The Fall and Rise of the Scottish Community

Alex Walker, ICSA conference, Findhorn, June 2013 

Overview

Community-based organisations (i.e. bodies owned and controlled by a membership open to all in their geographical community) are distinct from intentional communities, which are generally self-selective. Despite suffering potentially terminal decline during the 20th century, community organisations are now thriving in Scotland and have received significant encouragement from government in recent years. This paper charts this rise and some of the opportunities they present for regeneration and renewal and offers some comparisons with their intentional counterparts.

Historical Background

The way in which Scottish Highlanders experienced community for much of the historic period was through the clan system. These networks of extended kin relationships formed the backbone of medieval society and even as late as the 17th century this Celtic way of life probably had at least as much in common with traditional Native American lifestyles as it did with the English-speaking populations of Lowland Scotland of the time. 

The clans were broken up in the aftermath of the 1745 Jacobite rebellion and by the subsequent Highland Clearances that led to communal systems of land holding being replaced by landed estates owned in perpetuity by aristocratic families. The result of these traumatic changes was predictable. Large scale emigration to cities and distant lands became the norm. By the 1960s levels of earnings, unemployment and continuing net migration were so bad that a government agency, today called Highland and Islands Enterprise, was set up to combat them. 

In the cities of Glasgow and Edinburgh the idea of community enterprise fared little better. The growing numbers of urban poor sought to improve their position through the activities of trade unions. The provision of key services (including housing for the majority) was seen as the responsibility of the state and of local authorities. Locally-based collective action was, generally speaking, not given a high priority.

By the latter half of the 20th century these “local” authorities had also abandoned their community roots, becoming (as they remain) amongst the largest in Europe, serving on average a population of 115,000 and in the view of some, creating a “democratic deficit”. (Compared to the lowest tiers of government in e.g. Norway, where the average is 4,000 and Germany where it is 7,000.) Perhaps the nadir for the idea of community in Scotland came during the 1980s when UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher announced that “there is no such thing as society”.  

However it is in the nature of things that renewal often comes amidst the rubble of the old and the rest of this paper charts the remarkable rejuvenation of community-based action in Scotland during the last two decades.  

Development Trusts

Attempts to promote common ownership have a long history in the UK. Some movements shared ideals that are prominent amongst intentional communities today. In the 17th century the Ranters’ beliefs were in social equality and the divinity inherent in all mankind. William Blake observed the crushing effects of commercialism on the human spirit in London in the 18th century and called for “Mutual” to build a “New Jerusalem” – a rallying cry answered in the following century by the Rochdale Pioneers, who founded the Co-operative movement. 

Nevertheless, such was the state of affairs in the 20th century that when a group of community activists came together in London to found the development trusts movement  in the 1990s, the time was ripe for a new and radical attempt to bring community ownership and activism to the fore. A UK-based organisation was created to promote community-owned social enterprises and after a few years it had collected over 200 members.  However, there was still but one member from Scotland. Had community action died north of the border?

On investigation it was agreed that the newly devolved Government in Scotland, (created with a broad remit over Scottish affairs in 1997 and now based at the Holyrood Parliament building in Edinburgh), had encouraged systems of engaging with communities that were sufficiently different from those at Westminster, to merit the creation of an independent sister organisation. Development Trusts Association Scotland (DTAS) was duly established in 2003. 

Far from discovering a landscape deserted by community activists, only a decade later DTAS now has nearly 200 members of its own located throughout the length and breadth of Scotland, and especially in areas where community-based enterprise has attempted to meet the challenges of market failure – whether in the deprived urban housing estates or in the remote and (by now) sparsely populated Highlands. A 2012 survey found that in that year DTAS members had a combined annual turnover of £39 million and owned £51 million in assets.

Scottish Community Alliance

Development trusts are the generalists of the communities movement in the UK. There are also other streams and in recent years the Scottish Community Alliance was created to coordinate the activities of groups and networks that have sprung up offering community-based solutions for specific challenges in relation to energy, transport, food, retailing, woodlands, housing, estate ownership, recycling and so on.

Community Energy Scotland is the body tasked with enabling community organisations to maximise the benefits available from renewable energy systems. Scotland has an abundance of potential, especially from wind power and marine systems such as wave and tidal. Financial benefits to communities come from two main streams – discretionary funds provided by mainstream developers and outright community ownership of turbines. A 2010 study identified the potential annual income to communities in Scotland being £35 million or more by 2020 with the prospect of up to £100 million per annum if similar benefits could be obtained from offshore developments.  The scale of existing benefits is sufficient for various trainings to have been offered on the planning and implementation of local community benefit funds. 

Some of the community-based housing associations also have significant assets, as do members of Community Land Scotland. The work of bodies such as the Community Woodlands Association, the Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens and the Scottish League of Credit Unions may have a less significant financial impact, but their members also provide important resources for the communities the serve. Overall, the bodies that subscribe to the Alliance have about 1,000 members.

There are also a significant number of community bodies beyond the membership of the Alliance. It has been estimated that there are nearly 76,000 assets owned by a total of 2,718 community-controlled organisations in Scotland, and with a combined value of just over £1.45 billion. Collectively these assets comprise 187,372 hectares in area, 95% of which is made up of 17 large rural estates under community ownership. About 73,000 of these assets are units of housing owned by 84 community-controlled housing associations, housing co-operatives and rural development trusts. A further 2,740 assets are those that bring benefit to, or can be accessed by, the whole community they are intended to serve, such as village halls. 

Two-thirds of community-owned assets by value are to be found in remote rural areas, while those areas provide a home to just 6.5% of the population. In sharp contrast, just over one in every twenty community owned assets can be found in large urban areas where 39% of the population lives.

Comparison with Intentional Communities

Many of these community organisations have features commonly associated with intentional communities. These include: open, democratic processes; a focus on wider social benefits rather than simply on productivity or profits; community-led and independent of any kind of private or public sector control; non profit-distributing. They are usually also inclusive i.e. membership is typically open to all who live in a geographical area, although a small proportion are “communities of interest”.

