31
10
430
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/619/FutureOfEducationProvisionInTheGlenkens.jpg
5df8938b6330e3bf92e59848f8a0dbe1
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/619/FutureOfEducationProvisionInTheGlenkens.1.pdf
ea9b02e398e90dd581c3b7c7051d21c2
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Future of Education Provision in the Glenkens –
Necessary delay to the mothballing process on the
grounds of Place Principles and LOIP outcomes.
Background
This paper is from the Community Action Plan Steering Group 1 (CAP SG), owners of
the Glenkens & District Community Action Plan. It sets out a clear rationale for a
delay to the decision to mothball the Dalry Secondary School to allow the wider
impact on the community to be assessed and appropriate mitigating actions put
in place.
We feel strongly that a decision of this magnitude, impacting on current and future
pupils and the wider community, should not be able to be made by the Education
Committee of Dumfries and Galloway Council alone. The wider implications of the
decision should be considered by the Community Planning Partnership Board and a
community impact assessment made so that a plan to mitigate the impacts can be
developed.
The Glenkens & District has a Community Action Plan articulating the priorities
identified by the local community The agreed goal in the Community Action Plan, after
extensive consultation, is that the Glenkens will be: ... a connected, resilient and carbon neutral place, where people will want to live,
to work, to bring up their families, and to grow old. It will be somewhere that other
places in Scotland will look to for inspiration.
The provision of educational facilities is a key underpin of this goal. Good education
provision is important not only for the people currently living here and businesses based
here but also to attract businesses and families to move to the area. More homes, jobs
and businesses are key to our area and a key factor in people deciding to live here will
be access to good education. Hence our interest in this important decision that will
impact our communities in the short, medium and longer term.
The CAP SG is made up of nine people of all life experiences and interests from across our communities,
who will review progress against the Plan, suggest interventions if some actions aren’t getting done, and
ensure that the Action Plan remains up-to-date and relevant as our communities change.
1
Decision making process
Several members of the CAP SG attended the public meeting on 29 January 2024
where the proposal to recommend to the Education Committee that Dalry Secondary
School be mothballed was communicated by Education Department officials.
It became clear, after some questioning, that the decision on mothballing is currently
one for the Education Committee alone and that there is no requirement or indeed
intention to assess the potential impact on the Glenkens community in the information
provided to the Education Committee. This silo approach to decision making is wrong
and outdated and does not recognise or indeed respect the voice of our community in
such an important decision.
As clearly articulated by attendees at the meeting, it appears inevitable that the decision
to mothball will result in a future consultation process to in turn enable closure. Parents
and children are likely to have no belief that the school will ever re-open and so will
make the logical decision to send their children elsewhere. This is especially so since
there are no published criteria to allow the review and potential reversal any decision to
mothball.
This process, which appears to oversee a ‘managed decline’ leading to a decision to
mothball, runs a coach and horses through the statutory process for consultation on
school closures. We would cite as evidence of the ‘managed decline’:
1.
2.
3.
the reduction over the years in choices available to pupils in Dalry (with children
instead being advised to move to Castle Douglas High School for subjects)
which has necessarily been followed by parents choosing other schools.
the lack of any enthusiasm from the school management team to look at
innovative ways to retain secondary education facilities at Dalry.
the imposition of a mothballing timetable backed by analysis using a
questionable methodology and a survey done during the festive period that
precluded the possibility of lateral thinking and perhaps some more radical
alternatives.
Elected members condoning this approach in this instance therefore leaves
virtually all small rural schools in Dumfries and Galloway at risk of managed
decline leading to mothballing leading to closure. This appears to be a deliberate
attempt to circumvent Scottish Government requirements for closure consultation and
would be challengeable.
Role of Community Partnership Planning Board
Both the Scottish Government and Dumfries and Galloway Council are clear that the
voice of the community needs to be taken account of, encouraging communities to
develop plans and feel empowered. We would highlight for example the work being
required on Local Place Plans and the statements we have heard about their
importance.
In addition, the D&G September 2023 Local Outcome Improvement Plan sets out this
priority:
Community Planning Partners will focus on place; listen to our local
communities; improve connectivity; and help tackle key local issues.
and the top 3 LOIP underlying principles are:
Empowering Communities
Embracing and embedding Place Planning approaches
Working with our communities to build local community capacity,
skills and resilience
•
•
•
With the current focus on Local Place Planning and working in partnership rather than
silos, we request that the views of the Community Partnership Planning Board
(CPPB) are sought before a decision of this magnitude is taken by the Education
Committee.
Any decision made on this topic must be of interest to the CPPB if they are to achieve
the outcomes of the LOIP, and they should be consulted.
Need for effective planning and mitigation
In addition to considering the impact on the local community, we believe that an
important part of any decision made to mothball should be a clear set of actions
designed to ensure a smooth transition for the young people directly impacted. If we as
a Glenkens community are to achieve our Community Action Plan goal, then it is
important that our young people now and in the future feel connected with the place
they live in and are able to participate in all aspects of activity both at school and at
home. For the Education Committee to make a decision on mothballing without
understanding how the process would be effectively implemented risks any decision
being deemed perverse and unreasonable.
As a minimum, we think the following should form part of any recommendation to the
Education Committee and should be developed in conjunction with the wider Glenkens
community and community groups:
1. An effective transition plan agreed between the education department / school
/ parents / impacted young people to ensure that the transition to another school
is handled in a manner that minimises the impact on these young people. It was
clear from the meeting that the majority of the people who would be directly
impacted by any decision to mothball feel that Castle Douglas Secondary School
is not a good alternative for them. There was little evidence that any steps are
being taken to address these legitimate views and to ensure that the young
people are effectively and compassionately included in their new school family if
mothballing proceeds.
2. A comprehensive plan that sets out the transport arrangements for the new
educational infrastructure. This should of course include provision to enable the
young people to participate in after-school activities as well as core school
hours. It is crucially important for the young people to be able to participate in all
aspects of school life. At the meeting, one of the reasons given for the
mothballing was that the small number of pupils at Dalry meant that the social
aspects of school life and the interaction with others was not possible. If this is a
key criterion for the recommendation to mothball, then the Education Department
need to ensure that the statutory travel arrangements to and from the school do
not, in turn, prevent this. We are all aware of the material challenges re transport
in rural communities so this critical issue needs to be addressed.
Summary
The provision of educational facilities is a key underpin to the long-term sustainability of
our community here in the Glenkens, but also around the region. Good education
provision is important not only for the people currently living here but also to retain
existing families and attract families to move to the area. More homes, jobs and
businesses are critical to our area and a key factor in people deciding to live here and
businesses locating here will be access to a good education.
This accelerated mothballing process appears to be being deliberately used by the
Education Department to sidestep the need to either formally consult on closure or to
create mitigation plans that will minimise the impact on Glenkens young people and the
wider community. We believe that this is a misuse of process that the wider Council and
CPPB should be aware of. Allowing it to continue will not just disadvantage the
young people and communities of the Glenkens, but potentially all of our small
rural schools, accelerating rural depopulation and working in direct opposition to
LOIP outcomes.
We request that the decision on mothballing is delayed until further discussion between
the wider community, the Education Department, the Communities Department, the
CPPB and Elected Members takes place.
John Paterson, Chair,
Glenkens & District Community Action Plan Steering Group.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Future of Education Provision in the Glenkens
Description
An account of the resource
This paper from the Community Action Plan Steering Group (CAP SG), owners of the Glenkens & District Community Action Plan, sets out a clear rationale for a delay to the decision to mothball the Dalry Secondary School to allow the wider impact on the community to be assessed and appropriate mitigating actions put in place.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_16
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
CAP Steering Group
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2023
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
education
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/620/240307_GCSN_Report_Yr1_cover.jpg
89d54e712168086c9de3248a3a4714fc
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/620/240307_GCSN_Report_Yr1.pdf
b0815ea7150a89b4bb345af059357e2b
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Glenkens Community Spaces Network
Annual Report 2023
Executive Summary
The Glenkens Community Spaces Network (GCSN) began with a 0.2 FTE Facilitator in January 2023
thanks to funding from the Glenkens and District Community Fund through Foundation Scotland.
