BARRIERS TO RURAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT IN SCOTLAND
Ron Wilson & Tom Edwards
Submitted to Scottish Enterprise Borders,
on behalf of the
Scottish Enterprise Rural Group and
Partners
March 2008
Final report
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Contents
Executive summary of findings prioritised by importance of barrier ................................. 3
Additional findings from the interviews ............................................................................ 5
Prioritised suggestions for consideration ......................................................................... 5
Study context .................................................................................................................. 6
Study objectives .............................................................................................................. 6
Methods and acknowledgements .................................................................................... 6
TRANSPORT .............................................................................................................. 6
Background .............................................................................................................. 7
Transport policy........................................................................................................ 7
Transport and rural development ............................................................................. 8
Rural housing .............................................................................................................. 9
INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ict) ................................... 13
Background ............................................................................................................ 13
Policy ..................................................................................................................... 13
Outreach and uptake. ............................................................................................. 13
Planning regulations .................................................................................................. 14
REGULATIONS ......................................................................................................... 15
APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................. 19
APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................. 22
APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................. 28
APPENDIX D ............................................................................................................. 29
2
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Executive summary of findings prioritised by importance of barrier
Barrier
Planning
regulations
Negative aspects
Regarded as a major barrier to
farm diversification
opportunities and ranked
highest by most interviewees.
Seen as overly complex, with
slow resolution times, and a
lack of understanding and
support by local planning
officers towards diversification
ventures.
Other
regulations
Positive aspects
Suggestions to tackle
barriers
Potential for being most
easily rectified.
Organise a seminar /
short course (1day)
on ‘the place of
planning in rural
development’ and
targeted specifically at
planning officers in
Local Authorities.
Government support
through rural
development
programme should
encourage
improvements.
A few regulations responsible
for the majority of costs.
Organise the
preparation and
publication of a short
fact sheet(s) on the
main regulations likely
to be encountered in
rural development
projects.
Reductions in regulations go
largely unnoticed.
The burden of several
regulations together greater
than the sum of the parts
Impacts more on diversified
businesses like estates, which
operate in several sectors.
Present summary to
seminar for would-be
entrepreneurs (see
below).
Stark differences between
enterprise types in attracting
regulatory burdens, eg tourism
vs forestry.
Broadband
Slow speeds and poor
accessibility create barriers in
some area.
Non use has serious business
and social exclusion penalties
including restricted access to
market and institutional
information sources.
Housing
There is an affordable housing
problem.
Affordable housing is a barrier
to rural development through its
impact on the labour market.
Particular barrier in low pay
sectors like agriculture, forestry
& tourism.
Transport
Accessibility and cost are the
key transport issues in rural
Has the potential to
offset access problems
imposed by rural
transport
Improves business
growth and productivity
High house prices & in
particular demand for
rural business premises
also create
opportunities for landbased rural
development.
No strong empirical
evidence of the
3
Identify specific
locations of poor
access and
investigate potential
for hotspot
development using
satellite/wireless
technology.
Identify areas where
affordable housing &
demand for rural
business premises is
limiting development.
Present findings in
seminar to planners
(see above).
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
business formation.
Rural business locations rely on
labour mobility as public
transport is often lacking.
relationship between
transport infrastructure
and rural development.
High percentage of car
ownership by rural
residents
4
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Additional findings from the interviews

High levels of rural business initiation in some regions.

Rural entrepreneurs more likely to:


o
be younger
o
have a family
o
have existing alternative business interests
o
be part of a network
o
be prepared to take risk
o
have a need to develop an additional source of income
The commonest barriers to new farm business ventures were quoted as:
o
lack of confidence,
o
lack of knowledge of procedure
o
uncertainty of where to get help,
o
lack of managerial and in particular planning skills
o
lack of finance.
Suggested strategies for overcoming these barriers included;
o
farmer training particularly in the business and planning areas,
o
initiation of rural mentoring and networking schemes
o
better informing agencies’ staff of the particularities of farm based
business initiatives.
o
fostering good relations with agencies.
Prioritised suggestions for consideration
1. Host a day seminar for would-be entrepreneurs, examining primary & secondary
barriers, with examples of success stories.
2. Host seminar/training day for civil servants/ planning officers on ‘the place of
planning in rural development’.
3. Conduct a survey to determine what the main barriers were for development
projects which proceeded and which were abandoned in the Scottish Enterprise
area with specific reference to enterprise types and geographical location.
5
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Study context
In its entirety, rural Scotland comprises about 89% of the land area and roughly 21% of
the population of Scotland as a whole. However, it is economically, socially and
geographically diverse with large variations in economic development, proximity to
markets and services, human well being and population expansion or contraction.
Study objectives
The overall aim was to provide evidence of the extent to which certain infrastructural and
institutional barriers affect rural economic development, particularly in new business
formation in the farming communities within Scottish Enterprise areas, and so provide
more robust information on the potential influences of these barriers, thus providing a
platform for further discussions and explorations of ways in which these barriers could
be overcome.
Methods and acknowledgements
The 5 barriers identified for study were broadly grouped under 2 categories;
1. Infrastructural: transport, housing and broadband,
2. Institutional: planning regulations and other regulations.
The review of literature (predominately web based) was supplemented by a series of
semi-structured discussions and the authors are extremely grateful for the time, effort
and courtesy afforded by all the interviewees (appendix C).
Although the focus when gathering evidence should ideally have been confined to an
economic perspective relating to farming communities within Scottish Enterprise areas,
in reality the literature search also extended into social aspects, non-land based but
rurally located businesses and within the UK (and sometimes outwith).
Where possible, distinctions and comparisons were made between Accessible and
Remote rural areas (i.e either less than or greater than a 30-minute drive of settlements
greater than 10,000).
TRANSPORT
Summary

Scottish residents are highly committed to a car-centric transport system.

Rural residents/businesses are especially dependent for mobility on road
networks and on private vehicle use.

Government transport policy is committed to enhancing infrastructure and
reducing car dependency, both of which are unlikely to extend to rural areas.

Strong empirical evidence of the relationship between transport infrastructure
and rural development is lacking.

