Author: David Ross, Press and Journal

In a fortnight, residents of Gigha will mark the 20th anniversary of the community buyout of their island.

Some observers may be surprised. Seven years ago, there were predictions Gigha would be the first community buyout to fail.

Press reports said the island’s owners, the community-led Isle of Gigha Heritage Trust (IGHT), faced financial ruin with debts of £2.7 million.

There was a whiff of schadenfreude amongst those happier that land be inherited or purchased by the rich. They were waiting for one of the buyouts to fall flat on its face.

Gigha looked like delivering. Sections of the media appeared particularly vigilant about scrutinising the trust’s accounts, and still do – a vigilance not always apparent on privately-owned estates.

But, as of January 31, Gigha’s debt was down to £506,359. It should be reduced by another £200,000 shortly, with the sale of a property which would cost too much to renovate to required standards for letting.

Gigha now has assets worth £7.5 million

When the community was buying the island, a survey found that, of the 42 houses that came with the estate, 75% were classed as “below tolerable standard” and 23% were “in serious disrepair”. It also revealed a high level of hidden homelessness, with parents or siblings providing homes for adults.

In the first decade, 30 of the properties were renovated, helping explain the debt that would become newsworthy. More recently, new kitchens, windows, and heating systems have been financed entirely by IGHT’s own funds.

It now owns 30 residential properties, four farms, five self-catering units and four finance-generating wind turbines – assets worth £7.5 million.

But, the most important statistic for IGHT, which employs 14 people, is not in the balance sheet. It is that the population of 92 before the buyout has risen to almost 170.

Centuries of decline reversed.

Momentum of large community buyouts has stalled

The islanders of Eigg will celebrate the 25th anniversary of their buyout in June. That island also suffered remorseless depopulation. Before the buyout, the figure was 64, now it is around 110 (served by an award-winning green energy grid).

Addressing population loss drove many early buyouts. Ownership meant jobs could be created. Houses that people could afford could be built.

Lack of affordable housing is an enormous challenge facing rural Scotland. In remote and fragile communities, the demand for second or holiday homes adds to the pressure from businesses offering short-term lets.

Ulva and Langholm are exceptions

Community ownership establishes a balance. But the momentum of the communities buying large areas has stalled.

The first significant buyout in the Highlands and Islands in many years was in 2018. The 4,942 acre island of Ulva, with only six residents, was bought from its private owner, aided by a £4.4 million Scottish Land Fund (SLF) award.

Two years later, the SLF put £1 million towards the purchase of 5,000 acres from Buccleuch Estates near Langholm, the largest buyout in the south. A nature reserve is being established. A further 5,300 acres is being pursued by the community.

But Ulva and Langholm are exceptions.

Can we save the planet without making the rich richer?

Readers of this column may well be bored of warnings about commercial or private “green lairds”, buying estates to tap into public money available for the likes of tree-planting or peatland restoration.

Activities which can be used to offset carbon emissions from the landowners’ commercial operations or sold to others to do so – greenwashing. They are inflating the price of land beyond the reach of local communities, even with SLF support.

The average price of a Scottish estate increased by 87% in 2021, to £8.8 million, according to Strutt and Parker.

The upmarket estate agents specifically point to the potential for carbon credits as a reason for the rise.

There should be a way of achieving climate change goals without making the rich richer. And a way to do so while increasing the rural population.

SLC says Scotland should restrict land ownership

Ministers have to begin thinking about the hitherto unthinkable – bringing land into public ownership to build new human communities. Communities that would be the frontline in tackling global warming, as many of the early buyouts have long been.

Scotland’s land market is one of the most unregulated. A Sunday press report revealed the 13,000 acre Kilchoan Estate in Knoydart was bought by a German billionaire from its Belgian owners two years ago.

Last week, the Scottish Land Commission published a paper by a QC on property rights. It said: “…many European countries have laws restricting the acquisition, use and management of land, some of which go further than Scots law currently does.

“As long as all parties abide by the legal framework […] there is in principle no reason why similar measures could not be introduced in Scotland.”

They should be.