The Community Spaces Network is a Glenkens Community and Arts Trust project.
Following an initial round of fact-finding interviews with representatives of 20 community spaces in
order to set priorities for the network, it has hosted 7 Network meetings to date, four of which have
featured guest speakers to speak on a topic proposed by committee members. These meetings have
been attended by members of 14 Town Hall, Village Hall and other community space committees
across the Glenkens. Those who have been unable to attend have been kept up to date by email and
invited to join in with projects and share updates.
The Network’s purpose is to bring these voluntary committees together for peer support, to
encourage partnership working across the Glenkens and to amplify their efforts by further work by
the Facilitator over one day per week.
The GCSN has been very well received by the voluntary committees (see Appendix 1) and it has also
become clear that its effective function is a strategic underpin to many of the Glenkens & District
Community Action Plan priorities.
This report summarises the work done to date on these priorities, and sets out plans for the final
year of the currently-funded delivery phase.
2023 delivery
CAP Theme 1 – A Connected Community
Glenkens Hub partnership
•
The GCSN has worked closely with the Glenkens Hub website to use its reach as a public
facing service to improve the public profile of the halls. The GCSN page on the Glenkens Hub
Glenkens Hub - Glenkens Community Spaces Network allows members of the public to find
their local Hall and easily see information about events and activities taking place, as well as
giving information about how to hire the venue – both of which should hopefully increase
footfall and revenue.
•
The other really positive outcome for the GCSN is the password-protected Community
Spaces intranet page on the Hub, where resources, meeting papers and useful information
are stored so as to be easily updated and accessible to GCSN members.
•
One issue which came out of initial meetings with committees of community buildings was a
feeling that coordination of events timings would be helpful to reduce the risk of
clashes/competition for the same audience. The events calendar on the Glenkens Hub has
really helped with this. However, some events are planned up to a year in advance but
cannot be advertised on the Hub until details have been finalised. The GCSN intranet page
therefore now has a spreadsheet of planned events taking place taking place up to 12
months in advance.
Organic partnership working
The opportunity to meet on a regular basis and develop relationships with volunteers from other
community venues has been very positive.
•
Sharing of information and collective planning has happened organically, as meetings have
provided an opportunity for discussion of potentially clashing, joint or connected events.
•
We’re also in the process of creating a list of assets that can be hired/shared by other venues
which is also hosted on the GCSN intranet. Although this is not yet finished (inventory taking
is a big job!) people have already started to share resources (e.g. heaters for one-off events)
through links created in network meetings.
Adding value
Developing good working relationships with the GCSN members has led to further project work
being delivered through separate funding streams facilitated by the GCSN:
•
The Loch Ken Trust have commissioned the GCSN Facilitator via GCAT to help to deliver a
resilience-focused project for Community Councils and Halls. One of the outcomes of this
will be a toolkit for community halls that may be used as resilience evacuation centres or
warm hubs in the case of storms and similar. The toolkit will help them to develop any
necessary policies, consider and mitigate risks, and work out planned procedures so that if
there was a need for the venues to be used in this way, they would be better prepared. This
project will report end March 2024.
•
Dalry Community Council have sourced funding from NatureScot and SOSE to carry out
some work on Local Place Planning, one strand of which involves the GCSN Facilitator
working with Dalry and Carsphairn Community Councils to complete a draft Local Place Plan
for consultation, ensuring that all pertinent themes from the CAP are included, and to
produce resources to support the other CCs in the Glenkens with Local Place Planning work.
The NatureScot funding for this work ends in March 2024, but the work on Local Place
Planning will continue through 2024 and GCSN can continue to be involved as a support if
Community Councils would like.
CAP Theme 2 – An Asset Rich Community
Fundamentals
Supporting and amplifying the work of the Glenkens voluntary committees is the key remit of the
Network. By bringing people together in a supportive and positive environment, the GCSN allows
committee members to share good practice, successes and advice, highlight issues, ask questions,
suggest topics for investigation and potential projects and advise where the 1 day per week of the
GCSN Facilitator can best be used to add value and support committees.
Some committees have requested proforma documents to be developed to support with business
planning, policy development etc. As GCSN Facilitator, I have sought guidance and/or examples,
developing proforma documents and adding these to the GCSN intranet as a resource for all
members.
CAP Theme 4 – A Carbon Neutral Community
GCAT sourced £50,000 of funding in 2023 to commission a study into reducing energy demands and
emissions from our public buildings. The GCSN was critical to delivery of this report by Natural
Power Consultants. By using existing relationships, we were able to connect NPC to Hall committees
efficiently and effectively.
The resultant report Glenkens Hub - Energy Efficiency & Decarbonisation in Glenkens Buildings
provided information on energy efficiency and decarbonisation to the custodians of 11 community
buildings; three have so far used this information to inform capital funding bids to implement some
of the recommendations. We will be revisiting the report in the upcoming March 24 meeting to
discuss whether any of the other buildings who took part are now ready to consider upgrading as
doing this collectively may make it easier to get contractors in to quote for the work.
Looking forward: Challenges
Volunteer fatigue: One of the main issues which has become clear over the first year of the
Network has been that of volunteer fatigue. We are fortunate in the Glenkens to have a high
number of hardworking volunteers from a range of professional backgrounds, but the limited
population in the area necessarily means that there is a small pool from which to draw, meaning
that volunteer fatigue is perhaps the biggest challenge to the continuing functioning of our
community spaces. In these conditions, the provision of paid support can make a real difference in
terms of amplifying the work done by volunteers.
Funding: Although funds are available, the funding landscape is increasingly challenging, with more
competition for the limited available funds. GCSN members have expressed support for the
aspiration to look at collective funding bids for projects which benefit a number of community
venues and also further Community Action Plan aims. One area I’m hoping to build on in the coming
year is to look for opportunities for coordination of funding applications or submitting bids in
partnership – this will be discussed at our next GCSN meeting in March 24.
Looking forward: Opportunities
Signposting and support: Outside the network meetings and projects to benefit the wider
networks, I have worked with some groups on specific projects, helping to develop or looking over
funding bids pre-submission e.g. supporting the MUGA team in Dalry with the Asset Transfer
process and supporting the Crossmichael Community Trust with funding applications. I have also
signposted to organisations who are more appropriate to help with certain aspects, such as Third
Sector Dumfries and Galloway to look at issues with changes to constitutions, and would like to be
able to do more of this, time allowing.
Innovative thinking: I am also keen to support communities wishing to explore whether more can
be made of existing facilities, or whether there is scope for repurposing buildings. The Glenkens
Community Centre survey highlighted the possibility of a gym facility being created within the
Glenkens. A need for meeting spaces and bookable hot desking sites for home workers has also
been identified. I have also had meetings with a group who would like to use the refurbishment of
the Glenkens Community Centre as an opportunity to train local young people in eco-friendly
retrofitting, with the aspiration of creating a warmer, more welcoming, lower carbon community
building and helping to increase access to MCS-certified professionals in the local area.
Planning for sustainability: The GCSN’s work has from the outset been led by the priorities of its
members, and support for each community venue varies according to the aspirations and
circumstances of each member venue. The Community Action Plan includes an aspiration for a
sustainability plan to be completed for each community venue. I see this as potentially being
fulfilled by the ongoing work to support the committees both in general and with specific projects.
The Local Place Plan also offers an opportunity to formally recognise local support for community
assets and core organisations; this is already coming across strongly in the community engagement
events which have taken place in Dalry and which I think will be reflected across the Glenkens.
