool from the sheep is also processed locally and sold to knitters around the world.

According to the Orkney Sheep Foundation, the 3,000-strong flock are an ancient breed of small, hardy sheep that are part of the family of short-tailed animals found in various parts of northern Europe and on some of the Atlantic islands.

In the 1830s, traditional farming faced sweeping changes and big breeds of sheep such as Cheviots and Leicesters were bred on Orkney as elsewhere.

On many islands the native sheep did not survive this transformation changes. But in North Ronaldsay, farmers discovered to keep the breed that had served them for so many years alive they should build a 13-mile drystane dyke around the island to keep them on the shore. It is because of this development the sheep adapted to a seaweed diet.

Maintenance of the coastal sheep dyke, which is damaged by winter storms each year, is a continual challenge for the small community of just over 70 on what is Orkney’s most northerly island. Festival-goers will help repair fallen sections of the wall, learning traditional building skills from experts.

Volunteers are also being invited to take part in a North Ronaldsay punding – the process of rounding up the wild sheep from the beach in order to be clipped.

Author: Michael Gray, The National

TAPS aff’ weather is a beautiful description for a hot day in Scotland requiring minimal clothing. If you were out amid the scorching sun yesterday you’ll know what I mean. It was glorious. But before sharing that story with you, I wanted to check if it was the same elsewhere in the country.

I typed “weather in Scotland” into Google – hoping for a national picture to appear. The result? “Glasgow, UK. Sunny. 21 degrees.” The second result? “BBC Weather – Glasgow.” The third? “BBC Weather – Edinburgh.” Other results, also telling me what the weather was in Glasgow, were further down. In the morning I heard on the radio – also from a Central Belt station – that there were “blue skies across the country”. It might well have been sunny everywhere. It’s just a harmless tale about the weather. As I’m ginger, I couldn’t even stay outside for that long anyway. Really this isn’t about the sun at all. It’s about what Google – and what many other sources focus on – when we want to tell a story about “Scotland”.

Benedict Anderson coined the term “imagined communities” to describe the culture of nationalisms. It’s a description of how a society creates the idea of nationality among people we never meet and places we rarely see. Often this appears through stories and other media. We create mythology, heroes and villains, a plot line of history, and shared culture, even innocent wee phrases like “taps aff”, as part of a unique culture that becomes a bedrock of what “Scotland” is as a place, and what makes it different from elsewhere.

There’s nothing wrong with imagining a community. In many ways – as civic nationalists argue– it can be a positive thing that brings strangers together through the idea of common endeavour. Yet I think there can often be shortcomings in the way those communities are created.

If rain and clouds had engulfed the Outer Hebrides yesterday it’s unlikely that we – the majority elsewhere – would have seen much of a change to the main news storyline of blazing sunshine. The problem with reality is that it’s often too varied to fit into a single story or a single conception of a national community. Why does this matter? Well, I think it offers a view of the Holyrood election – where thousands grab for a national story, when perhaps it was far too complex to be pigeon-holed. I watched the declarations in Glasgow, as old Labour seats tumbled in a repeat of 2015. Their chickens from the referendum were coming home to roost, it was fair to say. Meanwhile, in Edinburgh the story was different, as more affluent seats fell to Unionist parties. In Perthshire and the north-east the pattern shifted again – SNP lost ground directly to the Tories, while Orkney and Shetland were a world away from commentator expectations: the Liberals surged.

As a reader you’ll have your own views on these differences. From a Glasgow viewpoint, there’s a well kent story of the SNP’s growth and Labour’s decline – sometimes it’s presented (like Google’s weather report) as synonymous with Scotland as a whole. It certainly wasn’t in Edinburgh Southern or East Lothian.

We’ve also told a story of a Scotland where the Tories are toxic – and while that may be the case, relatively speaking, in much of the central belt, it isn’t in the seven constituencies they won outright last week. This isn’t just about the referendum, and it hasn’t appeared overnight. We speak as if there’s one Scotland – when that’s a complete fiction. There are rich enclaves; cut-off urban estates; vast tracts of rural land plotted with farms, crofts, and mansions; prosperous coastal towns; windswept old seaside resorts struggling as planes fly off to Spain; new build flats packed with overcharged international students; fishing communities; posh bistro restaurants bustling with financial executives. The truth is there are many different Scotlands.

Traditionally, it is the job of the media to bridge these differences: urban, rural, rich, poor, young, old. Increasingly, with a media bereft of money and time – reporters have to assume more while knowing less. Look carefully, for instance, at what lay-offs (often under the guise of “voluntary redundancies”) do to the expertise of newsrooms. If we don’t have skilled professionals with the time to travel, research, and embed themselves within “Scotland’s communities”, will we ever truly know the meaning of either?

The danger, and sadly the most likely outcome, is that electoral realities are used to reaffirm our own biases. The urban Tory vote is written off to British, orange nationalism. The rural swing from the SNP is too easily dismissed or assumed to be a straightforward constitutional backlash. Unionism in Edinburgh is simplified as tactical voting. Orkney and Shetland, and their independent voting patterns, remain otherworldly.

Perhaps the best and most challenging perspective to maintain is one of humility and doubt – to admit that there is no, and can be no, simple “national story” that can ever fully condense the political voices of millions. For those who try, we can at least take comfort in that what Hugh MacDiarmid called “our multiform, our infinite Scotland” remains as perplexing and fascinating as ever

Author: Martin Sime, SCVO

A recent conversation convened by the Electoral Reform Society felt like it could become the start of a much needed campaign to improve local democracy, which many believe is a priority for reform in Scotland. Most voluntary organisations will have something to say about this.