Author: SENScot

Community Wellbeing Exchange is a Pockets & Prospects Project, made possible through funding from the Scottish Government via  Scottish Community Alliance.  

SENScot, SCHW and CHEX are delighted to be collaborating again this year on the  Community Wellbeing Exchange, following the success of last year’s Pockets Prospects Project that supported community organisations to address mental health & wellbeing needs within their local community. Read the Summary Report. 

Our approach is based on the model developed through a partnership between GSEN & SENScot for the successful Glasgow Pockets & Prospects Project which aimed to tackle loneliness and to mitigate the negative impacts of welfare reform, whilst also connecting and developing social enterprises. 

Community Wellbeing Exchange builds upon the valuable learning of previous work, with the approach based on the fundamental premise that community organisations have access to a small budget to purchase activities and services from social enterprises that contribute towards improved mental health. This enables community organisations who understand the needs of their local community to tap into services they may previously have been unaware of or been unable to afford, whilst also supporting social enterprise suppliers. 

From March to May 22 we have 20 community organisations that each have an allocation of £1000 to access 100’s of brilliant and wide-ranging activities and services being offered by social enterprise suppliers.

Even if you’re not participating in the project as a community organisation with the £1000 allocation, we invite you to browse the range of activities and services offered by over 40 social enterprise suppliers this year. 

For more information please contact: 

Mary Sinclair : mary@senscot.net   (SENScot) 

Andrew Patterson : andrew.paterson@scdc.org.uk   (CHEX) 

John Cassidy : john.kcassidy@ntlworld.com   (SCHW) 

Author: Dandelion

Unexpected Gardens will spring up across Scotland in unusual places in 2022.

From the Borders to the Highlands, along Scotland’s canals to urban, rural and island locations, whether indoors or open-air, on unused or forgotten land; these gardens will show that even the unlikeliest space can bloom. Both surprising spaces to visit and productive growing hubs, each garden will host seasonal events, installations, and grow herbs and vegetables for the whole community to share at a local Harvest in September 2022. A Musician-in-Residence will also connect with each garden to create brand new work.

Argyll – Cove Park will use tidal sites in Loch Long and Gare Loch to investigate links between coastal communities and agriculture.

Caithness – Lyth Arts Centre’s touring garden will roll off a trailer to become a performance and workshop space.

Falkirk and touring around the Union and Forth & Clyde Canals – our Floating Garden will tour Scotland’s canal networks from June. It will then dock at the Helix, Falkirk until September.

Forres – Findhorn Bay Arts’ garden will promote the growing of mushrooms in the alleyways of the town centre.

Edinburgh – Edinburgh Agroecology Co-op at Lauriston Farm, in partnership with North Edinburgh Arts, will experiment with farming practices that engage the local community.

Greenock – RIG Arts will take over the scrub site behind the South West Library creating a valuable shared space for meeting, reading and growing.

Leven – The Leven Programme will convert the car park of Leven Community Centre into a sustainable market garden.

Stranraer – The Stove, Dumfries, and Stranraer Development Trust will develop a vibrant garden that overlooks the former ferry terminal.

North Uist – Taigh Chearsabhagh’s garden in North Uist will respond to the unique ecosystem of the island.

Gardens will also appear in Alness (Feis Rois); in partnership with existing community gardens in Hawick (Alchemy) and in a soon-to-be-announced site in Dundee in partnership with University of Dundee, Creative Dundee and Dundee City Council.

Author: SENScot

The Scottish Government has announced its decision that Social Enterprise Scotland will receive the funding to become the single intermediary from summer 2022. SENScot is obviously extremely disappointed at this decision, but is also deeply concerned about the future of support for grassroots social enterprises, especially rural groups, social firms and community-led work in deprived urban communities.

We are also concerned about how Social Enterprise Networks (Place-based and thematic) will be supported going forward and how their values and approach will continue to be recognised and developed in the future. 

We note that the removal of government funding is likely to close the doors at SENScot, with a loss to the sector of  some of our most experienced and passionate people – and just as the government launches its new strategy towards a wellbeing economy. 