Accessibility and cost are the key transport issues in rural business formation.
6
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland

Differences exist between farm diversification ventures in their requirements for
transport.
Background
Findings from the 2001 Census indicated that almost 945 thousand people lived in rural
Scotland. This represented about 19% of the entire Scottish population (comprising of
13.1% and 5.6% when classified into accessible or remote rural areas respectively
(Scottish Executive, 2003)), subsequently rising to 21% in 2004 (OECD, 2008). Just
over half the residents of accessible rural areas in Scotland (52%) commute to urban
areas for work and consequently create strong linkages between the areas (OECD,
2008), as well as contributing to the overall high levels of road use to access
employment and educational opportunities (table 1).
Table 1 Percentage use of modes of transport by adults travelling to
work/education in Scotland 2006
Mode of transport
Remote rural
Car (driver/passenger)
72
Bus
6
Rail
1
Bicycle
3
Walk
16
Source: Scottish Government (2007a)
Accessible rural
All Scotland
79
9
3
0
7
63
13
4
2
16
Scottish residents are closely wedded to private transport and on average 79% of their
annual distances travelled are by this mode, while bus and rail services only account for
5.5% each (Scottish Government, 2007b). Residents in accessible rural areas have
higher levels of car ownership, (87% vs 57%), higher expenditures on fuel and distance
traveled to work than in large urban areas, indicating that mobility is key to the economic
and social well-being of rural residents.
However, of the 54,858 kilometres of Scottish roads, only 6.2% are trunk roads, and
consequently a third of all road traffic is on minor roads, compared with 15% on
motorways and 52% on A class roads (Scottish Government, 2007b).
Transport policy
Scotland’s threefold strategic transport outcomes are expected; 1) to improve journey
times and connections, 2) to reduce emissions and 3) to improve quality, accessibility
and affordability of transport systems (Scottish Executive, 2006a). These stem from the
objectives stated in Scotland's Transport Future, namely to:
1. Promote economic growth through infrastructure and network enhancement
2. Promote social inclusion by connecting remote and disadvantaged communities
3. Protect the environment by investing in public transport and other types of
sustainable transport
4. Improve safety of journeys
5. Improve integration of different forms of transport
7
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
The Government also has an aspirational target to stabilise road traffic at 2001 levels by
2021 (Scottish Executive, 2004), despite a consistently upward trend of total vehicle
kilometres since 1990 (Sustainable Development Commission, 2007) and an upward
actual and percentage planned spend on motorways and trunkroads till 2011 (Scottish
Government, 2007b).
Transport and rural development
“There is clear evidence that a comprehensive and high-performing transport system is
an important enabler of sustained economic prosperity: a 5% reduction in travel time for
all business and freight travel on the roads could generate around £2.5 billion of cost
savings – some 0.2% of GDP.” So states Eddington (2006) as his first key finding, and
goes on to say; “The economic case for targeted new infrastructure is strong and offers
very high returns – the best schemes offer returns in the region of £5-10 for each £1
invested”.
It is true that for a congested, urban transport system with clogged inter urban arteries
and log jammed international gateways, transport costs in terms of wasted travel time do
have a compelling economic significance. However, in a rural environment where
accessibility is as important an issue as cost, and where development stretches beyond
economics, the evidence of a link between transport and development is neither clearcut
nor compelling. There may be strong theoretical relationships between transport and
economic development but there is little supporting empirical evidence (Banister et al,
2005; Leitham et al, 2006).
In a European study of paired leading and lagging regions it was difficult to discern how
transport infrastructure as such contributed to differences in development, except that
the more integrated it was with broader development plans and accompanied by
complementary incentives such as the construction of well-equipped business sites, the
more it could trigger economic development (Terluin, 2003).
The trade interaction between rural and urban areas in earlier economic theories had
transport costs as a key component in determining the location of economic
development. Business location decisions are still expected to take account of access to
the market place, the labour market and the cost of transport (Scottish Executive, 2004).
In theory high transport costs should favour development close to product centres and
lower transport costs should allow clustering of firms, usually at market hubs (Kilkenny,
1995). With transport costs now forming a much smaller proportion of overall costs,
location economics has given way to agglomeration economics whereby firms still tend
to congregate but to enjoy benefits of intra business activity and a thicker labour market,
which tends to happen in urban areas (Banister et al, 2005). However, rural locations
are attractive to firms where the benefits of more affordable premises, potentially
cheaper workforces, lack of congestion and perceived better quality of environment
offset the additional transport charges, providing that rapid access to the road network is
still possible (Banister et al, 2005; Kilkenny, 1995). Nevertheless, a recent survey
indicated that transport costs and roads was still a particular constraint facing Scottish
rural businesses (EKOS, 2007).
A good quality rural transport infrastructure is often quoted by firms considering a rural
location (Banister et al, 2005), but this may be more important in allowing labour mobility
than in reducing distribution costs (SACTRA, 1999). Indeed a recent study indicated
that two thirds of long term unemployed men in rural areas said that getting to jobs is a
barrier to finding work (Beatty & Fothergill, 2001) and employers have also indicated that
8
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
lack of adequate transport infrastructure and dispersed rural labour had an impact on
recruitment. However, dependency on public transport may be less of a hindrance than
suggested as car ownership tends to be higher in rural areas (Gray et al, 2001;
Commission for Rural Communities, 2006) but this may be because of the lack of
alternatives.
Particular enterprises have specific transport infrastructure requirements:
Timber and wood products
Timber haulage accounts for between 20-50% of the cost of wood delivered to Scottish
sawmills and with Scotland’s timber production set to double in the next 15 years then
good rural transport infrastructure is essential (Forshaw, 2003) especially as 45% of
rural roads carry timber traffic. Wood fuel and other biomass materials have similar
infrastructural demands although biomass plants should be located in close proximity
to supply sources as a more sustainable way forward (Forum for Renewable Energy
Development in Scotland, 2005).
Tourism
Scotland hosted about 10.5 million visitors in 2005 and although there have been
recent rises in foreign tourists, the majority of visitors (76%) come from within the UK
(VisitScotland, 2005). Visitor access to Scotland is predominately by road which is
largely adequate although congestion at popular tourist spots, poor parking and poor
roads in some rural areas have all been identified as requiring improvement
(Thompson et al, 2006).
In analysing whether or not the transport infrastructure is a barrier to a specific
business development, it may be helpful to consider a few key issues;
 Is the proposed business location in an accessible or remote area of
Scotland?
 Is the business tied to a particular locale (e.g. farm based) or can it locate
anywhere (e.g. information services)?
 Are the business materials and goods bulky in nature (e.g. timber) or
otherwise (consultancy services)?
 Is the main transport movement to the business (e.g. tourism and recreation)
or away from it (e.g. production based)?
RURAL HOUSING
Summary

There is an affordable housing problem in Rural Scotland

This acts as a barrier to rural development because it affects the rural labour
market