Decision making procedures tend to be less complex with a greater emphasis on majority rule and less on obtaining consensus than is often the case in an intentional group. This is partly because in some cases they are larger, with many hundreds of potential members (even if only a relatively small proportion are active) and partly because there is less of a need to offer any kind of notional “membership benefit” that includes a greater degree of control for any single individual. Membership is usually a given once an individual has chosen to move to the area.

It is hard to know the extent to which this has caused difficulties. Certainly, for many new community bodies there can be stresses and strains in for example dealing with the novel ideas involved, the economic opportunities provided by renewables and the difficulties of dealing with employee relations (especially in remoter rural areas where everyone tends to know everyone else’s business – or at least thinks that they do). To date none of these problems appear to have been insuperable, although the modern community movement is still in its infancy.

The concept of an “anchor organisation” has been promoted of late. These are development trusts or other community bodies that typically invest in an important locally owned asset and provide a significant element of local leadership – a united voice which also holds and manages assets. They exist in both urban and rural areas and are seen by some as an ideal vehicle for promoting regeneration and renewal. Thus as a community body matures and takes on more responsibility it may, in some limited ways, begin to resemble an intentional community, especially if it is seen as a vital and enduring organisation of considerable local value to its employees, members and stakeholders. An urban example would be Inverclyde Community Development Trust, located on the western edge of the Glasgow conurbation. This organisation, which serves a relatively impoverished community, now employs 85 full time staff and has a turnover in excess of £3 million.

There are however few that would espouse any specific philosophical ideal – partly because this would tend to make membership less inclusive and partly because it may lead to a less successful fundraising strategy, give the public sector and UK Lottery’s keenness to ensure that support is not provided to quasi-closed organisations masquerading as ‘communities’ (as these bodies would define them).

Government Response

The Alliance, working together with Scotland’s leading community sector intermediaries argue for resources and decision making to be devolved to the most appropriate local level and for the achievements of the sector to be acknowledged as making a significant contribution towards improving the quality of life for everyone in Scotland. 

Perhaps in a less challenging economic climate the community movement might not have received so much attention from central government as it has done, but whatever the reasons communities are increasingly being asked to take on much more responsibility for local affairs than used to be the case. There is evidence of this across many areas of Scottish Government policy as outlined below. 

Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill

Known as CERB to its friends, this bill has significant potential to encourage the community ownership and control of land and other assets, and the capacity to generate income streams that are independent of the state. These are critical issues in determining the degree to which a community becomes “empowered”. This process, so the Alliance believes, should based on a number of first principles:    

• Self-determination.  Local people being allowed to determine for themselves how their 

community is defined and which structures  are best suited to take forward their plans. 

•  Local people leading. Community empowerment best occurs when local people lead the 

process in a bottom-up activity. This is in contrast to regeneration efforts led by outside consultants and agencies.

•  Subsidiarity. This is the proposition that a matter ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest, or least centralised authority capable of addressing that matter effectively. (The word as defined by the OED is “that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level. )

There already exists a “Community Right to Buy” land that comes on the market in rural Scotland. This, as set out in the existing Land Reform Act is essentially a community right to register an interest, with the community being given the first opportunity to purchase (at market value) should the property come up for sale. CERB and perhaps also the land reform review will consider whether and how this right should be extended to urban areas as well.

Land Reform Review

The SNP manifesto contained a commitment to the review of the Land Reform Act and the re-introduction of the Scottish Community Land Fund (both originally created by the earlier Labour/Liberal Democrat administration). Part of the review group’s remit is to “assist with the acquisition and management of land (and also land assets) by communities, to make stronger, more resilient, and independent communities which have an even greater stake in their development”.

This ongoing work will attempt to build on recent successes, which include the extraordinary transformations of various Highland estates which have been bought up by community bodies. Examples include the island of Gigha, the Knoydart Foundation and Stòras Uibhist in the Outer Hebrides.

This last example is a development trust that is so large you can see it from space! Stòras Uibhist (the store of Uist) is a collective term for various related organisations that form the community-owned group ownership of the South Uist Estate, which has a population in the vicinity of 3,000. The estate extends to 93,000 acres of land covering almost the whole of the islands of Benbecula, Eriskay and South Uist. It is home to over 850 tenant crofters and numerous businesses in the aquaculture, agriculture, fishing, food processing, construction, tourism and service sectors. This organisation was created to oversee a £4.5million community buy-out of the estate that took place in November 2006.

They are by no means alone. More than half of the landmass of the Outer Hebrides is now community owned, a dramatic change from a century ago when absentee private landowners were the norm. (The Stornoway Trust was formed in the 1920s but the remainder of these buyouts have happened in the last two decades and more are planned.) It has become clear that community ownership has the potential to transform decaying economies and cultures in the west Highlands and that the experiment is likely to be worth repeating elsewhere.

Regeneration Strategy and COSS

Launched in December of 2011, this strategy promotes community-led regeneration for the first time in Scotland, signifying a major shift in policy direction. In the same year DTAS received funding from the Scottish Government to establish a “Community Ownership Support Service”. In its first year the initiative fielded enquiries from 179 community organisations that were either interested in exploring the idea of taking on an asset, or were in the process of acquiring an asset, usually from a local authority. 

Communities Day and Rural Parliament

On 26th April 2013 the first ever “Communities Day” was held at the Holyrood parliament. This event enabled community activists to meet directly with Members of the Scottish Parliament and their advisors and to hold both plenary events in the main chamber for the 250 delegates and workshops in the committee rooms. It is too early to tell what direct impact this event may have, but symbolically it places the communities movement at the heart of Scottish society.

Delegates from all over Scotland attending Communities Day at the Holyrood Parliament

The idea of a ‘Rural Parliament’ is also being explored. The concept has existed for some time in several European countries and provides a platform for the “rural voice” to be heard. In the Scottish context the very varied geography and the diversity of cultural history in rural areas may make the creation of a unified rural vision harder to achieve than elsewhere, but the community movement has had a significant role in advising government about this proposed event.

Political and Economic Landscape

In the UK as a whole the political landscape is usually dominated by “policy instability built on a divisive rural-urban culture”.  By contrast, Scotland’s “rainbow parliament” is more akin to the European experience. It has four major parties and several smaller ones and their relative positions cannot be described purely on the basis of a simple left/right axis. Similarly, the wider sectoral landscape in which community bodies are working defies a simple description. 