The Board would like to thank the staff for their patience, loyalty and focus during what has been an incredibly challenging time.

Author: Severin Carrell, The Guardian

Full report by Jon Hollingdale commissioned by Community Land Scotland

A drive by wealthy companies to plant forests in the Scottish Highlands to offset their carbon emissions risks creating even greater inequalities in rural areas, a major report has warned.

The analysis says a surge of Highland estate sales to major corporations and cash-rich investors, such as Aviva, Standard Life and BrewDog, has driven up land prices sharply and increased the elitism and exclusivity of land ownership, while they aim to limit climate heating.

John Hollingdale, a community ownership expert, argues that much stricter rules on land ownership, tax breaks and forestry subsidies are needed to ensure the rush to meet government forestry and net zero targets has the widest public benefit.

The Scottish and UK governments have targets to plant 30,000 hectares (75,000 acres) of new woods and forests across Britain a year. Scottish Forestry, a government agency, is midway through a three-year programme worth £217m to plant 46,500 hectares (115,000 acres) of new woodland by April 2025, roughly equivalent to 93m trees.

In a report for Community Land Scotland, a land reform body, Hollingdale said those investments were further subsidised by exemptions from inheritance tax, business property tax relief, and income and corporation tax on profits for commercial woodland, as well as non-domestic rates exemptions.

Calum MacLeod, policy director for Community Land Scotland, said: “The paper’s detailed analysis and recommendations shows that green finance mechanisms need to be fit for purpose in terms of a just transition by making land use sustainable in ways that significantly benefit local communities.”

Standard Life Investments, Aviva and BrewDog are the best-known examples of companies that have spent tens of millions of pounds in the last year buying land for forestry, peatland restoration and woodland creation to offset their carbon emissions or sell climate-focused investments to their clients.

Known as natural capital or green finance investments, corporations have come under intense pressure to absorb or offset their carbon emissions to hit the Paris climate accord goal of limiting global heating to 1.5C by 2050.

To the alarm of land reform campaigners and the National Farmers’ Union, that has led to land prices more than doubling in some areas of Scotland, as the competition for upland estates and farmland intensifies.

Purchases by big companies such as the beer company BrewDog remain relatively rare but they reinforce another more subtle trend, Hollingdale argues. Increased funding for forestry and its tax advantages means existing owners can increase the value of their land and businesses by moving into woodland creation. While that has environmental benefits, it can make owners less likely to sell, pushing up land values by increasing scarcity.

Hollingdale’s report warns this trend also prices out local communities hoping to buy their land to increase local employment, tourism, ecological management and micro-businesses.

In 2020, the Scottish Land Fund, which funds community buyouts, stopped taking applications after five months because its £10m budget was oversubscribed. That has since been doubled to £20m, but surging land prices may soon swallow up that increased funding.

Hollingdale recommends green financing projects are regulated to ensure they support genuine carbon offsetting; that ministers remove tax exemptions which distort land prices, and increase sales taxes on agricultural buildings; and that land owners are required to produce management plans and introduce public interest tests for large estates.

Hamish Trench, the chief executive of the Scottish Land Commission, an official body focused on reforming highly concentrated patterns of land ownership, believes there is a “real risk” green finance investments will further concentrate the ownership of land and its benefits.

In 2019, the commission said, just 87 owners – made up of private owners, charities and state-run bodies – controlled 1.7m hectares of rural Scotland. Trench said it was essential the financing was used in the public interest. “How do we harness this new finance coming in so it actively supports the mixed and community ownership model? We see an opportunity to do that,” he said.

Sarah Jane Laing, the chief executive of Scottish Land and Estates, which represents many large landowners, said this trend was still in its infancy but had tremendous economic potential. There were still numerous opportunities for community groups and social enterprises to buy land, often with public or private support.

“Significant funds could flow into Scotland – benefiting nature, people and jobs,” she said. “Green investment has the potential to provide landowners of all types with revenue streams and community owners and farmers may well benefit from these emerging opportunities. However, these are very early days for all landowners.”

Author: Planning Democracy

Why have we produced this guide?