The problem may be worse in low pay sectors like agriculture, forestry & tourism

High house prices also create an opportunity for land-based rural businesses
9
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Housing is high on the agenda in rural Scotland: in an online poll by Rural Gateway
(2007) it was voted the most important issue facing rural Scotland; the Scottish
Parliament’s Rural and Environment Committee (2007) has launched an inquiry; and the
Scottish Government (2008) is investing £143m in affordable rural housing in 2007-08,
and has announced £5m for affordable rented rural properties (Communities Scotland
2007). The table below shows average house prices in Scotland.
Table 2 House prices in Rural and Urban Scotland 2006
Remote Rural
Sales
8,403
Average price (£)
156,679
Source: Scottish Government (2007c)
Accessible Rural
Rest of Scotland
17,814
164,695
141,613
128,642
Rural house prices have risen by 112% over the last 5 years, compared to 107% in
urban areas. As well as being more expensive, houses in rural areas are less affordable
to local workers. The average property price in rural areas is 5.8 times average annual
earnings compared to 5.2 in urban areas. The combined effect, amongst other things, is
to price some, notably young local people out of the market. The proportion of first-time
buyers in rural local authority areas, at around 18% of all buyers, is lower than in urban
areas (31%). There are regional variations: East Lothian is the least affordable rural local
authority at 6.5 times local average annual earnings, followed by the Borders (6.2 times)
and the Western Isles is the most affordable, at 4.3 times local earnings (Bank of
Scotland 2007).
Business in the Community (2003) set out the factors causing the problem:

The high proportion of housing purchased under the Right to Buy in rural areas

Urban to rural migration of wealthy commuters and retirees pushing up prices

The growing number of second homes and holiday accommodation

Low incomes in rural employment markets

Limited supply of appropriate land because of e.g. infrastructure constraints (esp
water and sewerage) and planning restrictions

Negative local attitudes to affordable housing

Increased construction costs because of the remoteness from suppliers and
services and the need to ensure appropriate building design and finishes; and the
generally smaller sites in rural areas

Difficulty in securing access to finance, for both occupants and developers
Research has shown that approaching one half of second and holiday homes in
Scotland are in remote rural areas (Communities Scotland, 2005). Another factor is that
developments in rural areas are often built for the upper end of the market, as four or
five bedroom houses (Commission for Rural Communities, 2006). A member of the
SEBG commented that:
10
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
In most housing schemes there isn’t enough of a mix of types of houses. We have
worked out a mix of houses in a development from 1-2 bed houses for first time
buying couples, to 3-4 bed houses for families, rather than all 4 bedroom houses
which is what you normally see. That’s being led by us, not by the planners.
They also highlighted the lack of sewerage capacity as a constraint:
We have land near a small village, it hasn’t grown much for 20 years, the school roll
is falling, the pub and shop need customers, and there is support from the
community for new development. We’ve put forward a housing scheme for 30
houses, 25% of which would be affordable, but it can’t go ahead because Scottish
Water say they have no capacity in the waste water treatment works. I met with
them and they told me that the capacity will increase sometime between now and
2014 or the developer can pay for the capacity increase.
In England, research has shown that someone on an income of £11,000 could only
afford to buy in 6% of rural wards, whilst someone on an income of £22,000 would be
able to buy in 50% of rural wards (Commission for Rural Communities, 2006). Bramley
et. al (2006) modelled housing need in Scottish local authorities. They found a net need
for 8,000 affordable houses nationally in 2005. Among rural local authorities Perth and
Kinross (540), Highland (505), Argyll and Bute (405), Dumfries and Galloway (340), and
Moray (245) had significant net needs, while only East Ayrshire (590) had a significant
net surplus. Future projections of need are shown in the table:
Table 3 Future projections of affordable housing need in Scotland 2005-2021
Type of area
2006
2011
2016
2021
4 cities
3610
1390
550
0
Urban
1540
1255
525
225
Mixed
3060
1980
520
1250
Accessible rural
1980
1420
685
595
Remote rural
1920
1725
1205
1210
Source: Bramley et.al (2006) Note: The projection is based on a middle scenario of a
correction of house prices from current rates of increase back towards their long-term
trend.
A number of studies have suggested that the lack of affordable housing in rural areas
has an impact on economic development. Highlands & Islands Enterprise (2005)
conducted a consultation which found that the supply of affordable housing was
regarded as a significant constraint on economic growth. The Scottish Executive’s
(2006c) tourism strategy identifies a need for housing in areas where people need to
work in tourist businesses. A study carried out for the Local Government Association
(2007) looked at reasons for different economic performance in “lagging” rural regions in
England. It highlighted the issue of accessible rural areas becoming dormitory
settlements, and the conversion of key business sites into housing as a major factor
challenging their economic vitality.
The main barrier to rural development caused by a lack of affordable housing is that it
makes it difficult for employers to find and retain staff. This problem was highlighted by
11
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
the Federation of Small Businesses (2004) in its report ‘an Entrepreneurial Countryside’
which reported the results of a survey of over 2,000 rural businesses. The Affordable
Rural Housing Commission (2006) said that the lack of housing was stifling rural
enterprise. They found that rural employers were having difficulties recruiting workers
because they could not afford to live locally. Monk & Ni Luanaigh (2006) suggested that
for new employment opportunities to be available in rural areas, there was a clear need
to ensure that housing supply in each locality and local travel-to-work area is sufficient to
meet the demands of the potential workforce. A study for DEFRA (Cambridge, 2006)
assessing rural housing need highlighted the particular affordability problems for workers
in the primary industries and the service sector, where wages tend to be lower, and said
that in its case study areas (in rural England) employers had reported problems with staff
recruitment and retention. The OECD (2008) found that while there was a high rate of
start-ups in rural Scotland, suggesting a strong foundation for SMEs, one of the main
reasons for their slow growth was a lack of local labour. They put tackling land, property
and housing related issues at the top of their agenda for reforming Scottish rural policy.
Attracting appropriately trained staff was a ‘mid-ranking challenge’, cited by 9% of rural
businesses in a survey carried out by Future Skills Scotland (2004). Nationally, 9% of
businesses also cited recruitment and retention of staff as a barrier to their business. Of
those businesses which had vacancies which were hard to fill (46% of all vacancies in
both rural and urban Scotland), 52% of rural employers said this was because of a
shortage of applicants, compared to 29% of employers in the rest of Scotland. The
effect of hard to fill vacancies was difficulty meeting customer service objectives,
affecting 51% of rural businesses, delays developing new products or services (33%)
and loss of business (29%).
The survey also measured vacancy rates by sector. In agriculture, forestry and fishing
2.8% of positions were vacant, in energy and water 4.2%, and in hotels and restaurants
6.4%. Nationally, the vacancy rate was 0.9% in energy, water and construction, and
2.2% in hotels and restaurants. The hotel and restaurant sector was one of two sectors
in rural Scotland where more than two-thirds of vacancies were hard-to-fill. More than
half of vacancies in the energy and water sector were hard-to-fill in rural areas. Lloyds
TSB Scotland (2007) found that 66% of farmers said it was either hard or very hard to
recruit staff. However, there are other reasons behind this as well as the rural housing
problem, such as a lack of people wanting to work in farming.
There has been a long-term trend of declining employment in Scotland’s primary rural
industries. Labour market projections have also suggested that employment is likely to
fall in the hotel and restaurant, and the energy sectors (Future Skills Scotland, 2006).
High rural house prices also create an opportunity for land-based rural businesses.
Lloyds TSB Scotland (2007) found that the largest source of non-farming income for
Scottish agricultural businesses was property related. This finding is supported by
DEFRA’s (2008) statistics on diversification. Out of the 60,000 farm businesses in
England large enough to support a full-time farmer, the dominant diversified enterprise
was letting out agricultural buildings for non-agricultural use – 36% of farms did this, and
it generated 60% of all diversified income (£250m out of a total of £430m from diversified
enterprises).
12
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES (ICT)
Summary