The public and private sectors are well known. The “third sector” is the name used in the UK to refer to charities, voluntary organisations and community owned bodies. “Social enterprise” as a concept does not fit easily into this simple system  and as development trusts are essentially community-owned social enterprises, their place in the scheme of things is not straightforward to explain. Furthermore, local authorities must now have “community planning partnerships” although their relationship to the communities they serve is sometimes questioned.  Social enterprise groups within local authority areas have been encouraged and, in some places, thrive. With so many community-based intermediaries, a national “Social Enterprise Coalition” etc. the landscape has become cluttered. 

This may be a welcome sign that economic and social diversity is being reflected in the institutions that serve the third sector’s interests. Alternatively this may prove to be a short-lived spring in which many flowers bloom, but only a few last the test of time. 

Observers of the Scottish scene will be aware that a referendum on whether or not Scotland should seek to become independent from the United Kingdom will be taking place in 2014. This has been described as the biggest decision for Scots in three centuries – where then, if at all, does the communities movement stand on this important topic?

The short answer is that (to date) no-one has asked. Community bodies are invariably not party political and whilst the actions or inactions of government are of considerable importance to them, outright political allegiances are all but unknown now and unlikely in future. Some, especially the woodland and recycling groups have a consciously green agenda – but then this is now commonplace and hardly an indicator of fervent support for the Green Party as such. As social enterprises, development trusts often act as small businesses, but as community owned bodies they straddle the left/right divide. The Alliance is a supporter of “double devolution”, a slogan used to support subsidiarity as a concept, but as two thirds of Scots support greater powers for Holyrood too, this is hardly a controversial stance. Perhaps all that we can say is that political parties of every stripe have a tendency to want to control things from the metaphorical centre and that communities and their supporters, by and large, are likely to resist this trend wherever they encounter it.

Nonetheless, concerned that the debate leading up to the independence referendum has yet to engage with local people and their communities, (having thus far been the preserve of politicians and Scotland’s chattering classes) the Alliance is embarking on a road show of local events around Scotland with a working title of ‘The Big Vote’. Both the pro-Independence ‘Yes’ campaign and the Unionist ‘Better Together’ alliance have committed themselves to take part in these events, which will examine both sides of the debate from the perspective of each community’s aspirations and concerns.

The Future

The Highlands and Islands of Scotland have undergone a remarkable transformation over the past half-century. An area once marked by its economic failures now scores higher than the Scottish average on a range of statistics. This change has partly been due to happenstances such as the impact of the oil industry (although Shetland is the only part of the UK that has any kind of oil fund) and increasing affluence and improved communications that have enabled in-migration and a significant growth in the tourist industry. Nonetheless there are those who maintain that a key driver of this success is that since its inception Highlands and Islands Enterprise was given a remit to develop not just the business sectors of the region, but also its communities. This remit does not apply to its Lowland counterpart, Scottish Enterprise, and it is unlikely to be a coincidence that most of the urban areas of Scotland that were a cause for concern 50 years ago still languish at the bottom of the economic and social pile, whilst an albeit incomplete transformation of the Highlands has occurred. 

These developments have been so remarkable that it may be worth ending on a note of caution. The community sector in Scotland is still relatively small and fragile. Community-led regeneration has its opponents, especially in urban areas where there are entrenched interests in both the public and private sectors. A high profile economic failure here and there, a change of government attitude, a continuing and deepening recession, might all contribute to the stalling of this movement. Nonetheless, such have been the changes over the past decade that given another ten years or so of fair winds and it is likely that we will be seeing a genuine and permanent transformation of communities throughout Scotland.

Alex Walker, ICSA Conference, Findhorn 2013

Further Information

DTA Scotland: http://www.dtascot.org.uk/

Scottish Community Alliance: http://www.localpeopleleading.co.uk/

Locality: http://locality.org.uk/

Alf and Ewan Young (2012) The New Road. Argyll Publishing.

References

Fresh thinking on Our Economy

For a copy of report click here

A new Oxfam Scotland report says that instead of tackling inequality and poverty in Scotland, the existing economic model is making them worse and needs to change.

Our Economy: Towards a New Prosperity says too much power and wealth is held by too few people. 

The report challenges politicians, policymakers and businesses to focus on what is really good for the country rather increasing economic measures like Gross Domestic Product.

It says that for too many people in Scotland, work is no longer a route to a better life. Some 40% of those living in poverty in Scotland are in work – a figure that has risen substantially in recent years.

It also highlights the growing inequality at the heart of our economy, with the wealthiest households in Scotland 273 times richer than the poorest households.

Judith Robertson, Head of Oxfam Scotland, said: “The existing economic model is not working. Despite decades of economic growth, and a myriad of anti-poverty policies, the reality for too many Scots is a cocktail of high mortality, economic inactivity, mental and physical ill-health, poor educational attainment, and exclusion from the decisions that affect them.

“This is a structural problem caused by our economy. If we are serious about tackling these issues, then our politicians and policymakers need to make a fundamental change. Without that change, poverty and inequality will continue to shame us and drag all of us down for generations to come.”

The paper outlines a series of policies which together challenge economic behaviours which damage Scotland’s collective prosperity, whilst promoting positive interventions.

The report is based on Oxfam’s work with local partners in Scotland. It shows that people in local communities have the appetite and ability to start building local economies that meet their needs, but need more help from government and greater recognition that their contribution goes beyond profit.

The proposals contained in Our Economy include:

• Putting a duty on all public authorities to make sure their policies and initiatives reduce poverty and inequality – monitored by a new Poverty Commissioner for Scotland.

• Building on the work of the Oxfam Humankind Index for Scotland to create a new measure of economic success, beyond GDP, which reflects what really matters to people.

• Creating a Scottish Ethical Business Initiative (SEBI) setting out key aspects of acceptable behaviour for businesses operating in Scotland.

Judith Robertson added: “We need to create a new prosperity that will benefit everyone in society.

“At the heart of this new prosperity would be community-led economies which focus on the quality and distribution of growth – creating livelihoods for the many, not profits for the few. Our Economy shows this is practical and achievable. We just need the will to work together to make it happen.”