Business and investment planning: CAP Theme 2 also highlights the aspiration to develop a rolling
and long-term support and investment plan for halls and community spaces to ensure that they are
accessible by everyone. As an initial step I’ve pulled together some resources and done some draft
business plan templates on the intranet page and hope that we can build on this with any
committees looking for support. Over coming months, I intend to arrange a follow-up visit with all
member Halls accompanied by Helen Keron, GCAT Executive Manager, to direct upcoming work and
identify opportunities for further project working. However, it will be difficult to achieve concrete
gains on this in the current 1 day/week allocation.
Conclusion
In 2024, I am looking forward to continuing to work with the Hall committees to pursue their
ambitions as well as those in the Community Action Plan. Having spent a year developing really
positive relationships with many of them, based on support and delivery, we can now use this
second year to continue to encourage strong partnership working and delivery of CAP priorities.
I would like to thank all of the members of the Hall committees across the Glenkens for the huge
amount of voluntary effort they put into keeping all our Community Spaces thriving – the Glenkens
is much the stronger for them. It is a pleasure to work with them.
Becca Nelson (Glenkens CSN Facilitator), March 2024
Appendix 1: Comments from GCSN members on the usefulness of the network over the first
year of operation
The introduction of the Community Spaces Network from my initial, one to one, meeting with
Becca Nelson to the regular meetings of the Spaces Network have been constructive and
inclusive. I think everyone has found that by meeting on a regular basis much common ground has
been found by all the Community Venues issues facing all the community venue have been
discussed and I think the feeling that you are ‘not on your own’ is one of the main positives to
come out of the meeting and that Becca is able to take forward joint concerns and look for
solutions is of great benefit. The meetings have also given a the venues a chance of networking
which may not have been possible before and I know from Balmaclellan Hall the greater cooperation and joint working is of great benefit, especially when planning event programmes for the
individual venues.
Perhaps during the coming year it may be that the group can explore looking at available funding
not only for individual venues but also on a joint basis.
The GCSN, and in particular Becca, have been instrumental in the Crossmichael Community Trust’s
recent SPEN application for funding improvements to our village hall.
Our Trust did not know of this funding source so without Becca we would have missed out on the
opportunity of £94k of funding whether we are successful or not. At every stage Becca has been
helpful by drawing together outcomes from other projects in the Glenkens which are relevant to
our application. Furthermore, the monthly GCSN meetings have allowed us to discuss in person
with other groups in the area that are also applying. Although we are all local without these
meetings we would all still be working separately and not pooling our knowledge and resources as
we now are. Becca has brought a sense of community to those who are trying to create a better
community in their village. There is now a central resource area on the intranet which is a
reassuring starting point. Becca is extremely knowledgeable and approachable and is an absolute
asset to the Glenkens. It is essential that GCSN should continue.
Crossmichael Community Trust
From the perspective of LING, the GCSN has offered a most valuable addition to the resources
available and it deserves to remain as a forum for sharing amongst Glenkens halls. It has considered
topics of real and active concern - and led to positive outcomes. It is that which distinguishes it
from previous approaches.
Its success has rested upon the careful and sensitive attention given to it by Becca. Her personality
and professional competence have given the disparate players the confidence to participate with
enthusiasm.
I took on the role of chairperson of the Dalry Town Hall Management committee over three years
ago and from the outset found it quite daunting and time consuming as I had no previous
experience of managing a valued rural asset. I have the benefit of advice and help from the previous
chairperson but sometimes I thought that the problems that occurred were totally specific to the
Town Hall. Since attending the meetings of the GCSN headed up by Becca Nelson who is the
Glenkens Spaces Network Co Ordinator, I have come to value the support of other individuals and
realised we all have the same day to day hurdles to overcome. The opportunity to air my problems
and discuss any difficulties I had been experiencing has proved invaluable. Becca has become our
sounding block and any issues we have had, no matter how small such as Insurance or problems
with Wi FI connection or just how we can tackle the age-old problem of promoting and marketing
the different venues she has been able to take the pressure off and research and feedback her
findings. We all juggle our time and having Becca there to ease the burden and arrange for us to
meet any relevant individuals who can help give advice. I have found it good to be able to speak to
like-minded individuals to exchange ideas with. I would like to see the GCSN continue.
I wanted to extend my sincere appreciation for your outstanding work as our Community Spaces
Network officer. I wanted to express my gratitude for your invaluable contributions. Your
dedication and expertise have truly made a significant impact on our endeavours in the Glenkens
area. And your efforts have been instrumental in fostering collaboration and driving positive
outcomes in the community.
Having you on board has facilitated numerous positive outcomes for our community. One of the
most noteworthy aspects of your role has been your ability to foster collaboration and knowledgesharing among volunteers and local teams. The platform you've created for us to exchange ideas,
experiences, and challenges has been invaluable. Your efficiency, organization, and approachability
have significantly contributed to the success of our initiatives, making a noticeable difference in our
community.
You have been pivotal in the Dalry Community Council Local Place plans. Your skilful management
of consultations and engagements has ensured that community voices are heard and integrated
into strategic plans effectively. Moreover, your knack for collating information and has been
instrumental in driving progress. Additionally, I greatly appreciate how you meticulously gather and
assess all available information for our projects. Your ability to discern what crucial elements may
be missing and communicate this clearly and concisely has been invaluable in ensuring the
thoroughness and success of our endeavours.
Your comprehensive understanding of the various organizations in the Glenkens area has facilitated
a more cohesive community vision. Your honesty, responsiveness, and willingness to assist have
been invaluable assets to us all.
Looking ahead, I recognize the challenges of managing a growing workload. Considering the
expanding scope of projects and community needs, I believe it may be beneficial to explore options
for increasing your role or support, such as introducing a dedicated project development officer or
a funding specialist.
Once again, thank you for your dedication and contributions. Your work is truly appreciated, and I
look forward to continuing our collaboration for the betterment of the Glenkens community.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Glenkens Community Spaces Network Annual Report 2023
Description
An account of the resource
The Network’s purpose is to bring these voluntary committees together for peer support and to encourage partnership working across the Glenkens. This report summarises the work done to date on these priorities, and sets out plans for the final year of the currently-funded delivery phase.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_17
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Glenkens Community Spaces Network
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2023
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 1
CAP Theme 2
CAP Theme 4
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/621/240312_GH_Year1_Report_cover.jpg
f5f67871ab2208637f204238da7f4e77
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/621/240312_GH_Year_1_Report.pdf
4f316ad8acc102c5cb9de5fd561b27d8
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Glenkens Hub 2023 Report
February 2024
1. Overview of delivery
2. Introduction
3. Review of development and delivery in 2023
4. Additional identified needs
5. User data
6. Community engagement
7. Breakdown of time spent per task
8. Areas of potential development
9. Challenges and Opportunities
10. Conclusion
1. OVERVIEW OF DELIVERY
The Glenkens Hub was catalysed by the Glenkens & District Community Action Plan and was initially
conceived as an Events Calendar and sister project to the Glenkens Gazette. Like the Glenkens
Gazette, it is a GCAT project. The capital build and the first 2 years of delivery (to end 2024) has been
funded by the Glenkens and District Community Fund and the Galloway Glens Landscape
Partnership Scheme.
After initial development work through 2022 by Sarah Ade, including the capital build of the website
by Greater Govanhill and volunteer work by Oli Sturm to render the Gazette archive searchable, Gail
Challis started in post as Glenkens Hub Editor in January 2023.
Since then, she has carried out major development work on the website, as detailed below. In one
year, it has gone from the initial concept to an invaluable community resource.
Some of the most useful aspects of the website to date include:
Regular / ad hoc Events Calendars
Promotion of local Job / Volunteering opportunities
A permanent home for Glenkens-wide resources, from the Galloway Glens legacy work to
copyright-free photos to Reports and Studies.
It has also been a key resource for many partnership projects over the year, including the Glenkens
Food Month, the Glenkens Community Spaces Network and the Loch Ken Trust Resilience project.
It brings our communities together and strengthens their sustainability, in particular by the recent
grouping of facilities on a village-by-village basis. It supports local businesses through promotion and
news stories.