The meeting opened in promising fashion with some real insights into the problems of the current set-up and the potential to develop something altogether more relevant, inclusive and participative. Despite a heavy Scottish and local government presence this was not about giving existing local authorities more power and resources. We are all bored and generally unconvinced by that. Instead there was a welcome commitment to diversity, one solution will not fit everyone, and a shared understanding that the focus of this debate should not be about boundaries or institutional structures but about citizen participation. 

At best local democracy ought to be untidy and uneven, there should be no appetite for structural blueprints

That’s where local democracy ought to get interesting for the third sector. Mostly people express their concerns and sign up to be involved in the issues and with the organisations that matter to them. Nearly 90% of the public make some contribution to our sector. Can some of these dynamics be applied, for example to parent involvement in schools? And what more could the recent explosion of community land buy-outs, community anchor organisations, development trusts and energy and broadband co-operatives contribute?

Once self-directed support is accepted as the default mode for government-organised human services (as it must be), it becomes more possible to reimagine local democracy in a creative way. With social care and education off the books in terms of workforce and planning, the purpose and functions of local government become much easier to debate. The form and structure debate should follow not lead that discussion.

We heard some very positive experiences from rural Scotland, where people had taken on land or other assets and there is a growing appetite to do more. With the right leadership local government could play a huge enabling role in invigorating new forms of community democracy, which have precisely nothing to do with chains of office or even community planning but are about citizens taking collective responsibility for organising the things that matter to them. Some small towns are already preparing for this kind of future. 

At best local democracy ought to be untidy and uneven, there should be no appetite for structural blueprints. Traditional up and down electoral politics will need to co-exist with networks and dispersed and often intangible centres of power. Agile alliances will get things done with the job of local government in whatever shape and scale it emerges, being much more about engagement and representation of citizens and enabling new forms of community control.

The number of councils and councillors is a sideshow to the real challenge of generating a participative culture where citizen action is the default mode, and where the level and scale of that engagement, is more important than the number of directly employed staff. There is a long road to travel to make the shift from municipal to enabling councils, but the journey starts here.

Author: BY ALEJANDRO DAVILA FRAGOSO

Motivating people to act on climate change is a constant struggle for governments and nonprofits. But a new study may have found how best to frame the issue to inspire people not just to act, but also to give.

In a study published in Climatic Change Wednesday, researchers found people may donate up to 50 percent more money to a cause when encouraged to think about a problem in collective terms, instead of appealing to personal responsibility. In other words, climate action campaigns like the ones Canada and the European Union have launched may do better when they call for us to act, instead of asking you to act.

“We’re operating on a lot of baked-in assumptions on how to motivate people,” lead author Nick Obradovich, a doctoral candidate in the department of political science at the University of California, San Diego, told ThinkProgress. These assumptions are a problem not just for governments, but also for environmental campaigns seeking donations. “That could be a lot of money potentially lost,” Obradovich said.

“We’re operating on a lot of baked-in assumptions on how to motivate people.

To explore message efficiency, Obradovich and fellow political science Ph.D. student Scott Guenther surveyed members of the National Audubon Society, a wildlife conservation organization focused on birds, as well as members of the public viaAmazon’s Mechanical Turk, an online micro jobs venue.

Participants were randomly assigned to do one of three tasks for a one in 100 chance of winning $100. Some were asked to write a paragraph on how they personally cause climate change. Others were asked to write about how climate change is collectively caused, and the control subjects wrote about daily routines like brushing their teeth and didn’t mention climate change. After writing, participants were asked how much of the $100 they would be willing to donate to Audubon’s climate change efforts.

Among the 1,215 Audubon members, researchers found those writing about collective causes of climate change were willing to donate 7 percent more of their potential winnings relative to the control group, or about $5 more. Among 304 members of the public, the trend was similar for those writing about collective causes, though donations were 50 percent higher, or about $7 more than the control.

But most tellingly, those assigned to the personal responsibility task donated amounts that didn’t significantly differ from the control. Obradovich said that was surprising since both the collective and personal responsibility task referred to climate change.

“So something negative is going on,” said Obradovich. “We had hypothesized that thinking about climate change in any way would incline people to donate more to climate change, but that’s not what happened.”

Obradovich and Guenther then ran a follow-up experiment to see how powerful the effect of the collective treatment was. They contacted their original public sample and asked them again how much they’d be willing to give. People who’d written about climate change in collective terms were still willing to donate more than the others, even several days later.

“That also was quite surprising to us,” said Obradovich. “It’s not very common that treatments persist.” Obradovich and Guenther even did a similar survey experiment with a different group of 451 people, also recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, asking them how they might change their future climate-related behaviors. Again, the collective frame outperformed the others, producing the highest aspirations for reducing carbon emissions.

While the findings are revealing and significant for organizations hoping to inspire collective action or conservation funding, the pending question now is why people responded like this. Studies in the past have shown that there is something about the collective that appeals to people. For instance, in 2008 researchers found that hotel guests who learned that the majority of their fellow guests had reused their towels were 26 percent more likely to reuse when compared to those who saw the basic environmental protection message to recycle their towels. This may happen because people are more likely to follow the collective when uncertain about how to behave.

However, in this case there is no collective group to follow. If anything, there’s maybe guilt. But Obradovich said they tested for guilt and it didn’t seem to play much of a factor, so people may have given more to offset their negative emotions with the positive emotions associated with giving. But that’s just a theory. “We really need further study to be able to know with more certainty,” said Obradovich, adding this experiment needs to be duplicated and tested in the real world with a real campaign.

He is also quick to say that Audubon members and the so-called MTurk responders believed more strongly in the occurrence of climate change and its human causes than the average U.S. citizen. Which means it’s unclear if framing the problem of climate change collectively is more effective with people less inclined to support climate action. In any case, he said, “we should be more careful when we are crafting our outreach messages.”