Sign up to our email newsletter to find out how you can help us build Our Economy in the future!

Our Economy was launched at Oxfam partner The GalGael Trust, which provides training in traditional woodworking skills for people left without work for long periods of time.

Gehan Macleod of GalGael said: “The current economic structure simply doesn’t provide enough good jobs. Our experience shows it isn’t people from under-resourced communities that are deficient, it is the economy which is deficient in providing opportunities for all – opportunities that recognise people’s inner need to contribute to their communities as well as their outer need for a living wage. 

“We’ve seen time and again how those who’ve been labelled work-shy or unemployable love to graft if there is respect and dignity in the work. That is what the work in Our Economy looks like.”

The report has won support from across Scottish civil society.

Grahame Smith, STUC General Secretary, said: “If Scotland is to rebuild a fairer, more equal and sustainable economic and social model it is essential that strong civic voices contribute to the debate. This report, covering key areas such as employment and tax, forms one such contribution. Policymakers at all levels should take note and act”.

Martin Stepek, Chief Executive of the Scottish Family Business Association, said: “I applaud Oxfam Scotland for producing the challenging and radical Our Economy report. The current situation is morally and socially unacceptable. We have to change some fundamentals to create a fairer, happier society for all.”

James Proctor, Strategic Relations Officer at Co-operatives UK, said: “Scotland was the birthplace of early co-operative enterprise and the principle of working together for shared benefit is a fresh and vital one for our times. We warmly welcome this call for a new model of wealth creation, based on co-operative values of openness and equality.”

An economy that is self-restoring

http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation launches “Towards the Circular Economy: Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition”, a new report, featuring analysis from McKinsey, that makes the case for a faster adoption of the circular economy, quantifies the economic benefits of circular business models and lays out pathways for action.

The evolution of our economy from an increasingly resource-constrained ‘take-make-dispose’ model towards one that is circular and re- generative by intention poses a huge opportunity for business innovation. This report highlights the significant economic opportunities, both immediate and long-term, that are available across the EU. I believe the report offers the catalyst for a sector wide re-design revolution. – Ellen MacArthur

Using product case studies and economy-wide analysis, the report details the potential for significant benefits across the EU. It argues that a subset of the EU manufacturing sector could realise net materials cost savings worth up to $ 630 billion p.a. towards 2025—stimulating economic activity in the areas of product development, remanufacturing and refurbishment.

These numbers are indicative as they only cover “sweet spot” sectors that represent a little less than half of GDP contribution of EU manufacturing sectors. They also assume the addition of only one product cycle with today’s technologies. Yet many cycles would be possible and technological innovation would likely lead to rapid improvements and additional cost savings.

The report focuses particularly on the business opportunity. It examines five product case studies, including one example of cascading material usage, in depth. All cases show a chance for value creation by preserving the embedded labor, energy and material costs in finished products. In mobile phones, for example, 50% of material input costs could be saved by the effective use of remanufacturing.

Considerable environmental savings are also at stake. For instance, the UK economy could save up to $ 1.1 billion (€ 850 million, € 850 million) annually—and could reduce yearly greenhouse gas emissions by up to 7.4 million tonnes—by keeping food waste out of British landfills.

The resource intensity of the current industrial model presents economic and environmental risks. Many companies and governments are actively exploring the opportunities of efficiency and new forms of energy, but less thought has been given to systematically designing out material leakage and disposal in the first place. This, the report says, is where the case for a circular economy begins.

Over the past several decades, the concept of a circular economy that emulates natural systems has attracted the attention of thought leaders in fields from material science to industrial ecology. At its core, a circular economy aims to ‘design out’ waste. Products are designed for disassembly and reuse— in their entirety, or on a material/component level – whilst being supported by a shift towards licensing ‘performance’ over selling ‘products’.

Though circular business models have been explored in niche markets, the report argues that market conditions and tighter environmental standards are now combining to give the framework its full, large- scale potential.

To seize the technical and financial opportunity, both the corporate sector and government must drive change and create an environment more conducive to circular product offerings. The report was created to trigger debate. It concludes by summarising the steps forward it sees for businesses, governments, and researchers eager to help push the circular economy into the mainstream.

Important additions to Group

The LRRG is re-examining the 2003 Land Reform (Scotland) Act, and how communities in Scotland could benefit from further land reform. In Phase Two of its research, the LRRG will consider what steps can be taken to better encourage more communities in both rural and urban Scotland to have a stake in the ownership, management and use of land.

The interim report represents where the LRRG has got to so far, based on evidence received through visits, meetings and a wide call for evidence, which received over 475 submissions.

The report outlines the next steps and themes which are likely to be the focus of investigation in Phase Two of the review before the LRRG present their findings to Ministers in 2014.

The report received mixed reviews and subsequent to its publication there has been an active debate across the sector as to what the Group’s direction and future focus should be. The latest chapter in this debate has been prompted by an article from the CEO of Scottish land and Estates, Douglas MacAdam. The article and subsequent comments can be followed here.

LRRG Chairperson, Dr Alison Elliot, said: “We have been given a wide ranging remit by the Scottish Government to look at how positive outcomes for people and communities throughout Scotland can be achieved through land reform.

“Our research so far has clearly outlined the potential for fresh approaches to land reform and the importance of engaging the whole community in this. I’m looking forward to exploring these issues in more detail in the second phase so that our land can continue to contribute to the success of Scotland for future generations.”

The Group has been expanded to include :

Robin Callander

Robin lives in Birse parish, Aberdeenshire, and is self-employed.  He acts an adviser and agent for Birse Community Trust and the Birse Trading Company.  He also undertakes work as an independent special adviser to parliamentary and other public interest committees. He is currently retained as a Special Adviser by the House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee and in recent years, has served in that capacity in both Parliaments for inquiries by the Treasury, Scottish Affairs and Scotland Bill Committees into the Crown Estate. He has been involved in practical land management for nearly 40 years. He has served on a range of government and NGO committees and been a Deer Commissioner and Crofters Commissioner. He is the author of ‘A Pattern of Landownership in Scotland’ (1987) and ‘How Scotland is Owned’ (1998). He managed the McEwen Lectures on Land Tenure in Scotland (1993-99).