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
It also allows us to promote ourselves as an effective and organised community to regional and
national stakeholders.
The associated Facebook and Instagram channels were launched in summer 2023, which bring news
stories and events directly to people’s phones. This will have had a big effect in making people feel
more connected to their communities.
2. INTRODUCTION
A full first-year review of the Glenkens Hub website will take place in April 2024 in order to:
gauge community user views on the Hub
determine level of Hub usage by targeted user groups
determine extent to which the Hub is meeting its aims
make improvements to layout / pages as necessary
plan development for the next 3 years
This report looks at development of the site to date and identifies potential area for development in
the next year.
3. REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY IN 2023
Ideas and requests from the CAP were compiled into the Functional Requirement Specification (FRS)
used in the initial development phases. Progress against that FRS as at January 2024 was as follows:
Identified
need
Events
calendar
1
Specification1
Achieved / Reason for delay
crowd sourced
Calendar of weekly and monthly/one-off
with minimal
activities.
moderator /
Average of
admin input, easy
◦ 37.4 events per month across
to navigate,
2023 (total 614)
◦ 37 events per week
Crowdsourced from Facebook, Google
submission form and direct contact.
Not self-service due to SquareSpace
limitations.
auto-linked to
social media
Facebook and Instagram set up
Feeds on front page
News and events directly shared to
Facebook.
able to export
pdfs of specific
listings (eg
activities for
children in
Balmaclellan in
June)
Not possible via SquareSpace.
Search What’s On page set up to allow
filtering events on location and type
Newsletter (every 2 months) rounds up
forthcoming events and is printable from
email distribution or downloaded from
Hub.
Plan for
development
Investigate
options for better
user interaction.
From initial tender process documentation.
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
searchable
(price, location,
date, age-range)
Search What’s On allows filtering of
events on tags (age-range, type of event)
and category (venue and location).
Attractions
crowd sourced - Things to See and Do page
things to see &
31 entries
do; up to an
Focussed on Glenkens at present.
hour's drive away
– include name
of place, brief
description,
photo, web link
News
moderated, with
posts archive (by
date – 2022 / 23,
etc) or just
searchable
Extend scope to
include “up to an
hour’s drive
away”.
Encourage
community
submissions to
help populate the
data.
News page with 91 articles
Most submitted by email and admin
uploaded submissions
Archived by date and searchable by tags
(topics) and category (location).
Trades listings local directory
(producers and
services)
Local Directory page
93 local businesses added
22 food and drink producers / vendors /
establishments
supported Glenkens Food month
campaign
Focus on local
businesses to
increase
coverage and
promote eg local
food movement
Community
services
local doctors
surgery, shop
opening times,
cafes, local
organisations,
links to websites
for these
Shop Local
Food & Drink
Health, Welfare & Advice
Community Directory
Community Groups (29)
Community Councils (8)
Community Spaces (28)
Potential for
Community
Council agendas
to be advertised
and minutes
stored on Hub.
Transport
car share / lift
share
Transport page
Public Transport (Traveline
Scotland embed, Galloway
Community Transport timetables,
link to DGC bus timetables).
Road Travel (Liftshare, AA Route
Planner, D&GVOST Twitter
embed, Gritter Tracker, filling
stations, electric car charging
points, Report a pothole link,
Glenkens Ebike Club link
Jobs &
Volunteering
Jobs and Volunteering section
36 jobs and
9 volunteering opportunities
advertised
Volunteering
Volunteers’ Week 2023 promoted
Housing
Housing page
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
Freecycle
Glenkens
Facebook free /
wanted page
This already exists The Glenkens in D&G
– For Sale/Free & Wants Group
promoted on Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
page
External Links weather, bus
See other sections for details
timetables, VOST
(road closures /
storm warnings),
GCT, D&G
Council
Searchable
Gazette
archive
Calameo
page for
current issue
Started process of adding past articles to
Hub, tagged and categorised for easy
searching
better readable
format than
archive format
To continue to be
progressed
Glenkens Gazette page with Calameo
embed of past issues, link to Oliver
Sturm’s archive and list of where to get
paper copies
Bulletin board eg missing pets,
(moderated) childminders,
room to rent;
each post timelimited
Community Noticeboard
11 entries received
Submissions promoted of Facebook.
Transfer of
Galloway
Glens
resources
onto website
Galloway Glens overview page
33 individual pages focussing on
different topics
Glenkens Gallery entries
136 documents uploaded
On-going addition
of photo albums
eg Balmaclellan
Mirror
Transfer of
Gazette
archive local
history /
interest
articles onto
website
History & Heritage page
Visit, Read, Watch, Get Involved
sections
On-going addition
of past articles
from Glenkens
Gazette issues
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
4. ADDITIONAL IDENTIFIED NEEDS
The following items were added to the Hub as the need for them emerged from users during 2023:
Identified need
Purpose
Achieved / Reason for delay
Consultations,
Bring together issues in
Planning and Local one place with links to
Place Plans
how to get involved
Consultations, Planning and
Local Place Plans
Schools and Early
Learning
Sign-posting to local
schools, ELCs, play
groups and youth groups
Education
Includes ongoing
consultations where
available
Communities
round-up
Collate information
Glenkens Communities
spread across
Community Council,
Community Group and
Community Spaces page
plus community centred
information from Good to
Know leaflet
Land Use
Page to highlight land
use issues
Will incorporate
resilience
information once
collated.
Land Use
includes A Vision
for Land Use in the
Glenkens link
Groups and
organisations
Articles esp. from
Gazette issue 130
Consultations
Libraries and
Courses
Libraries and Courses
including
Balmaclellan
Library and Sandy
Gordon Memorial
Collection
Local Funders
Local Funders
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
Plan for
development
V4 240312
5. USER DATA
It was decided not to activate user tracking on the website in the first instance to avoid putting off
potential users to the new site with a Cookie Notice. Therefore the number of Hub page visits and
page views in the table below is somewhat inaccurate. It is planned to activate the tracking in April
2024, during the community survey period, with an appropriate Cookie Notice in order to get better
data on numbers of individuals using the Hub.
Social Media
@16/1/24
Facebook Followers
342
Instagram Followers
79
In last 90 days
Facebook reach
8075
2.8K
Instagram reach
145
70
16/01/2024
As % of Glenkens Area
population
50
1.31%
Hub Users
Newsletter subscribers
1 April 23 – 16 Jan 24
Page visits (browsing session)
131K
Page views (total number of page requests)
34753
Top pages – Home,
Calendar, Glenkens Gazette,
News, Building Biographies,
Food Month, Jobs and
volunteering
42
1.10%
Users submitting information (excluding
GCAT staff)
Google Search performance
In last 90 days
Total clicks (number of times a users clicked
through to the Hub from a Google search)
844
Total impressions (number of times a users
see a link to the Hub in search results)
22.5K
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
6. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Information from the community is directly
and indirectly sourced:
Directly community sourced
◦ email
◦ Google form
◦ by social media direct
message
Indirectly community sourced
◦ Via social media (specifically
Facebook)
◦ Via TicketSource
Of the community sourced information on the Hub in 2023, approximately three quarters referred to
events (608), followed by News articles (91).
The community’s most used submission method for each type of content is shown in the graph below.
Most submission are via email or via
social media, except for Volunteer
Opportunities and Community Notices.
However, these represent a very small
number of total submissions, 9 in each
case.
It has not been possible to differentiate
between those received by email (directly
community sourced) and those copied
from Facebook (indirectly community
sourced, without the original poster’s
involvement), as tracking this would have
added an additional admin burden.
However, rough calculation indicates that it is mostly community events which are copied from
Facebook, while most News and Job Adverts are submitted by email. The data from Google form
submissions is automatically collated by Google without additional admin effort.