Broadband connection has the potential to remove the transport barriers imposed
in rural areas.

High national coverage of broadband belies the slow speeds and poor
accessibility to services (and operators) in some specific areas.

Growth in business turnover, increases in productivity and establishment of new
markets are all attributed to broadband connection.

Non use of broadband services has serious business and social exclusion
penalties.

Further advances in satellite and wireless technology may be the solution to poor
broadband connection associated with land lines.
Background
Although this section will focus particularly on broadband, ICT in general can provide the
means of removing the barriers to accessing services and information which may be
imposed by the lack of transport and local facilities in rural areas. In this respect rural
citizens have more to gain than most (Warren, 2006). The provision of broadband (highbandwidth) services which allow quicker transfers of more complex information types,
has been identified as an important enabling tool in allowing Scottish rural businesses to
access new markets and new ideas (Scottish Executive, 2004). Faster internet
connectivity can simplify supply chains thereby reducing transaction costs and prices.
Well maintained websites also provide a shop window for potential customers who are
increasingly searching online for goods and services. Farmhouse bed & breakfast, farm
holiday cottages, farm processed meats are just a few examples of what’s available in
rural Scotland. (Although website creation does not require broadband as they need not
be hosted in local communities, with the arrival of broadband there were explosions of
online marketing and other e-commerce as users became more aware of the
opportunities available).
Policy
The Scottish Executive initiated its broadband strategy in 2001 (Connecting Scotland:
our broadband future) to boost broadband coverage from 43% (Scottish Executive,
2004), and reached over 99% by the end of 2005 following the successful completion of
the Broadband for Scotland Rural and Remote Areas Supply-Side Intervention (SSI)
(Primrose & Fawcett, 2008).
Outreach and uptake.
However, in upgrading rural exchanges BT use Exchange Activate a smaller–scale
broadband product that has limited bandwith (512Kbps, the minimum benchmark for
broadband) and can only be provided to a limited number of end users. Even after
upgrade it is estimated that between 7-25,000 lines will be of poor quality or of such
distance from the exchange that they will be affected (Mason Communications Ltd,
2006). This represents 1% of all Scottish lines. So although Scottish communities may
have access there will still be appreciable households and businesses in rural Scotland
that will have real problems in effectively accessing broadband services. Solutions may
13
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
lie in the further development of satellite and wireless combinations for connecting rural
businesses and the creation of community internet hotspots.
So, although the uptake of internet use is higher in rural than in urban areas, the type of
connection is less likely to be broadband (table 4). Similar discrepancies between rural
and urban broadband access have also been reported in England (Commission for Rural
Communities, 2006).
Table 4 Percentage of households with internet and broadband in Scotland 2005
Households with internet access
Households with broadband internet
Source: Corbett et al (2006)
Remote
rural
57
27
Accessible
rural
56
47
All
Scotland
48
55
The advantages of broadband connection are very real and in the most recent Scottish
survey (Primrose & Fawcett, 2008) a large proportion of businesses reported
commercial benefits from the availability and use of broadband, 42% saw a growth in
turnover, productivity was up by 25% on average, and new markets were established.
The downside is of course that businesses which have problems accessing broadband
or lack the skills or confidence to enter the digital age will be progressively discriminated
against (Warren, 2006), especially as the internet becomes the default mode of
communication (increasingly so for official applications and information sources).
PLANNING REGULATIONS

Planning regulations were examined specifically in relation to farm diversification
projects.

In general planning regulations were regarded as a major barrier to farm
diversification opportunities, although there were some contrary views as well.

A lack of understanding and of proactive support by local planning officers
towards diversification ventures, was the outcome of one major report.
Perhaps the largest study of where planning barriers associated with farm diversification
existed and the extent to which planning authorities were proactively assisting farm
diversification applicants was carried out with 1,397 applicants across 21 English Local
Planning Authorities (LPAs) (Land Use Consultants for DETR (2001).
Farm diversification accounted for only 1.5% of all planning applications though ranged
from 0.9% in urban fringe areas to 5.1% in National Parks. The commonest farm
diversification subject to planning controls was tourism (31% of all planning applications)
but up to 53% in remote rural areas leading to concern of over-saturation of the tourist
market and lack of other income generating opportunities. Equestrian activities were the
second commonest overall (17%) but most popular (30%) in accessible rural areas.
When applications were refused (17%), the reasons most cited were; visual impact
(62%), inappropriate development in the countryside (52%) and issues relating traffic
and highways (51%).
The report concluded that “the majority of LPAs are not proactively assisting farm
diversification. Neither in development plan policies, other publications, or in the delivery
14
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
and co-ordination of advice to farmers, is the full potential to identify and promote farm
diversification suitable to its locality being taken up. LPAs are not unwilling to act
proactively, rather they lack the resources to do so”.
In a later research note on Integrated Farm Appraisal (IFA), the Countryside Agency
(2004) reported on the experiences of 38 farmers participating in the IFA process.
Planning regulations were cited as barriers in 11 cases of farmers not progressing their
plans and for a further 17 of those who did progress their plans.
In a survey of 1,716 English farmers who had diversified activities only 9% cited planning
as a problem in setting up the operation (Centre of Rural Research, 2002). However,
the same researchers found a very different story in 2006. Planning was considered a
major challenge for 32% of farmers from a sample of 749 who had diversified
enterprises. For diversified enterprises which were not set up, then planning was given
as the main reason in 24% of the cases, second only to failure to secure grant aid
(40%).
Two hundred and fifty one non-diversified farmers, who were considering diversifying,
were asked about their most significant challenges ahead. About 23% cited sorting out
planning constraints as a significant issue, second only to dealing with market
opportunities.
Nearly two thirds of the 100 farmers surveyed in a Diversification Survey carried out by
the National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association considered
that they understood the planning system and how to achieve a successful application.
However, almost three quarters felt discouraged by the planning system and nearly half
felt discouraged by the complexity of the planning application (cited in DEFRA 2007a).
Some of the specific criticisms levelled at planning barriers include; poor staffing of
planning authorities, staff without rural backgrounds, lack of, or negative pre application
advice, lack of approachability, extensive and onerous forms and supplementary
information required as part of the planning application process, confusing, inflexible and
inadequately rural proofed (DEFRA, 2007a).
REGULATIONS
Summary