The Fourth National Planning Framework (NPF4) is an important document, it will affect planning decisions for the next 10 years. People have told us it is not easy to find the time to respond to this high level long and complicated Government consultation, so we have devised this guide to try to help you. 

We have drawn on other’s expertise to provide suggested answers to many of the questions as such it reflects the voice of some environmental organisations as well as Planning Democracy. 

Why we need you to respond to the consultation on draft NPF4.

Because the environment and communities need a stronger voice in the planning world!

Together we need to motivate the Scottish Government to strengthen the draft document for more just and sustainable planning decisions. 

The finished NPF4 is expected to be published in summer 2022, after approval by the Scottish Parliament. NPF4 will guide planning decisions and local plans for the next decade. 

Getting the wording right for future planning policies is crucial in ensuring decision makers, including local authority planners, councillors and Scottish Government Reporters are given a clear steer to make the best decisions. 

Tackling key issues such as climate change and biodiversity loss are aspirations clearly voiced in this document, but which are not necessarily going to be achieved unless we strengthen some of the policies to make requirements more robust and reduce the number of get out clauses. 

Continuous economic growth is not possible, we live on a planet with finite limited resources. We don’t want developments to be given permission just because development itself stimulates the economy.

We have to start to limit development so that we don’t continue to use up the Earth’s precious resources. We need to learn to do more with less and consider reusing and refurbishing buildings, whilst conserving precious land and consuming less.

A transformative planning system shifts from the belief in continuous economic growth to

acknowledging that growth of itself is not necessary for well-being. This means NPF4 needs to balance ‘enabling’ good development, with the prevention of unsustainable developments. 

Currently the focus is on the former, the latter needs a lot more work.  In essence we are urging the government to use NPF4 to enable planning to act as a regulator, as well as an enabler of public interest development.

Planning Democracy’s Guide for Communities responding to the consultation on the draft National Planning Framework

Author: Erikka Askeland, The Press and Journal

A community shop and visitor information hub on the Isle of Barra has hailed a victory after it won an appeal to take ownership of its premises.

Bùth Bharraigh was granted the right to buy the former Co-op Building in Castlebay, where it has been based since 2013, by a community asset transfer appeals panel.

The building has been owned since 2009 by Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (CnES), which had plans to demolish it.

Bùth Bharraigh provides an outlet for local producers and sells wholefoods, books and arts and crafts materials.

It is also a visitor information centre and Hebridean Way pit stop, where cyclists and walkers can rest, refuel and restock while also offering a laundrette, bike hire and free wifi.

The facility is also the home of the “Barra Bunting” – a “guestbook” for visitors who leave their mark in the form of a textile-base triangle to be added to the chain.

Sarah MacLean, founder and manager of the shop, said it had been a “long road” but now the work of raising funds to refurbish the building starts.

She said: “We are not quite there yet but this is a massive step forward.

“We now need to raise the money to renovate and make it something special for the whole island.

“It is a tremendous relief and achievement to have finally got this far.”

She said the organisation would be reviewing its plans while also preparing for a busy tourist season.

“We would like to achieve the refurb as soon as possible but realistically it could take two to three years to achieve,” said Ms MacLean.

“We are expecting a busy year with visitors and bookings are coming in thick and fast.”

It is third time lucky for the shop – its initial transfer request in 2019 was terminated and then, after another submission, it was turned down again last year in 2020.

The council said the proposed demolition of the property was part of its £2 million South Uist and Barra Regeneration Programme bid in 2013.

It added that Bùth Bharraigh was “made aware” of the Comhairle’s intention to demolish  from the start, adding that “this occupation was always intended to be of a temporary nature”.

Buth Bharraigh works with over 80 producers of goods available at the shop.

Ms MacLean, who previously has said she fell in love with the island after moving there to take a job, was thankful for community support for the campaign to save the shop.

This included an online petition which has attracted almost 4,000 signatures.

“This has been a long road and we would like to thank all those that have shown us support; the local community, the current Castlebay & Vatersay Community Council, our producers and visitors to the Bùth from all over the world,” she said.

“There are so many individuals who have helped along the way by giving their time and/or money, we are extremely grateful.”