By continuing to offer a range of ways to engage with the Hub, it is hoped that most people will be
able to use their preferred method of sending information to the Hub. Proactively seeking community
events on social media and TicketSource should help prevent duplication of volunteer effort and make
sure the maximum amount of content is available on the Hub for the community.
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
7. BREAKDOWN OF TIME SPENT PER TASK
The time spent on Glenkens Hub tasks was collated for 2023 both pre and post-launch.
As expected, the time spent
on Development (dark green)
was significantly higher prelaunch in April, while
Facebook (yellow) and
Instagram (orange) did not
involve many hours until
post-launch.
In the last few months of the
year, website additions
(navy) and Facebook were
the predominant activities,
followed by Writing Articles
(light green) and
Development.
Excluding the pre-launch period, the time spent per task is as per Chart 4.
While website additions is
the predominant task
(averaging 30 hours per
month), Facebook time
(which includes indirectly
sourcing Hub content) has
increased to around 9 hours
per month.
September’s increased website additions and lack of development and research can be attributed to
the increased number of community events additions due to Glenkens Food Month and last minute
Galloway Glens additions.
It is hoped that a balance can be achieved between continuing to source and supply time-critical
information, while allowing time for:
1. research and development to keep the Hub fresh;
2. areas of potential development (see section 8).
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
8. AREAS OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Outstanding areas from the Functional Requirement Specification (FRS) are as follows:
Identified need
Plan for development
Events calendar
Investigate options for better user interaction.
Attractions
Extend scope to include “up to an hour’s drive away”.
Encourage community submissions to help populate the data.
Trades listings
Focus on local businesses to increase coverage and promote eg local
food movement
Community services
Potential for Community Council agendas to be advertised and
minutes stored on Hub.
Transfer of Galloway Glens On-going addition of photo albums eg Balmaclellan Mirror
resources onto website
Links for You Tube videos (144)
Transfer of Gazette archive On-going addition of past articles from Glenkens Gazette issues
local history / interest
Consolidation of Gazette archive data
articles onto website and
searchable Gazette
archive
In addition, the Glenkens Hub Survey planned for April 2024 will be used to identify areas where the
community feels there could be improvement and to help decide on the prioritisation of the above
areas.
9. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Challenges
The main challenge associated with the Glenkens Hub is keeping the workload and community
expectations linked to the funded time available. It has been as successful as it has through 2023
through a huge amount of volunteer effort by Gail in addition to her paid hours, which we are most
grateful for. Looking forward, we need to find a sustainable model whereby the hours required are
manageable and also funded.
There are also technical challenges due to the limitations of the Square Space platform. Other
options will be investigated through 2024, as time allows.
Opportunities
Monetising the value of the Hub. We see opportunities to work with larger businesses in the area to
help them see the value of the Hub to their business. Through sponsorship or adverts, this could be a
revenue stream that could aid the challenges above. However, it requires an additional investment of
time to make it happen, which is not easy to find.
Getting the Gazette onto the Hub. It would be fantastic to have all Gazette articles as News stories
on the Glenkens Hub and website, but this is too time intensive at present. It could be a volunteer
project if anyone was interested.
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
Community Council hosting. Some CCs are approaching the Hub with a view to the Hub hosting
their Minutes and perhaps even replacing their village websites. This will be facilitated wherever
possible, on the proviso that it comes at Community Council request and is not a take-over bid by the
Glenkens Hub!
Attracting working families to the area. If funding can be found, we would like to use the Hub to
explicitly try and attract working families to come to the Glenkens, by highlighting what jobs and
facilities are available here. This is of course fully aligned with CAP Theme 3, An Economically
Flourishing Community.
10. CONCLUSION
The Glenkens Hub has rapidly established itself as a most valuable addition to the communities of the
Glenkens. It brings them together, hosts their resources and promotes partnership working. The
scope for evolution and optimisation is almost boundless but will need to be constrained by available
funds and resources. Prioritisation through 2024 will be required.
Thank you to the many people who have made the Glenkens Hub such a success:
The Gazette Steering Committee of Mike Brown, Nigel Martin and Gill Warnock.
Oli Sturm for his work on the Gazette Archive.
All the many contributors and readers.
Sarah Ade for her support of the Hub through her work on the Glenkens Gazette.
Gail Challis for her huge commitment to a fantastic community resource.
February 2024
Glenkens Hub Development Plan February 2024
V4 240312
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Glenkens Hub 2023 Report
Description
An account of the resource
The 2023 Annual Report sets out its delivery over the year and the plans for the evolution of the site in 2024 and beyond.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_18
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Glenkens Hub
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2023
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 1
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/622/ParticipatoryMonitoring_of_LandUse_in_the_Glenkens_cover.jpg
fcfdb374df14fca00a1e44393baf74c2
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/622/Participatory_Monitoring_of_Land_Use_in_the_Glenkens_PUBLIC.pdf
aea35515a67c24c9cfa0ff618524f9ac
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Participatory Monitoring of Land Use in the Glenkens
Description
An account of the resource
Dalry Community Council with GCAT commissioned three complementary reports studying Land Use and Local Place Planning in the Glenkens. The studies were funded by SoSE and Nature Scot, to set out the next steps required to embed land use considerations in the Glenkens into the medium term.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_19
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Dalry Community Council, GCAT
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
land use
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/623/GK_LUF_FeasibilityStudy_final_for_SoSE_cover.jpg
d3559f0de88dd48bc8f985e4683358cb
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/623/GK_LUF_feasibility_study_final_for_SoSE_revised_2024-04-30.pdf
12267d69fffb2f85b1cdc5a2f862ea29
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Feasibility Study
into the creation of a
Land Use Forum in the
Glenkens
Dr Stephen Connelly
March 2024
Produced for: Dalry Community Council & Glenkens Community & Arts Trust
Supported by: South of Scotland Enterprise and NatureScot
St. John’s Town of
Dalry Community
Council
Contents
Summary
i
Acknowledgements
iii
Disclaimer
iii
About the author
iii
List of acronyms
iv
§1: Introduction
1
§2: Land use and community engagement: the current situation
4
What is the vision for land use in Glenkens?
A note on ‘community’
What the Vision says about a “Land Use Forum”
4
4
5
What is driving land use change in the Glenkens?
6
What are the current opportunities for community input?
The planning system
Regional Land Use Frameworks
Community councils (CCs) and the representative democratic system
The Glenkens and District Community Action Plan (CAP)
Opportunities for influence with respect to the main land use changes
10
10
12
13
13
14
Summary
18
§3: Achieving change
18
Mechanisms for change
18
To Plan or not to Plan?
20
The importance of values, beliefs and attitudes
21
Resourcing change
22
§4: Options for taking forward the Vision
24
§5: Recommendations for action
32
A Glenkens Land Use Network
A Land Use and Resource Map
Linking the Network into local governance
32
34
36
Implications for other bodies
36
§6: Conclusions
39
Appendix 1: A Vision for Land Use in Glenkens
41
Appendix 2: List of interviewees
45
i
Summary
This feasibility study provides recommendations and guidance on how the potential of the
Vision for Land Use in the Glenkens could be realised. In 2023 the communities of the
Glenkens adopted this Vision, which sets out their aspirations for creating a landscape which
is environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable, where all voices are heard,
respected, and valued, and where empowered communities have more control over the
market and policy forces which currently shape the use of land. The goal is that land use
activities in the Glenkens will enhance local climate and environmental resilience,
biodiversity and thriving communities. This is fully aligned with government priorities and
policies, at local authority, regional and national level.
The study was commissioned by two key local organisations, the St John’s Town of Dalry
Community Council and the Glenkens Community & Arts Trust, with support from South of
Scotland Enterprise and NatureScot. The report is based principally on 22 interviews with
people from local communities and governmental, private and third sector organisations
which have a stake in land use in the Glenkens. Initial recommendations derived from these
interviews were discussed at a final workshop with representatives of forestry, farming,
biodiversity and community interests, and their feedback was incorporated into this report.