Regulations act as a barrier for a significant proportion of farmers

Only a few agricultural regulations are responsible for creating most of the costs

The regulatory burden in forestry is small compared to agriculture and is reducing

Regulations pose a problem for rural tourism businesses

In many cases it is not individual regulations which pose a problem, but the burden
of all regulations put together. This poses problems for diversified businesses like
estates, as they are subject to the regimes of the different sectors in which they are
active
Overall, the UK’s regulatory regime is well respected internationally. A 2004 survey of
regulatory costs by KPMG ranked the UK as the most competitive country in Europe,
and third in the world. World Bank research and the OECD confirm this assessment
(Hampton, 2005).
15
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Nonetheless many businesses report problems with regulation. One member of the
SRPBA commented:
I now must be registered and licensed to extract my own water, transport my
livestock, spray herbicides and pesticides, butcher my own meat, check my electrics
and gas, maintain my flood banks. My cattle and horses need passports, my sheep
will soon need to be double tagged. Even our hours of work are regulated.
The burden of regulation is felt more by small businesses. Hampton (2005) cited
research by the OECD which found that businesses with fewer than 20 staff bore a
burden five times that of larger businesses with more than 50 staff.
The Small Business Service conducts an annual survey of small businesses, which
includes questions about barriers to business. The survey results from a subset of over
500 rural businesses in Scotland have been analyzed (Databuild, 2003). Around half of
rural businesses (49% in accessible rural and 51% in remote rural) said that regulation
was a barrier, slightly more than for businesses in urban areas (46%). The economic
environment (18%) and competition (17%) were the biggest single barrier for more
businesses in accessible rural areas than regulation (16%), while taxation (20%), the
economic environment (18%) and competition (17%) were the biggest single barrier for
more businesses than regulation (13%) in remote rural areas. The Small Business
Research Centre (2005) found that rural businesses were more likely to cite regulation
as an obstacle to their business.
The results of small business surveys consistently show that more businesses in the
primary industries say regulation is a barrier to their business than businesses in other
sectors (BMG Research 2006, Institute of Employment Studies 2005 & 2006). These
findings are supported by Lloyds TSB (2007) who found that 63% of farmers thought that
regulations limited the prosperity of their businesses. A study by ADAS (2005) found
that 58% of farmers thought that business performance had been depressed by
regulation. Sixty percent of farmers thought that the main cost of regulation was
because of increased time spent on administration, rather than because of compliance
costs, or changed business practices. The study found that the time a regulation had
been in force had an effect on the extent to which it was perceived to be a barrier.
Regulations which had been in force for a long time, such as the ban on stubble burning,
were no longer identified as a barrier to business. The costs of some regulations were
not obvious to farmers, because they affect the price of their inputs.
In response to a report by the Better Regulation Task Force (2005), the UK Government
launched an Administrative Burdens Measurement Exercise (ABME) which aimed to
measure the administrative costs incurred by the private sector as a result of regulations
imposed by central government. The exercise found that farmers were the biggest
recipients of regulation by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(DEFRA, 2006). Although agriculture is a devolved matter, and DEFRA is only
responsible for farming in England, Scottish farmers are subject to similar regulations,
especially those derived from EU regulation. The total cost to business as a result of
DEFRA regulations at May 2005 was £735.7m. Of the 362 regulations considered by
the exercise, the 20 most costly regulations accounted for £553m (three-quarters) of
DEFRA’s total estimated administrative cost and over two thirds of this cost was
accounted for by five regulations. The largest cost resulted from the Single Farm
Payment Scheme Regulations, although it is notable that this was the first year of their
introduction. This suggests that the majority of costs on farm businesses may be
imposed by relatively few regulations.
16
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
A study carried out by DEFRA (2007b) investigated administrative burdens in agriculture
in 6 EU Member States. Single farm payment regulations, livestock identification and
movement regulations and welfare of farmed animals’ regulations were identified among
the top 20 most burdensome regulations in all 6 Member States. The study also
classified regulations according to whether they originated as a result of EU obligations,
EU/international obligations, or were exclusively national. For the UK split was 46%
exclusively EU, 21% EU/international, and 34% national. In Sweden only 4% of
regulations were exclusively national. This finding is interesting because it is often
suggested that it is not possible to do anything about the regulation of agriculture
because so many regulations derive from the EU. DEFRA (2007b) also reported that
the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture set a target in 2003 of reducing administrative burdens
by 25% by 2007. By the end of 2006 this had been exceeded, and burdens had been
reduced by 35%. When Dutch farmers were surveyed to see what the impact was, they
had not noticed a difference. This highlights the importance of working with industry
when tackling regulation.
In sectors such as farming and food, which are subject to complicated regulatory
regimes, knowledge of regulation can also be a barrier. A study found that 62% of small
food business proprietors did not understand which food safety regulations were relevant
to them (Fairman & Yapp, 2006). A member of the SRPBA commented:
If I wanted to set up a farm shop, I’ve got to think how on earth would I go about that,
where would I find the information, where would I find out about the regulations?
The administrative burden of regulations enforced by the Forestry Commission was
estimated at £1.5 million. Nine regulations were identified which created a burden. The
two most burdensome regulations, which relate to the Woodland Grant Scheme and the
Plant Health Export Certificates) are voluntary. That regulation is not a major issue for
forest businesses was borne out by a comment from the SRPBA that:
With forestry there’s a different set of issues more to do with economics, and the fact
that although there’s demand for timber at the moment, its hard to find land to plant.
The security of long term grants is an issue. I’m a member of a Forestry e-group, and
regulation hasn’t been raised much as an issue by group members.
However, red tape was found to be a huge source of dissatisfaction among 370
respondents to a survey of forest businesses in the South of Scotland (Scottish Forest
Industries Cluster, 2007). Respondents complained that the regulatory bodies do not
seem to collaborate with each other and much duplication of information provision, form
filling and inspections seems to result. One response suggested that low margins in
forestry had resulted in “sailing close to the wind” in complying with regulations, which in
turn had resulted in tightening of controls. This suggests the risk of regulation creating a
vicious circle.
The Country Land & Business Association (2006) surveyed 360 rural tourism operators
in 2005, and found that 22% of operators cited red tape as a constraint on their
business. The Scottish Tourism Forum’s manifesto said that there are an everincreasing range of legislative and fiscal barriers to the growth of tourism businesses.
Neither source identified specific regulations that were a concern. In some cases, it may
not be particular regulations which are a problem, but the burden of regulations taken
together. This was the view of members of the SEBG who said that:
17
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Estates are multi faceted businesses, and they have to deal with all the various
regulatory regimes in each business in which they are active. For example, you open
a farm shop, you have to comply with food safety legislation, you make a play area
next to the shop, and you have to comply with health and safety. The shop does well
and you take on staff, and then you have to comply with employment legislation.
And
Governments talk a lot about reducing red tape, but I don’t see any evidence of it
having reduced. In the last 20 years have I seen any change – yes, more of it.