Pip Tabor

Pip Tabor graduated in Biology at the University of York, went on to do a teaching qualification and then taught science in Humberside for 4 years and then in Bhutan for the next three. He then joined Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO) as Field Officer and helped run a programme of 35 volunteers working in education, health, agriculture, construction and information technology. In 1993 he undertook an MSc in Natural Resource Management at Edinburgh University and then joined Scottish Natural Heritage in the Borders where he was Area Officer for 5 years.

In 1999 he was appointed Project Manager of the Southern Uplands Partnership which has grown to be a major player in rural development in Southern Scotland.

He lives in the Scottish Borders with his artist partner and their three children.

DIY Finance

By Rory Reynolds, The Scotsman 30/06/2013 

SCOTLAND’S first community-run hydro-electric energy plant is set to be made a reality after its backers managed to raise the entire funding using an innovative new crowd-funding scheme.

Harlaw Hydro intends to build the device on the outskirts of Edinburgh, following in the footsteps of 19th century industrialists who harnessed the power of the Water of Leith to power their mills.

Local residents of Balerno have been working on the bid for two years and believe they can deliver the entire project for just over £300,000.

Construction will begin within months and is estimated for completion in March 2014.

The Balerno Village Trust – which established Harlaw Hydro – had intended to borrow much of the money from the banks, but said they were astonished at the level of interest from those who wanted to invest privately.

Energy Minister Fergus Ewing has backed the project and said the funding model paved the way for other schemes across Scotland.

The Community Share Offer used to raise the funds is similar to ‘crowdfunding’, which has been employed widely on the internet to fund full-length feature films and music albums.

The group arrived at the £313,000 mark on Wednesday – just 12 weeks after fundraising began.

Consultants hired to work on the project said such is the success of the model that two similar schemes on Skye and Mull are also now in development.

The Harlaw project will take advantage of government feed-in-tariffs, which pay families or community groups to generate renewable energy.

Lynn Molleson, a director at the firm, said investors had been attracted by the four per cent return on offer – higher than any ISA on the market due to low interest rates.

The electricity – which is fed into the National Grid in return for the tariffs – is only enough to power around 60 homes, but the group hope that the scheme will pave the way for other similar projects. in the future.

Power of Just Doing Stuff – How Local Action Can Change the World

By Rob Hopkins

Most people would agree that what we need are jobs, economic activity, stronger and happier communities and community resilience.  But what kind of approach is most likely to achieve this, and what is it that we actually want to grow?

GDP is a blunt tool for measuring progress.  If black ice on the M4 resulted in 20 car crashes, the resultant hospitalisations, demand for new cars and associated work would add significantly to the region’s GDP.  Clearly the idea that all GDP, all growth, is a good thing, is ridiculous.  Alongside economic activity, we also need to grow community, wellbeing and resilience (the ability of communities to respond and adapt to the unexpected).  We should be wary of any approach to creating growth which imperils those things. 

We derive much of our employment and turnover from small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs), accounting for around three-quarters of employment.  Yet all too often, the ‘growth agenda’ actively undermines those businesses that are the very foundation of this economy.  The recent Portas Review showed how just 8,000 supermarkets now account for over 97% of all UK grocery sales, a High Street massacre Tesco’s Sir Terry Leahy recently dismissed as a “part of progress”. 

The National Retail Planning Forum has found that each time a large supermarket opens, on average 276 local jobs are lost, an impact felt “up to 15km away”.  A recent study by Localise West Midlands on what it calls ‘community economic development’ found “strong evidence that local economies with higher levels of SMEs and local ownership perform better in terms of employment growth (especially disadvantaged and peripheral areas), the local multiplier effect, social and eco­nomic inclusion, income redistribution, health, civic engage­ment and well-being than places heavily reliant on inward investment where there are fewer, larger, remotely owned employers”. 

Yet large-scale growth strategies often focus on big infrastructure projects and ‘regeneration’ which displaces independent traders to replace them with glittering shopping centres identical to every other high street.  In terms of meeting the needs we want growth to address, it’s a disaster. 

If what we want are jobs, economic activity, stronger and happier communities and community resilience, we need to think carefully about the kind of economy, the kind of growth that will produce them.  For the past 7 years I have been involved in an experiment known as Transition, or ‘Transition Towns’, which may yet turn out to be one of the South West’s most important exports. 

You’ll find Transition groups in 40 countries, initiating community economic development from the local level.  For example, Bath & West Community Energy, an offshoot of Transitions Bath and Corsham, recently raised over £750,000 in community shares.  The Bristol Pound, “real money made for Bristol”, is now accepted in hundreds of Bristol businesses, the city’s new Mayor taking his full salary in them.  In London, Brixton Energy are installing solar energy on the roofs of some of the city’s poorest housing funded by investment from local residents.  As Agamemnon Otero from the project told me, “we’re not wedded to solar panels …we’re wedded to wellbeing”. 

Transition Town Totnes (TTT), together with a coalition of local stakeholder organisations, recently produced a Local Economic Blueprint, a detailed mapping of how the community spends its money.  It found Totnes spends £30 million on food every year, £22 million through just two supermarkets.  Applying this approach to retrofitting housing, energy and care for the elderly, could generate £5.5 million per year to drive local jobs and business creation.  Just shifting 10% of what is spent on food, for example, would bring over £2 million into the economy.  

TTT’s work has also led to:

• a community-owned energy company with over 500 members

• an annual Local Entrepreneurs’ Forum supporting new enterprises

• ‘Transition Streets’, a street-by-street programme helping over 700 households reduce their energy bills by, on average, £600 per year each

• Transition Homes, set to build 25 affordable ecological homes

• The Atmos Project, close to masterplanning the former Dairy Crest site as the UK’s first Community Right to Build Order. 

TTT is beginning to join the dots and offer a new approach to economic development.  In the face of recession, it is clear that there is no cavalry coming riding to our community’s rescue, that we are that cavalry.  We can either support enterprises that underpin and build community resilience, or undermine them.  As the economic crisis worsens and questions about the economic implications of our fossil fuel dependency grow, this shift in thinking could well turn out to be the spark for the creative thinking that will create an economy fit for the many uncertainties of the 21st century. 