This material was supported by examination of local authority, regional and national policy
documents, and of articles in the local press.
The key recommendations are:
A) Establishing a Glenkens Land Use Network with a primary aim of finding win-win
solutions to land use issues in the sub-catchment. This would combine:
•
ad hoc responses to emerging land use issues (including mediation over contentious
proposals) and opportunities for collaborative working;
with
•
proactively addressing sectoral issues (such as tourism, active travel, water
management) and drawing up thematic action plans to direct investment and activity
to support positive land-use based change.
The Network would also advocate for policy change on the basis of its work at local, regional
and national levels.
The Network would be a flexible group of stakeholders signed up to common broad aims,
steered by a small stakeholder group, and facilitated and supported by paid staff.
B) Producing a Land Use and Resource Map of the Glenkens. This would be a first activity for
the Network. The Map would bring together as much biophysical, socio-economic and
cultural information about land use and resources in the Glenkens as possible, drawing on
professional and community sources, in a way which is readily usable and can be maintained
with limited resources. It would be a resource to support many different activities around
i
land use in the Glenkens, including providing a basis for future Glenkens-scale land use
planning.
The headline cost for A and B would be £110,000 for a two year pilot project. This period
would allow for the completion of the Map and for the Network to have established itself as
a productive partner addressing land use issues, with the ability then to seek ongoing
funding.
The recommendations have been devised to mesh with and support other policy and
government initiatives in the Glenkens. The Network and Map could nest within the Regional
Land Use Partnership and Framework, collectively making a significant contribution to
developing an approach to sub-catchment planning, and contributing to other regional
development initiatives, including future natural capital investment. The approach also
forms a bridge between other initiatives empowering rural communities, linking the placebased approach of the Local Place Plans with the development aspirations set out for the
Glenkens as a whole in the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan.
The feasibility of the recommendations is ensured by an approach to stakeholder processes
which recognises the reality of existing constraints, and proposes solutions which will work
within these and attempt to overcome them. The principal constraints are:
•
•
•
•
the absence of effective statutory routes for community engagement in land use
planning
serious resource constraints on all stakeholders
divisions between stakeholders over appropriate and desirable ways forward; and
a dynamic and unpredictably evolving governance/policy environment.
This proposal will enable progress to be made through collaborative working to overcome
the statutory weakness, in a resource efficient manner. The divisions are mitigated by
emphasising a positive approach of seeking win-win solutions and sharing information in the
Map, using these processes to build trust and mutual respect, with the aspiration of moving
towards the more challenging aspects of land use planning as a potential future step. This
flexible, stepwise approach will also enable the Network to be agile in its responses to the
changing policy environment.
Overall, the collaborative approach, working through an expanding partnership between the
Glenkens communities and state, private and third sector organisations, would continue the
structured sequence of development planning taking place in the Glenkens over the past
few years. Following on from the creation of the Community Action Plan and its associated
Vision for Land Use, this feasibility study sets out practical actions to enable the aspirations
of the communities to be realised. Its focus is on the continued empowerment of the
Glenkens communities, while at the same time supporting regional and national land use
planning and development initiatives, and providing a template and learning resource for
other communities with similar aspirations.
ii
Acknowledgements
I am very grateful to the St John’s Town of Dalry Community Council (DCC) and Glenkens
Community & Arts Trust for the opportunity to carry out this study, and particularly to the
steering group of Jenna Cains (DCC), Helen Keron (GCAT) and Morag Paterson (DCC) for their
advice and guidance. Thanks also to Becca Nelson for her collaboration on the overlaps
between this study and her parallel project on developing Local Place Plans. The support of
South of Scotland Enterprise and NatureScot is gratefully acknowledged.
I am hugely indebted to the participants in the study, who gave their time so generously to
speak openly to an unknown researcher. I hope that the study meets their expectations and
that their faith that their participation will be worthwhile is justified, as the Vision for Land
Use in the Glenkens is taken forward.
Disclaimer
To make this study as useful as possible, participants were interviewed with the guarantee of
confidentiality and anonymity so that they could speak freely. In consequence, their voices
are absent from the report, and personal sources of information and perspectives are
unattributed. I endeavoured to be unbiased in how I engaged with all participants, and have
tried my best to chart a course though complex and contested issues, which draws fairly on
every participant’s viewpoint. This is not a report of what people told me: it presents my
analysis of those ideas, supplemented by wider reading, tempered by discussion with the
Steering Group and tested through the later interviews and a workshop.
About the author
I moved to St John’s Town of Dalry in August 2023 to work as a freelance consultant, building
on two previous careers. The first was in rural development in the global South, following an
MSc in “Forestry and its Relation to Land Use”. The second was as an academic, starting with
a PhD on public involvement in local sustainable development, and specialising in
researching and teaching environmental policy, sustainable development, and local
democracy. This led me into working alongside voluntary and statutory organisations to
advise on stakeholder engagement and to evaluate their work. I have also served as a
trustee for environmental and educational non-governmental organisations, and as a
director of a social enterprise.
iii
List of acronyms
CAP ................................... Community Action Plan (specifically the Glenkens and District CAP)
CAPSG............................................................................ Community Action Plan Steering Group
CC .................................................................................................................. Community Council
DCC ...................................................................... (St John’s Town of) Dalry Community Council1
DGC ................................... Dumfries & Galloway Council (the local authority for the Glenkens)
EIA ......................................................................................... Environmental Impact Assessment
FTE ................................................................................... Full-time equivalent (worker or salary)
GCAT ....................................................................................... Glenkens Community & Arts Trust
GDT .................................................................................................... Glenkens and District Trust
LBAP .............................................................................................. Local Biodiversity Action Plan
LDP ......................................................................................................... Local Development Plan
LPA ......................................................................................................... Local Planning Authority
NPF4 ........................................................................... (Scottish) National Planning Framework 4
RES.................................................................................................... Regional Economic Strategy
RLUF ................................................................................ (draft) Regional Land Use Framework2
RLUP ............................................................................................ Regional Land Use Partnership
RSS ......................................................................................................... Regional Spatial Strategy
SF ........................................................................................................................ Scottish Forestry
SOSE ................................................................................................South of Scotland Enterprise
SPG ....................................................................Supplementary Planning Guidance (to the LDP)
UKFS ......................................................................................... United Kingdom Forest Standard
1 ‘St John’s Town of Dalry’ is the full name of the settlement in the Glenkens, locally referred to as ‘Dalry’.
2 Where the acronym refers to the South of Scotland RLUF document (rather than the general programme), the
reference is to the consultation draft, produced in November 2023.
iv
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
§1: Introduction
In 2023 the communities of the Glenkens 3 adopted a Vision for Land Use in the Glenkens4
(the Vision or Land Use Vision for short) which set out their aspirations for creating a
“balance in land use where all voices are heard, respected and valued”. Its aim is a landscape
which is more truly sustainable – environmentally, socially, economically – with empowered
communities who have more control over the externally-driven market and policy forces
which currently shape the use of land. The goal is that land use activities in the Glenkens will
enhance local climate and environmental resilience, biodiversity and thriving communities,
and support re-population. To achieve this, the Vision anticipates that land use planning will
be carried out at the landscape scale, lying between the detail of individual settlements and
the generalities of regional planning.
This report’s overarching purpose is to provide guidance on how the potential of the Vision
could be realised. A local Land Use Forum is proposed in the Vision. This was envisaged to be
an inclusive body which would build bridges between sectors and provide a vehicle through
which the communities could advocate, support projects and organisations, network, raise
awareness, create positive actions, and research and learn. However, this study did not take
for granted that such a Forum, and/or a single ‘Glenkens Land Use Plan’, would be the most
appropriate ways forward. Instead it evaluated a number of options, and this report
recommends a pragmatic, feasible, but ambitious, way to take the next steps on the journey
started by the Vision.