18
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
APPENDIX A
Summary points taken from the semi-structured discussions
Issues
Comments
Client/membership
base, Very wide ranging, from a handful to several
especially focusing on the thousands. Start-up enterprise services, in strong
farming portion
position to gauge interest in farm based new
ventures. About 25% of clients in Coatbridge,
Selkirk and Stirling were farmers. Business startup
was disproportionately large in rural areas of Stirling.
Type of business or individual Very variable. Larger, owner-occupiers with a
interested in diversifying
diverse asset base, and a stable platform with which
to take risk. Tenants may be more constrained by
leases and collateral. Arable farmers more
‘enlightened’ with better business sense. 2nd /3rd
generation farmers willing to do something different.
No particular size, nor type of farm, common
denominator was a positive attitude and networking,
usually involved in other groups. “Had done a
diversification before or had other business interests,
rather than size or farm type”. Perhaps a profile of a
younger person with kids (feel obliged to offer some
opportunity) and a need to develop EXTRA income.
Willingness to drive an idea forward.
Types of development
Commonest
obstacle
developing business
Most difficult obstacle
More service than value adding, recreation, reflection
of economy as a whole, oversaturation of tourism.
Contracting, fabrication, direct outlets, B & B,
equestrian quite important in Central Belt. Bottled
water, commercial premises development for rent,
animation, chalets, yurt manufacture, difficult dog
training etc.
to Self –confidence, own mental attitude, followed by
financial assistance or access to grants.
Understanding the procedures, then finance.
Motivation, confidence and a willingness to take
risks. Attitude to risk, but not risk averse.
Confidence and where to go for advice. Lack of
knowledge and where to seek advice.
Planning as now have to play by sets of complex
19
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
rules. “Getting people to plan”. Planning
permissions. Attitude of farmers themselves.
Regional
obstacle
differences
Differences of barrier
different developments
of Some suggestion of an east /west divide. Variation
in interpretation of SPP15 among local planning
authorities.
for Administrative services and consulting have very
little impediment to setting up, compared with
processing which have health& safety, hygiene and
environmental issues to contend with.
Rank of 5 study barriers
Fairly consistent, 1) planning =2) other regulations or
broadband, 4) housing, 5) transport.
Planning issues
Overly complex, non supportive, slow, not yet caught
up with rural development, unaware of local strategy,
farmers unwilling to pay professionals for help.
Broadband issues
Slow, and poor access in areas, even on urban
fringe, eg East Kilbride. Minimum grade broadband
which restricts business with large data files, eg
creative animation. IT now a necessity for many non
farm businesses wishing to set up rurally as lifestyle
choices.
Housing issues
Particular problem for tourist industry. Latent
demand for rural business premises. Young people
forced to live with parents as no affordable housing.
Transport issues
Serious problem of maintenance of rural roads,
partly blamed on increased lorry axle weight and lack
of funding from councils. Many sites not easily
accessed by public transport eg Kelso races or
Glentress, or NT attractions.
Strategies to overcome these Lobbying of MPs. Pester council. Training for
5 barriers
farmers, particularly management skills,
organisation, planning and people management.
Rural mentoring programme. Networking with others
20
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
in same situation. Course for civil servants on rural
entrepreneurship. Forward planning. Foster good
relations with agencies.
Which barriers most easily Planning, as the opportunity for more supportive
removed.
interpretation is there, together with government
commitment to SRDP.
Other factors of importance
Certainly market opportunities rely on state of the
economy, question if over-reliance on tourism.
Inheritance tax cited as impacts on succession
issues. Indicated that labour should be considered
as a barrier.
21
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
APPENDIX B
SOURCES
ADAS. (2005) Study on the impacts of regulation on agriculture. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/policy/regulation/charge/pdf/impacts-regulationagriculture.pdf
Affordable Rural Housing Commission. (2006) Final report. London: Afforable Rural
Housing Commission. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/pdfs/housing/commission/affordable-housing.pdf
Ambler, T & Chittenden, F. (2007) Deregulation or déjà vu? UK deregulation initiatives
1987-2006.
London:
British
Chambers
of
Commerce.
Available
at:
http://www.britishchambers.org.uk/policy/pdf/deregulation_report_2007.pdf
Banister, D., Clark, O., Byers, A. & Baker, J. (2005) An Investigation into the Links
between Infrastructure Investment and Sustainable Rural Communities. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/pdfs/research/transport-src.pdf
Bank of Scotland. (2007) Bank of Scotland Rural Housing Review. Available at:
http://www.hbosplc.com/media/pressreleases/articles/bos/25.08.07%20Rural%20Housin
g%20Review%20Scotland.pdf
Beatty, C. & Fothergill, S. (2001) Labour Market Detachment in Rural England,
Countryside Agency
Better Regulation Task Force. (2005) Regulation – Less is More, Reducing Burdens,
Improving Outcomes. London: Cabinet Office. Available at:
http://archive.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/brc/upload/assets/www.brc.gov.uk/lessismore.pdf
BMG Research. (2006) Annual Survey of Small Businesses: Scotland 2004/05.
Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/10/05092848/11
Bramley, G. Kofi Karley, N & Watkins, D. (2006) Local housing need and affordability
model for Scotland – Update (2005 based), A report to the Scottish Executive and
Communities Scotland. Communities Scotland: Edinburgh.
Available at:
http://www.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/documents/webpages/pub
cs_016552.pdf
Business in the Community. (2003) Affordable Rural Housing – an Opportunity for
Business. Available at: http://www.bitc.org.uk/document.rm?id=6305
Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research and Land Use Consultants.
(2006) The extent and impacts of rural housing need. A study for DEFRA. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/pdfs/research/rural-housing-need.pdf
Centre for Rural Research, University of Exeter, (2002). Farm diversification activities Benchmarking study. Available at:
http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/reports/farmdiv/default.asp
22
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Centre for Rural Research, University of Exeter, (2006). The wider social impacts of
changes in the structure of agricultural businesses. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/research/soc_impact.htm
Commission for Rural Communities (2006) Rural Disadvantage Reviewing the Evidence
Available at:
http://www.ruralcommunities.gov.uk/publications/crc31review
Commission for Rural Communities. (2006) Rural disadvantage, reviewing the evidence.
London: Commission for Rural Communities. Available at:
http://www.ruralcommunities.gov.uk/files/CRC31-RuralDisadvantagereviewingtheevidence.pdf
Communities Scotland. (2005) The impact of second and holiday homes on rural
communities in Scotland. Available at:
http://www.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/documents/webpages/pub
cs_011272.pdf
Communities Scotland. (2007) Record £584 million for housing across Scotland.
Available at:
http://www.communitiesscotland.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/documents/csnews/cs_01
8090.hcsp
Corbett, J., MacLeod, P. Martin, C. & Hope, S. (2007) Scotland’s People; Results from
2005 Scottish Household Survey. Available from:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/140387/0034518.pdf
Country Land & Business Association. (2006) Business Confidence in Rural Tourism
2005. Available at:
http://www.cla.org.uk/Policy_Work/Policy_report_archive/Business/Tourism/4189.htm
The Countryside Agency (2004) Integrated farm appraisal. Research Notes CRN 80
Databuild. (2003) Omnibus Survey of Small Businesses in Scotland 2002: Rural
Analysis. Available at
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/02/18843/32590
Davidson, N. (2006) Davidson Review of the Implementation of EU legislation – Final
Report. London: Cabinet Office. Available at: http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file44583.pdf
DEFRA. (2006) Administrative Burdens Measurement Exercise – Final Report.
Available
at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/regulat/better/adminburdens/abmereport0612.pdf