Communities with strong social networks of neighbours and friends are more creative, benefit from their own strengths and efforts and enjoy a better quality of life.  By involving all sectors of the community, Transition believes that we can produce innovative, effective ideas and practical skills to carry us through the transition to a much more rewarding, secure, enjoyable low carbon future.

Globally, nationally and as a local community we are entering previously unchartered territory. The pressures on our society in 2030 will require communities to be much more self-sustaining.   And we have a choice – we can wait and have those changes imposed on us, or we can create the future vision we want to see with the development of vibrant and resilient local communities.

The Transition Initiatives engages residents, schools, businesses, entrepreneurs, investors, in social and enjoyable local visioning activities.   By building a 2030 vision it helps us to plan how we are going to get there and the projects and activities we would need to undertake to make the changes we need to make.  People of all walks of life with a whole range of skills and experiences get involved at whatever level and on an issue that interests them – whether it be arts, building and housing, economies and livelihoods, energy, food, education, heart and soul, local government liaison, outreach, transport, Transition tales, or even leadership and team building.

If you want to get involved:

-buy the book

-share your ideas with friends

-find the resources and advice you need or Transitionnetwork.org

Rob Hopkins is co-founder of Transition Town Totnes and Transition Network.  He is author of The Power of Just Doing Stuff, published June 15th, and The Transition Companion.  He blogs at www.transitionnetwork.org and tweets as @robintransition.  

Read more about the ideas and the thinking in the book – Power of Just Doing Stuff – How Local Action is Going to Change the World, where you will with inspiring stories all across the world of people already doing amazing and creative things.

http://www.transitionnetwork.org/the-power-of-just-doing-stuff

The Grow Trust

to see website click here http://growtrust.org/

We are going to level the playing field; Grow incomes, Grow jobs and Grow a fair return for communities.

We are going to Trust people in their communities, Trust their abilities and Trust their expertise to work out solutions and deliver them.

We are going to transform how business is done at a local level; no more rolling a jelly up a hill, communities at the table with the information they need and the support they need at a time when they need it. 

We are going to do this by building local enterprises which can generate community wealth; which will be controlled by the community through their Development Trusts. 

On first sight, it seems an odd collaboration; Lochboisdale Amenity Trust on South Uist, Beith Community Development Trust in the semi-rural area of North Ayrshire, Linwood Community Development Trust in the urban central belt setting up The Grow Trust to work on their agendas. 

This collaboration of urban and rural Trusts, brought together by the support of Oxfam, arose from the shared journey and experience of these three community trusts, an experience shared by 1000s of community organisations up and down the country. 

Being told by public organisations; what can’t happen, how it would be difficult, that our expectations were too high. Endless meetings, hurdles, barriers and hoops that seemed to be put up at every stage. Those never ending questions which required answering, the lists of what we needed to do was a sap on our energy and a drain on our enthusiasm. 

These challenges resulted in a transformational change of approach which we all shared. No more seeking permission to change. No more waiting for policy changes, no more waiting for public bodies to agree with what each of our communities were wanting to change; we were going ahead with the change on our terms; No permission was required.

As we now had a shared approach we identified projects which we could share the work on and the subsequent benefits, the way we were going to achieve this was through the Grow Trust.

Tom Gordon, The Herald, 17th June

A group of academics and economists have launched an international project to flesh out their vision of an independent Scotland as a wealthier and more fair country on the Nordic model.

The Common Weal group, which argues that an exit from the UK would free Scotland to adopt a Scandinavian economic and social blueprint, will open a dedicated website with a call for policy ideas large and small from the public, civic Scotland and fellow scholars worldwide.

Scottishcommonweal.org is intended to become an online Speakers’ Corner where people can highlight their priorities for independence, with contributions building into a library of policy ideas that could be put into effect after a Yes vote next year.

Created by the left-wing Jimmy Reid Foundation to bring some overdue intellectual heft to the independence debate, the project will also publish six blueprints for reform, drawing on ideas from a pool of 30 academics and editors.

The first paper, due in September, will focus on tax and the critical issue of how Scotland would pay its bills without following the UK’s market-led, neo-liberal economic model. Early ideas include levying a wealth tax on super-rich companies and individuals to pay for universal childcare.

Other papers will cover the economy and industrial relations, the welfare state, the environment, international relations and equality and democracy.

Although it is not taking sides in the referendum, the Church of Scotland last night gave the project a major boost, confirming it was setting up a working group to research, explore and reflect on the fundamental principles “of what we mean about Common Weal – how we look after our neighbours”.

Dennis Canavan, chairman of the Yes Scotland campaign, said Common Weal was the kind of “creative thinking” Scotland needed.

Bob Thomson, the Jimmy Reid Foundation convener, said: “There are many more people in Scotland who want a change in how the country is run than want the market-driven mess we’re in now.

“The only reason politicians haven’t had to respond to this public demand for change is that there hasn’t been a big, wide and inclusive plan of action. This is a chance to bring people together, expert or not, to build up that programme.

“The volume and diversity of response we’ve had so far suggests this is not something politicians will be able to ignore.”

Designed to inject some gravitas into the knockabout of the referendum debate, the project argues that the powers of independence would let Scotland break with a failed and increasingly pitiless UK economic system and import more enlightened policies from Scandinavia and Germany to tackle inequality and promote a more socially just and stronger society.

A Scottish Nordic model would include a welfare state with cradle-to-grave universal services; a diverse economy with high-tech, high-paying firms fostered by state lending rather than over-reliance on risk in the finance sector and low-paying retail jobs and greater local democracy and gender equality.

It would require a bigger overall tax take but not necessarily higher individual taxes, with a wealth tax or land tax boosting exchequer coffers. Revenues would be used to improve public services and education, raise skills and bolster the economy, which in turn would lift wages and reduce wealth inequality.

Its proponents see a virtuous circle, though critics detect a never-ending daydream.

In its inaugural Common Weal paper, which was circulated among the SNP hierarchy, the Reid Foundation sketched out key areas for reform, but deliberately left the detail for another day details out, as it wanted to provoke a debate without prescribing its limits. The launch and appeal for specifics is intended to take the project to the next level.