Throughout, the study has paid attention to the complexity of government policies and
structures which affect the area. The most relevant is the Regional Land Use Framework5
(RLUF), with its commitments to national (i.e. Scottish) policies which promote sustainable
land use planning, community empowerment and wealth building, and a just transition to
net zero. It also aligns regional policy with national targets on forestry and renewable energy
expansion. However, other initiatives overlap very significantly with the RLUF process,
sharing overall goals but rooted in different organisations and policies. The most significant
of these are Local Place Planning (from the statutory planning system), Community Action
Planning (from the community empowerment agenda) and NatureScot and Heritage
Environment Scotland’s joint approach to ‘people, place and landscape’ 6, particularly
NatureScot’s “Community Engagement in Landscape Change” project. Along with other
3 ‘The Glenkens’ is a collective name for the settlements in the valley of the Water of Ken, in the traditional
county of Kirkcudbrightshire, administered by Dumfries & Galloway Council.
4 The complete text of the Vision is given in Appendix 1. More details can be found at
https://glenkens.scot/land-use
5 The RLUF is being developed under the oversight of the Regional Land use Partnership (RLUP). See
https://www.southofscotlandenterprise.com/RLUP; the consultation draft of the RLUF is at
https://sosrep.dumgal.gov.uk/media/28720/RLUF-Consultation-Draft/pdf/RLUF-Consultation-Draft.pdf. This
was the current, most up to date version available at the time of writing (March 2024).
6This is set out in the NatureScot and Historic Environment Scotland joint position statement People, Place, and
Landscape (https://www.historicenvironment.scot/archives-andresearch/publications/publication/?publicationId=13053e28-f83a-464d-90d9-aae100f92c3b).
1
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
developments in policy and market conditions, these evolving processes create a dynamic
environment within which the Vision will be realised.
The study was commissioned by two key local organisations, the St John’s Town of Dalry
Community Council (DCC) and the Glenkens Community &Arts Trust (GCAT), with funding
from South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE). It is one of three projects jointly funded by SOSE
and NatureScot in late 2023 and early 2024, which collectively aim to advance the
community’s aspirations around balanced land use in the Glenkens. The projects were
carried out by individual consultants, coordinated by a Steering Group comprising
representatives from DCC and GCAT. GCAT’s interest in this project comes from its mandate
to lead on the delivery of the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan and the
appended Land Use Vision; Dalry CC’s from the concern of its constituents about the rate
and manner of land use change in their parish.
This report is based principally on interviews with 22 individuals, carried out between
December 2023 and March 2024. They were drawn from local communities and the
government, private and third sector organisations which affect land use in the Glenkens7.
They were chosen either as key players in their own right (e.g. senior staff from forestry
organisations) or as members of important stakeholder groups (e.g. farmers). While not
intended to be statistically representative, the study aimed to gain as broad a view as
possible of the issues. In particular it tried to include the views of people and organisations
outside the groups known to strongly support community-based land use planning8, since
the feasibility of any initiative depends partly on it being acceptable and attractive to those
not already committed. The analysis and recommendations derived from these interviews –
to develop a map of environmental resources and other land use issues in the Glenkens and
establish a network to take forward the Vision - were discussed at a workshop at the end of
the project. The workshop participants included representatives of forestry, farming,
biodiversity and community interests, and their feedback has been incorporated into this
report. This material was supported by examination of local authority, regional and national
policy documents, and of articles in the local press, in particular the Glenkens Gazette9.
The study assumes that people matter. Developing a successful Forum (or any alternative
process) depends on the attitudes and actions of real people with individual and collective
histories, understandings, interests, emotions, and needs. In such a small community10, with
a history of activism around sustainable development and land use issues, historical
relationships are important and have to be (to an extent) taken into account in designing an
enduring approach to land use. (At the same time, such an approach cannot be built around
individuals, but must be able to survive if key people leave.) Policy makers and other
stakeholders are also human, and – within the limits set by regulations and formal policy –
7An anonymised list of interviewees is given in Appendix 2.
8 Unfortunately within the time available it was not possible to interview any large landowners: the three
interviewed farmers were owners of medium to small farms.
9See https://glenkens.scot/glenkens-gazette.
10 The 2018 population of the Glenkens was 3715 (Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, p. 6 at
https://www.glenkenstrust.org.uk/community-action-plan).
2
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
bring their personal motivations and understanding to how they implement policy and
engage with other stakeholders, including the public.
The Glenkens’ history of activism is a tremendous strength, and the area has an enviable
wealth of experience and community organisations, with a track record of developing its
own agenda and engaging with external bodies to pilot new initiatives. This history also
comes with risks. Taking the Vision forward should learn from and build on past experience,
and respect the fact that a great deal of consultation has left some people understandably
wary of repeating similar processes without obvious practical effects. The weariness and
cynicism mentioned by some interviewees, and the rejection by all of them of the idea of a
Forum as simply ‘a talking shop’, have been taken account of in carrying out of this study and
in what is proposed.
The body of this report has three sections. In §2 the Vision is briefly introduced along with
the context of land use change in the Glenkens, followed by a description of existing
opportunities for local input into decision making. §3 discusses important considerations
when trying to achieve change, before §4 presents a structured evaluation of a set of
options, ranging from ‘do nothing new’ to setting up an independent Forum. §5 draws on
this analysis to put forward recommendations for the next steps towards realising the Land
Use Vision: the establishment of a Land Use Network which will coordinate the production
of a Land Use Map of the Glenkens. It also discusses the implications of these
recommendations for other organisations.
3
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
§2: Land use and community engagement: the current situation
What is the vision for land use in Glenkens?
Overall, the Vision is quite a radical document, setting out a vision for sustainable rural
development founded in a balance between different land uses and stakeholder interests,
and contrasting these sharply with the present situation and direction of travel. It places this
in the context of an active and well-organised community (see text box) which is seeing very
rapid land use change, driven by forces rooted outside the area and which is largely
extractive in economic terms. The Vision’s goals are well-aligned with current progressive
thinking across the economic,
environmental,
social
and A note on ‘community’
democratic
dimensions
of Although it was developed through an inclusive stakeholder
sustainability, as reflected to a process, the Vision’s position on what sustainable rural
great extent in current Scottish development should be is not shared by everyone living and
working in the Glenkens, and who might therefore count as ‘the
Government policy.
local community’. There are differences in viewpoints, interests
The Vision sets out goals at and understandings of matters of fact. This is absolutely normal
local, regional and national in democratic policy processes, and means that generalisations
scales, including changes in land about ‘the community’ have to be treated carefully. In this
use and land use decision section ‘community’ is used to reflect the Vision’s own language;
elsewhere ‘communities’ is used to gently draw attention to the
making, broader outcomes complexity of the situation. Further discussion is beyond the
(dependent on land use) around scope of this study, but language does matter: it is important in
economy
and
community practice to neither reinforce an unhelpful distinction between
wellbeing, and changes in policy ‘the community’ and ‘others’, nor annoy people by ignoring their
and governance which would differences. While there is value in seeing the people of the
Glenkens positively as ‘a community’, it is also vital to recognise
enable these, including stronger
that – as with any community - there are significant differences
enforcement of existing policies within it.
and plans. It also has goals
which diverge from broad national policies – in particular around the need for forestry
expansion – where these are seen to be implemented in ways which work against other
policy goals, such as those promoting sustainable rural economies and biodiversity
conservation. This reflects the regional situation, where there
is a good level of congruence between local people’s perceptions of the key land use
changes required and the national policy objectives. However, there are also clear
differences. There was a strong preference from stakeholders for a higher proportion
of native woodland and for the extent and design of commercial forestry to be more
sensitive to local concerns. Both renewable energy and afforestation had potential to
generate more local benefits which were currently being missed. The need to better
integrate farming and forestry was voiced by many, as was the need to seek
increased gains for nature and carbon adaptation and sequestration from future
developments. (Draft RLUF p. 33)
4
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
The creation of the Vision was initiated through a discussion programme run by external
facilitators (the Social Enterprise Academy11) on behalf of the Scottish Government in
support of the Regional Land Use Partnership (RLUP) pilot projects. The Glenkens
Community & Arts Trust (GCAT, effectively the Glenkens’ development trust and main
community anchor organisation) then steered the writing of a draft. This was discussed with
external stakeholders (several of whom were interviewed for this study) and redrafted for a
final round of public consultation. The final version was adopted formally as an appendix to
the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan (CAP) in late 2023. Within the Glenkens the
CAP, and therefore the Vision, is the principal guiding document for investment of
community benefit funds from local wind farms12 along with other funding. In policy terms,
the CAP links the Vision to ‘community planning’ (deriving from the Community
Empowerment (Scotland) Act (2015)) alongside its link to regional land use planning
(through the RLUF). In principle it can therefore be expected to play a role in shaping local
government and other service provision.