DEFRA (2007a) Report of Joint Industry-Government Working Group. Barriers to Farm
Diversification. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/working/diversify/pdf/barriers-diversification.pdf
23
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
DEFRA. (2007b) Administrative burdens in European agriculture: an evidence base.
London: DEFRA. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/policy/regulation/charge/pdf/admin-burdens-eu-ag.pdf
DEFRA. (2008) Farm diversification – January 2008. Available at:
http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/statnot/Divers08final.pdf
Eddington, R. (2006) The Eddington Transport Study. London UK Government.
Available at:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/162259/187604/206711/executivesummary
EKOS Limited (2007) Review of a Demand for a Rural Financial Product. Final report
for SE Rural Group
Fairman, R & Yapp, C (2006) Factors affecting food safety compliance within small and
medium sized enterprises: Implications for regulatory and enforcement strategies’,
Journal of Food Control 17: 42-51
Federation of Small Businesses. (2004) An Entrepreneurial Countryside. London: FSB.
Available at: http://www.fsb.org.uk/documentstore/filedetails.asp?id=52
Forestry Commission. (2006) Administrative Burdens Measurement Exercise - Final
Report. Available at:
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/Final_FC_ABMEPhase3Report_V1.3_03.07.06.pdf/$FILE/
Final_FC_ABMEPhase3Report_V1.3_03.07.06.pdf
Forshaw, I. Timber Transport Forum (2003) Response to Proposals for a new Approach
to
Transport
in
Scotland:
a
Consultation.
Available
at:
www.confor.org.uk/timber_transport/pages/download.asp?file=Revised%20SE%20Response.do
c
Forum for Renewable Energy Development in Scotland (2005)
Promoting and Accelerating the Market Penetration of Biomass Technology in Scotland.
Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/01/20616/51406
Future Skills Scotland. (2004) Skills in Rural Scotland 2004.
Available at:
http://www.futureskillsscotland.org.uk/web/site/home/Reports/WhatEmployersThink/Rep
ort_Skills_in_Rural_Scotland_2004.asp
Future Skills Scotland. (2006) The Scottish Labour Market 2006. Available at:
http://www.futureskillsscotland.org.uk/web/site/home/Reports/NationalReports/Report_T
he_Scottish_Labour_Market_2006.asp
Hampton, P. (2005) Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and
enforcement.
London:
HM
Treasury.
Available
at:
http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/media/7/F/bud05hamptonv1.pdf
Highlands and Islands Enterprise. (2005) A Smart, Successful Highlands and Islands –
An Enterprise Strategy for the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. Inverness: Highlands
and Islands Enterprise. Available at: http://www.hie.co.uk/hie-sshandi-english-lowresv5.pdf
24
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Institute of Employment Studies. (2005) Annual Survey of Small Businesses in Scotland
2003. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/06/07153758/38004
Institute of Employment Studies (2006) Annual Survey of Small Businesses 2005.
Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/12/20153636/0
Kilkenny, M. (1995) Transport Costs and Rural Development. Available at:
http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/95wp133.pdf
Land use Consultants (2001) for DETR. The Implementation of National Planning Policy
Guidance (PPG7) in Relation to the Diversification of Farm Businesses. Available at:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/158514
Leitham, S., Canning, S. & Simmonds, D. (2006) Ayrshire – Transport and the Economy
Available at:
http://www.mvaconsultancy.com/publications/Ayreshire%20%20Transport%20and%20the%20Economy.pdf
Lloyds TSB Scotland. (2007) Results of the 2007 Lloyds TSB Scotland Agricultural
Survey. [Unpublished].
Local Government Association. (2007) Productivity and place – economic performance
in remote areas. London: Local Government Association. Available at:
http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/21911
Mason Communications Ltd (2006) A study into broadband reach in Scotland for
Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/161597/0043878.pdf
Monk, S & Ni Luanaigh, A. (2006) Rural housing affordability and sustainable
communities, in A new Rural Agenda, Institute for Public Policy Research. Newcastle:
IPPR. Available at:
http://www.ippr.org/members/download.asp?f=/ecomm/files/a_new_rural_agenda.pdf&a
=skip
OECD (2008) OECD Rural Policy Reviews; Scotland, UK. Assessment and
Recommendations. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/02/14143544/0
Primrose, D. & Fawcett, J. (2008) Evaluation of the Scottish Executive’s “Broadband for
Scotland” Intervention. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/02/19085818/0
SACTRA (1999) Transport and the Economy Report of the Standing Advisory
Committee on the Trunk Road Assessment, HMSO.
Scottish Executive (2003) Social Focus on Urban Rural Scotland 2003. Edinburgh:
Scottish Executive. Available at:
25
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/05/17207/22173
Scottish Executive (2004) Background Analysis to the Framework of Economic
Development in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/09/19882/42504
Scottish Executive (2006a) Scotland’s National Transport Strategy. Edinburgh: Scottish
Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/12/04104414/0
Scottish Executive (2006b) Digital Inclusion Strategy 2006. Edinburgh: Scottish
Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/12/22112316/0
Scottish Executive. (2006c) Scottish Tourism: The Next Decade - A Tourism Framework
for Change. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/03/03145848/1
Scottish Forest Industries Cluster. (2007) Survey of People in the Forest Industries in
South Scotland, May 2007. Available at:
http://www.forestryscotland.com/pages/publications_detail.asp?id=17
Scottish Government (2007a) Brief report on 2006 Scottish Household Survey results.
Edinburgh: Scottish Government. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/06/04150044/0
Scottish Government (2007b) Key Transport Statistics. Edinburgh: Scottish
Government. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/12/19160115/0
Scottish Government. (2007c) Rural Scotland Key Facts. Edinburgh: Scottish
Government. Available at:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/11/02154950/0
Scottish Parliament Rural Affairs and Environment Committee. (2007) Rural Housing
Inquiry. Available at:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/rae/inquiries/ruralHousing/index.htm
Scottish Tourism Forum (2007) Tourism Industry Manifesto.
Available at:
http://www.stforum.co.uk/
Small Business Centre (2005). Regulation and Small Firm Performance and Growth:
A Review of the Literature. Available at:
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file38268.pdf
Sustainable Development Commission (2007) Sustainable Development in Scotland.
Available at:
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications.php?id=583
26
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
Terluin, I.J. (2003) Differences in economic development in rural regions of advanced
countries: an overview and critical analysis of theories. Journal of Rural Studies Volume
19, Issue 3, Pages 327-344
Thompson, K., Ferguson, N. S. in association with Derek Halden Consultancy Ltd & the
Moffat Centre, (2006) Investigation of Travel Behaviour of Visitors to Scotland.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/04/30170641/0
VisitScotland (2005) Tourism in Scotland. Edinburgh: VisitScotland.
Warren, M. (2006) The Cloud in the Silver Lining: exploring links between social
disadvantage and digital exclusion in rural areas. Available at:
http://www.ruralfuturesconference.org/2006/Warren.pdf
27
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEWEES
Jonathan Hall – Head of Rural Policy, National Farmers Union of Scotland, Ingliston.
Polly McPherson – Director of Research and Communications, Scottish Estates
Business Group, Edinburgh.
Stuart Ogg – Operations Director, Scottish Enterprise Forth Valley, Stirling.
Julian Pace – Director Corporate, Rural & South, Scottish Enterprise Borders,
Galashiels.
Ronnie Smith – Chief Executive, Lanarkshire Enterprise Services, Coatbridge.
Karen Smyth – Rural Development Manager at the Scottish Rural Property & Business
Association, Musselburgh.
Chris Trotman – Business Advisor, Business Gateway, Selkirk.
Stuart Young – Deputy Chairman, Scottish Estates Business Group & Dunecht Estates,
Dunecht.
As well as interviewing Karen Smyth, interview questions were forwarded to 28
members of the SRPBA with a particular interest in rural development issues, and two
responses were received.
28
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
APPENDIX D
Semi structured interviews / discussions with members of the
Scottish Enterprise Rural Group & Partners on barriers to rural
development.