The social enterprise  employs four full-time staff and has 10 volunteers.

In a statement the group further thanked the council’s own appeal panel for hearing the case and “dealing with it in a fair manner”.

It continued: “Bùth Bharraigh would also like to highlight the help and support of the Community Ownership Support Service (COSS) who have been invaluable throughout this whole process.

“We would never have got to this stage without them.

Commonhealth assets

This research is important because policy attention on community approaches to health and wellbeing has often increased faster than the evidence base. In order to ensure good policy, we need good evidence, developed through rigorous, theory-based studies.

There is evidence starting to emerge that sustained positive health and social outcomes canonly occur when people and communities have opportunities to manage their own futures, and the skills and capabilities to be able to do so. The importance of community – community spirit, mutual aid and support – was brought home to us all during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This research will help focus attention on the importance of community topublic health generally; especially important as we rebuild, and imagine, what may be required to cope with future crises.

Project

The CommonHealth Assets project is led by Rachel Baker, Professor of Health Economics and Director of the Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health at Glasgow Caledonian University. Rachel oversees a multi-disciplinary collaboration between researchers at GCU, Bournemouth University, Glasgow Centre for Population Health, Queens University Belfast, the University of East London and community led organisations in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland.The project is funded by the National Institute for Health Research.

Collaboration

Collaboration is at the heart of this research. By working alongside community-led organisations and a wide range of stakeholders and investigators from several disciplines in our research and activities, we will co-create research that is relevant, effective and user-friendly.The team includes experts on assets-based approaches, health economics, community development and realist approaches to research. Methodologically, the project combines qualitative methods, policy analysis, photovoice, Q methodology and economic evaluation.

Community

We will work with community led organisations, or ‘CLOs’, which we define as place-based community-owned and governed organisations usually found in the ‘third’ or voluntary sectors, in areas that are often called ‘deprived’ because of poverty, poor physical and social environments and lower health outcomes. CLOs are vital to communities, and regularly offer a range of activities, such as walking or cooking groups, language classes, and community gardens or cafes.

Assets

Assets based approaches are about ‘doing with’ (rather than ‘doing to’) and working with communities to build on their strengths and mobilise the knowledge and skills of local people. Assets-based approaches also involves recognising that to do this successfully requires shifting control back into the hands of communities. They are designed to bring people in communities together to achieve positive change, focusing and mobilising their own knowledge, skills and experience, rather than viewing communities as having ‘deficits’ that need ‘fixed’.

Scale

CLOs are different in different places. Some are large, some are very small. Some are likely to have been established for a long time, while others will be fairly new. Some will betowns and cities, while others might be based in remote or rural communities. Some work with specific groups of people, while others are designed to cater for the needs of the whole community. Whatever their size or shape, they are responsive to local needs, but it is unlikely that the same approach work will exactly the same in different places, or with different groups of people.

Development

In order to capture these different impacts, we will draw upon an approach called ‘realist evaluation’ to develop a working theory of what works, for whom, in what circumstances. A range of research methods will then be used to test and update the programme theory. The methods we will employ include stakeholder interviews, a creative method called ‘Photovoice’, analysis of policies and funding streams in different places, workshops, a card sorting method called “Q”, and a survey of users to measure costs and benefits. Each method tells us something different about the CLOs and how they work, their communities, their funding and how users feel before and after taking part.When approaches are shown to work locally, issues of scale and sustainability are important to consider, both for policy and for practice

Author: Local Futures

Localization – is it the solution? See Local Futures

Let’s imagine a very different world, one in which most of your food comes from nearby farmers who ensure food security year round, in which children are free to explore their world safely under the watch of neighbors who you trust.

Imagine the money you spend on everyday goods continuing to recirculate in the local economy. Imagine local businesses providing ample, meaningful employment opportunities.

Economic localization can make these visions a reality for all.

Localization is about bringing the economy back to a human scale. It is the process of building economic structures that allow the goods and services a community needs to be produced locally and regionally whenever possible. This can strengthen community cohesion and lead to greater human health and material well-being, all while reducing pollution and degradation of the natural world.