There is also an important political calculation in the Common Weal. While those behind it will not run their own referendum campaign, they intend to put their ideas over to voters by embedding them in the messages of the SNP and Yes Scotland.

The aim is to build the Common Weal drumbeat steadily over the summer and autumn, starting with a pitch to business about a radically simplified tax system which would see all firms pay their fair share, rather than one which allows multinationals such as Google to pick and choose where and when to meet liabilities.

The Common Weal concept would be debated by the Radical Independence Campaign at its annual gathering, then the Scottish Green conference, and finally the SNP conference in Perth. SNP local branches are already being encouraged to put forward motions based around the idea.

While some in the SNP hierarchy might bridle at these tactics, the promoters of the Common Weal report a welcome from SNP activists eager to take forward the Nordic vision, and even from senior MSPs who would quietly like their conference to take on the Common Weal mantle.

The theory goes that, once absorbed into mainstream thinking, it would be impossible to put the Common Weal idea back in the bottle.

If there is a Yes vote next year, the policies of an independent Scotland would also, in many cases, be Common Weal policies.

If there is a No vote, the Common Weal would still be the Yes side’s legacy – a storehouse of policy ideas to feed into Scottish politics for future years.

Canavan said: “I strongly welcome the Common Weal initiative. This is the kind of creative thinking which can ensure that an independent Scotland is based on sound economics, as well as sound principles of social justice.

“I urge individuals and organisations to respond to the invitation to submit ideas which will contribute to the Common Weal vision, thereby helping to build a fairer Scotland, where wealth is not only created but is used to benefit all the people.”

A spokesman for the pro-Union Better Together campaign said: “The SNP’s vision for a separate Scotland is to hand over control of welfare, currency, savings, mortgages and much else to a foreign government without any Scottish representation at all. It’s little wonder that people across the political spectrum find the SNP’s plans so unappealing.”

European funds at risk

Briefing for third sector organisations and rural communities 

1. What is the SRDP? 

The Scotland Rural Development Development Programme (SRDP) is intended to provide support for a range of economic, environmental and social measures in rural Scotland. It is jointly funded by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the Scottish Government. The new programme is meant to run from 2014 to 2020 and the Scottish Government has launched a Stage 1 consultation to help them shape it. 

The SRDP’s social dimension, including the LEADER programme, is small compared to the funding for land-based activity but it is important. Through LEADER and other funding streams, it has supported many successful community-based and managed projects, facilities and services. 

This is the first of a series of briefings from SCVO that will highlight issues of importance to rural communities. SCVO will also be developing its own response to the consultation and will seek to take into account the views of its stakeholders and members. 

??This initial briefing is intended to encourage individuals, community groups and third sector organisations with an interest in Scotland’s rural communities to respond to the current consultation, which is available on the Scottish Government website. 

2. What does it have to do with the third sector and community groups? 

Investments made through the SRDP must fit into the EU Rural Development Priorities, which are: 

1. Fostering knowledge transfer and innovation 

2. Enhancing competitiveness 

3. Promoting food chain organisation and risk management 

4. Restoring, preserving and enhancing ecosystems 

5. Promoting resource efficiency and transition to low carbon economy 

6. Promoting social inclusion, poverty reduction and economic development 

Priority 6 is clearly of most importance to most third sector and community-based organisations. However, the sector can also make, and indeed is making, a significant contribution to the other priorities. 

These priorities are addressed using the individual investment articles in the European legislation. The most relevant one for the third sector is Article 21 – Basic services and village renewal in rural areas. 

This covers a wide range of activities including broadband, renewables, basic services and related infrastructure. Investment in these activities promotes economic sustainabilility and resilience in rural communities. 

The Scottish Government’s SWOT analysis for the new SRDP identifies as opportunities for the programme: 

• Possibility to create and maintain vibrant rural communities 

• Ability to enhance the social economy and the voluntary sector in rural areas 

??The SRDP is clearly not designed to be exclusively for farmers and land managers. It is also intended to support rural communities and the wider rural economy, and it is important that this dimension of the programme is fully recognized and implemented. 

3. What about the current SRDP? 

The Scottish Government is being commendably frank in its appraisal of the current SRDP. While it points to success in the delivery of around £1.2 billion of spending, with close to 80% of applicants being funded, it admits there are questions about the delivery of the programme. These include how the funding was targeted and whether best value was achieved, as well as the complexity of the application system, claims administration and audit issues. 

For community groups, the main experience of the SRDP has been through Rural Priorities and LEADER. While many excellent projects have been funded, including community facilities and services, some applicants have found the burdens of bureaucracy, payment delays and audit requirements at best irksome and at worst highly stressful. 

In some cases these difficulties and bureaucratic barriers have resulted in significant delays to projects and increased project costs. They have even discouraged communities from applying for much needed funding. 

The Scottish Government recognises that there have been problems with the programme and has stated that the design of the next programme must be simpler and more customer friendly. They also state that “clarity of guidance, purpose and scheme rules will be essential in the new programme to address the audit risk”. 

SCVO believes that this consultation is an opportunity to use the positive and negative experiences of the current SRDP to influence the new programme for the better, including designing the best possible technical assistance and advisory services to support applicants. 

??Applying for funding through the new programme, including LEADER, will continue to be a demanding and time consuming process. But at a time when budgets are tight and getting tighter, it is important that community groups access the full range of funding that is available to them and are provided with appropriate and relevant support to help them to do so. 

4. How does the new SRDP fit with other European funding? 

For the period 2014-2020, the European Commission has proposed that the SRDP will fit into a new Common Strategic Framework (CSF). This will bring the SRDP together with the European Social Fund (ESF), European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Maritime and Fisheries Fund with the aim of achieving better co-ordination and targeting of the funds. This will be developed through a Partnership Agreement between the member state and the European Commission. 

In Scotland, the proposal is that EU funds should be marshalled into three ‘Scottish Funds’which seek to explicitly address Scottish Government and EU priorities: 

• Competitiveness, Innovation and jobs 

• Low carbon, resource efficiency and environment 

• Local development and social inclusion 

Each of the three Scottish Funds would have resources allocated to it from the European programmes (including SRDP), depending on the eventual allocations agreed at EU and UK level and individual analysis of need against relevant priorities as set out in operational programme legislation. Land-based rural development funding (including climate change, forestry and agri-environment) will continue to be delivered by the current delivery partners (SNH, Rural Payments & Inspections Directorate and Forestry Commission Scotland) through a new application portal. 