Initial questions to establish some basic information about the interviewee’s group,
association or union members
o
What’s the scale of interest in rural development among your members?
o
What business types are these?
o
What types of development are involved?
Open questions to elicit opinions as to the main obstacles to developing land-based
businesses in rural Scotland.
o
What are the commonest obstacles that your members have encountered
in trying to develop land based business ventures?
o
Which of these is perceived by your members to present the greatest
barrier?
o
Does this coincide with your own perceptions?
o
What strategies to overcome these barriers have been employed, and
with what success?
o
Are there any suggestions of regional differences in both the greatest
barrier and the responses to it?
o
Are there any suggestions of differences of development types in both the
main barrier and the responses to it?
Discussion of the extent to which the specific five factors examined in this study are
barriers to business development:
Transport
Internet communication technology
Housing
Planning regulations
Other regulations
o
Is it possible to rank the above 5 barriers in terms of how common and
how challenging they are among your members?
o
Is there any suggestion that there are regional differences with respect to
these rankings? Can you give examples? Why do you think this is so?
o
Is there any suggestion that there are development type differences with
respect to these rankings? Can you give examples? Why do you think
this is so?
29
Barriers to rural economic development in Scotland
o
Can you give specific examples of how the above barriers have affected
the development of your members’ businesses?
o

What strategies to overcome these barriers have been employed, and
with what success?
Discussion of the relative importance of the 5 factors.
o
How important are the above 5 factors in relation to other factors such as
competition, taxation, the state of the economy?
o
Have the relative importance of the 5 factors changed over time, for the
better or worse?
o
Do you think these 5 factors affect other rural businesses in the same
way?
o

What strategies have those businesses used to overcome these barriers?
Discussion on solutions to development barriers?
o
Which barriers do you think could most easily be removed?
o
What do you think would be required to effect this change?
o
If you think that there are either regional or development type differences,
do you think that solutions need to be adjusted accordingly? If so, how?
Finally, is there any of your members that would be prepared to share their experiences
of rural development barriers and how they overcame these?
30