Localization isn’t about ending all trade. Communities can still export surpluses once local needs are

met, and they can still import goods that can’t be produced locally. But localization allows local, regional, and even national self-reliance to replace dependence on distant, unaccountable corporations.

Localization does not mean total isolation. Localized economies are a reflection of particular cultures, resources and needs, but they still encourage the free exchange of knowledge and ideas across borders. In fact, localization requires international cooperation and collaboration to address global problems like climate change, and to forge agreements to scale back the rapacious power of global corporations and banks.

← Watch our short video

Author: Ann Carruthers, Leicestershire County Council

The 30-minute rural community is a new concept looking at how inequality can be tackled through new thinking and collaboration. It is a response to the emerging 15-minute city concept and is the brainchild of WSP’s Future Mobility team, part of the leading engineering and professional services consultancy.

WSP has been developing the approach since early 2021 and published a paper in summer 2021, to officially launch the idea.

The 15-minute city concept places the needs of people and communities at the centre of planning considerations – the basic principle is that everyone should be able to access key amenities and opportunities within 15-minutes.

Inspired by this, and noting the emphasis was on cities, WSP began looking at how to develop the concept for rural communities, looking at how to make rural communities more sustainable and better connected.

Often overlooked, rural communities are home to 12 million people in the UK and up to 80% of the UK area is officially classified as rural. Yet they face very different challenges to urban areas, including transport, access to key services, and socio-economic opportunities.

The importance of local neighbourhoods and communities has been elevated following the Covid-19 pandemic and the climate change agenda. The public is increasingly aware of their impact upon the planet and many are keen to explore new opportunities for living differently.

In addition, the working from home restrictions opened up new opportunities for some, with many people choosing to relocate into rural areas.

The WSP paper, The 30-minute rural community / Future Mobility looks at how to use human capital to meet community needs. It considers opportunities to encompass new and emerging modes of transport, how to harness digital in rural communities, and energy requirements associated with this.

It looks at how to ‘level-up’ to: ‘deliver greener, friendlier, happier, healthier, more productive, prosperous, quieter and safer communities.’

Many of these ideas are already happening in pockets, so WSP wanted to explore how different settlements can work together to increase this.

The paper suggests this needs a three-pronged approach. Firstly, looking at how to improve social and community infrastructure, with the idea that settlements will work together in clusters. Secondly, looking at how partnerships can increase resources and access. Finally, improving physical and digital access to nearby market towns and cities provides access to opportunities at scales impractical to be delivered in rural areas.

In Leicestershire, we share many of the common challenges associated with rural communities. We have a large number of market towns and smaller-sized settlements. To achieve the 30-minute rural community concept here, we would need to have a review of transport and service provision including shopping, medical, and education services. We would also need to review how the digital offer can build on these, as well as considering behavioural change across our communities.

Transport and connectivity are issues for rural areas across the country. Many areas have poor public transport networks leading to car dependency, isolation for those without a car, and proportionately higher levels of personal spending on transport.

Many villages and their surrounding areas also don’t have the infrastructure required to support active travel – a large proportion of areas have narrow lanes, with no pavements and limited streetlighting so safety concerns are often significant. However, new ways of approaching publicly available transport are emerging and this concept is about finding the right solutions for different places.

Historically, rural communities tend to drive to the nearest market town or city to access services – but what if they could be accessed more locally? What if villages worked together to create clusters of services and amenities? The benefits of meeting net zero obligations, community cohesion and to making rural areas more sustainable could be significant.

Most importantly, the shift to a 30-minute community is a cultural challenge. This is about winning hearts and minds. To make it work, the public need to understand – and buy into – the potential benefits. They need to be at the heart of creating these communities, along with groups and organisations, bringing their knowledge and skills – doing this, and working together will help to reimagine how we live and move around our local areas.

At this stage, the 30-minute community is at the concept stage, but at ADEPT we hope that a local authority will develop a pilot that can be shared across the country. We are keen to open the dialogue around this exciting concept, which offers many benefits including greener, more equal and more prosperous rural communities.