Funding for the ‘wider rural economy’ will be developed and delivered alongside the other European funds (ESF, ERDF). The consultation document says “Our goal is to ensure we identify the right agency/organisation to deliver each aspect based on relevant expertise”. 

??It is important that SRDP funding for rural development ‘beyond the farm gate’ is not sidelined and limited to the 5% minimum of the budget that has to be spent on LEADER. It is therefore vital that third sector and community interests are represented on all decision-making and monitoring bodies. 

5. What role will LEADER have? 

LEADER funding will continue to be delivered through Local Action Groups (LAGs) according to agreed Local Development Strategies, as part of the Local Development Fund. A minimum of 5% of the SRDP budget must be delivered through LEADER. 

While business development applications will be delivered through the competitiveness fund, views are being sought on small local businesses should be supported through LEADER. 

The European Commission are encouraging the use of the LEADER approach across all the funds to: 

• Strengthen the role of local development strategies 

• Be more flexible, innovative and responsible to local needs 

• Provide greater transparency and clarity 

• Focus on animation and capacity building 

• Strengthen private and third sector participation in delivery of funds 

• Strengthen networking and co-operation at all levels. 

The Scottish Government will shortly be asking for expressions of interest in preparing Local Development Strategies by prospective Local Action Groups. 

??Third sector and community involvement in LEADER will be more important than ever, and begins with active involvement in the new Local Development Strategies. 

6. What assistance and advice will be available for applicants? 

The consultation document proposes an improved advisory service for farmers and land owners, but does not mention support, advice and guidance for applicants from other sectors. Applicants to LEADER will continue to be supported by LAG staff, as resources allow, to develop their applications, but there is no mention of wider independent support for community groups through a service such as Rural Direct. 

??All applicants for SRDP funding should have the support and assistance that will help them to achieve success in their applications. This should be fully resourced, universally available to third sector and community groups and integrated into the management and delivery of the programme. 

7. What issues should third sector and community groups raise in their consultation response? 

SCVO will circulate its draft response early in June with detailed answers to relevant questions. Meanwhile, however, the following are the headline issues we have identified: 

??Promoting social inclusion, poverty reduction and sustainable economic development should be one of the main priorities of the new SRDP 

??Basic services and village renewal in rural areas should be a priority for investment through the SRDP 

??Spending on non-farm rural development must not be limited to the obligatory 5% of the budget on LEADER required by the European Commission 

??Support and assistance must be available to third sector and community groups applying for funding across the programme 

8. What can I do now? 

??Circulate this briefing to any groups and organisations who may be interested 

??Find out if there is a consultation roadshow near you and and take part in it 

??Consider running a facilitated discussion event to gather views and formulate a response (SCVO’s Rural Direct team can help with this) 

??Get in touch with SCVO with any suggestions or questions about the consultation 

??Draft a response to the consultation, however brief, and copy SCVO into it 

??Look out for further briefings, including a draft response from SCVO 

Norman MacAskill 

Head of Rural Policy 

norman.macaskill@scvo.org.uk 

All change at Community Energy Scotland 

I am writing to thank you for your continuing support and to let you know about some changes that we will be introducing to Community Energy Scotland’s business from August onwards this year. 

We have been delivering the Scottish Government’s Community and Renewable Energy Scheme (CARES) since April 2009. We were, however, unsuccessful in our bid to deliver the new CARES programme which begins in August 2013. Delivery of the new programme will pass to a consortium led by the UK Energy Saving Trust. For some members, for example those with CARES LOANS or outstanding grant obligations, the relationship will transfer entirely from Community Energy Scotland to Energy Saving Trust. We will help members through this transition and we will do everything we can to assist you with any issues which arise. Members affected should contact the Community Energy Scotland Dingwall Office, or use Community Energy Scotland’s website (www.communityenergyscotland.org.uk) to access this information. 

We have taken this as an opportunity to give consideration to the future development and direction of Community Energy Scotland, as well as the ongoing needs of communities. 

Since its establishment in 2008, Community Energy Scotland has driven forward the prospects for communities to develop and benefit from renewable energy projects. Over 35MW of community-owned capacity has now been installed, with over 100MW currently in development. Our aim has been to ensure communities are able to develop and control their own renewable energy projects as a foundation for their sustainable development. 

We will continue to build on our core mission as Scotland’s leading community energy charity, supporting community-owned project development and championing community needs and aspirations on renewable energy at the highest level, especially those of our 300 + members. 

We aim to radically increase community ownership of renewable energy generation in Scotland and expand the ways in which it benefits communities. 

Following a review of priorities and opportunities, Community Energy Scotland will be focusing on four specific development areas, building on our current work:  

• Strengthening our advocacy, policy and representational work for members and community energy groups, including further development of member services (such as events, training on project development, management and information provision); 

• Renewable energy project development and management services – this will be a new fee-based service focused on community groups and covering the full scope of project development, from the earliest feasibility and resource assessment stage through to post construction management, for both small (microgen) and large-scale projects; 

• Research and Innovation to increase community control of renewable energy resources – we intend to drive forward measures and programmes to increase control and local use of renewable energy, tackling technical, regulatory, financial and policy obstacles. We also intend to step up our efforts to find ways in which the more fragile and deprived communities in Scotland can benefit from the ‘renewables revolution’. 

• International development – we intend to build on our current work on the Malawi Community Energy Development Programme and support community-based sustainable energy development in other developing countries. 

At the same time, we will continue to develop our own renewable energy projects designed to generate revenue to underpin our charitable work. As part of this, we will be keen to explore opportunities for joint ventures with our members. 

Please get back to me if you have any queries or questions on this. The next few months will be a period of significant change for Community Energy Scotland and your support is very important to us. We will be reporting back fully to members at our next AGM and conference, which will be held in Glasgow on 5th November. 

Best wishes 

Carola Bell 

Chair 

Community Energy Scotland