What the Vision says about a “Land Use Forum”
One of the ‘local actions’ proposed in the Vision is to establish “a local Land Use Forum that
is inclusive of all stakeholders and designed to narrow the gap between sectors” (Vision, §3
local b) with roles including: advocacy; support for local projects and organisations being
consulted on land use proposals; networking; awareness raising over issues and
consultations; creating ‘positive actions’ with landowners; and researching and learning
(including about successful actions in other places). The Vision also sees a national (and
implicitly regional) role for a Forum as a vehicle for enhancing community engagement in
policy making beyond consultation. It envisages this role as a “strategic partner for
representing Glenkens and district issues” through which to “effect change through robust
channels that all communities can access” (Vision, §3 national c).
This is a bold vision with a broad set of goals, and while all of these are important and
mutually supportive, it is possible that different structures and processes might be better at
achieving some than others. The Vision does not spell out in any detail what a ‘Forum’ would
look like, and it may be that a single organisation is not the best approach to addressing all
of these goals effectively and simultaneously. Facilitating genuine dialogue seems essential,
given the problems of a lack of communication as equals between communities and other
stakeholders, and of non-coordination between different land use policies and actions.
However, an inclusive, all-the-stakeholders-round-the-table approach may not be the best
way to achieve this. Although inclusive partnership working has become the go-to approach
for addressing complex governance issues in the past 25-30 years, it is not always
appropriate. Interviewees were generally ambivalent about a single Forum, recognising the
need to bring people together, but also the risk of creating an ineffective and wasteful
‘talking shop’.
See 11https://socialenterprise.academy/
12 In early 2024 this funding amounted to over £300,000 each year, with distribution decided by the Glenkens
and District Trust (GDT; https://www.glenkenstrust.org.uk ).
5
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Consequently, reflecting the community’s aspirations as set out in the Vision, this study set
out from the following observations:
•
•
•
•
the status quo is not sustainable. Even if in the short term it works for some
stakeholders, in the medium and longer term there are physical and policy and market
changes happening which need some kind of strategic and collective response;
whatever is established, it must enable action: it must not be simply a ‘talking shop’ or,
worse, exacerbate existing tensions and conflicts over land use;
the range of functions set out in Vision may not be most effectively delivered by a
single body; and
the process of achieving the Vision’s potential will take time and require a
developmental approach – not everything can or should be attempted at once.
What is driving land use change in the Glenkens?
The significant land use changes in the Glenkens have been well described elsewhere,
including in the Vision and the draft RLUF. While the impacts, inevitability and desirability of
these are all contested within and outside the communities of the Glenkens, they are (in
brief and simplified):
•
•
•
expanding areas of commercial coniferous forestry (dominated by Sitka spruce) at the
expense of farmland and peatland
intensification of agriculture
increasing numbers of wind farms13.
The interviewees broadly recognised that land use change is inevitable and constant – none
of them expressed the view that the landscape should stay exactly as it is. (Some did
attribute this view to other Glenkens residents, negatively associating it with a lack of
realism, particularly on the part of incomers who neither make a living from the land, nor
understand how rural economies and societies function.) What concerns many people is the
rapidity of the changes, and the emotional sense of loss of valued places and landscapes,
linked to broader, more objective concerns about socio-economic change and the climate
and biodiversity emergencies14. These are heightened by the sense that much (though not
all) of the change is driven by external forces which the communities are unable to
influence, and currently seem unstoppable.
13 This was less often mentioned by interviewees, other than in connection with the impacts and management
of the community benefit funds. It is clear from other sources, though, that there is both significant resistance
to and support for the construction of more wind farms within the Glenkens.
14 Note that there is absolutely no judgment implied by the use of ‘emotional’ and ‘objective’. The author does
not subscribe to the views that policy making is or can be entirely rational, that emotional responses are
unhelpful, or that expert science has a higher value than laypeople’s responses. All policy making and
governance inescapably involves a mix of subjective and objective factors, as well as both expert and lay
knowledge.
6
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
The drivers of these changes come from policy and market forces, as set out in Table 1
below.
Table 1: drivers of land use change in the Glenkens
Sector
Policy drivers
Forestry
National policy targets for tree planting
as a response to the climate emergency
and the UK’s dependence on timber
imports, and the identification of
Dumfries & Galloway as a suitable region
for forestry expansion.
Market drivers
A buoyant domestic timber market.
The emergence of a carbon market
creating additional income for forestry.
Appreciating land value.
Agriculture
Agricultural subsidies which currently
still prioritise food production over other
ecosystem services.
The generally poor economic returns
from farming, pushing intensification in
the search for higher productivity, and
conversion to forestry.
Energy
National policy supporting onshore wind
generation as a response to the climate
emergency and the drive to ‘net zero’.
The increasing profitability of wind
generation, driven in part by
technological development including the
increasing size of turbines.
These drivers operate in the broader context of a set of factors which challenge effective
community engagement in land use decision making: a very centralised state, opaque and
unequal land holding, the autonomy of land managers, and limited opportunities for
community involvement in land use decision making (see below).
At the same time, alternative land use changes are widely discussed which address the
negative impacts, while in principle achieving the same policy goals:
•
•
•
more diverse and better located woodland creation, supported by investment in local
job creation etc.
regenerative farming practices
sustaining hill farms through economic diversification.
Some of these alternative approaches are influenced and supported by another set of
external drivers, acting alongside and in potential conflict with those in Table 1:
•
•
•
•
changes to forest policy to encourage more diverse, better located planting
increasing salience of the biodiversity emergency in policy making and public
awareness
the developing market for carbon credits for peat restoration
emerging markets for biodiversity tokens and other ecosystem benefits15
15These are currently not very significant in their overall scale and impact. Note, however, that there is already
an emerging market for ‘nature-positive carbon’ i.e. higher value carbon credits associated with biodiversity
gains.
7
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
•
•
substantial governmental support for private investment in natural capital which
delivers integrated land use, multiple environmental outcomes, and public, private
and community benefit16
increasing investor and landowner sentiment in support of non-marketised
community and biodiversity benefits i.e. recognising sustainability goals as having
intrinsic value.
The broader Scottish political and policy context also contains much that is positive, in the
form of a suite of inter-related national policies which emphasise democratic and economic
‘community empowerment’, alongside an economic agenda rooted in a commitment to a
broad conception of sustainable development17:
•
•
planning reform, in favour of a more inclusive and collaborative planning system
land reform involving greater community say in land transactions, changes in land
use, and land management
• a place-based approach to planning and service provision
• an emphasis on community wealth building
and
• a just transition to net zero.
All of these could encourage more local influence (if not control) over land use, and the
creation of the kinds of community and landscape envisaged in the CAP and the Vision.
Evidence of the impact of this policy direction is limited at the moment, but these ideas –
and the policy and legal documents in which they are set out - provide political resources for
communities and other stakeholders to draw on. They may develop more traction over time,
particularly if they are increasingly used and so become part of mainstream policy making
and implementation, but this is far from certain.
A second policy development which may work in favour of more local input into land use
planning is the push to regionalisation, apparent in the planning reform agenda. The explicit
context for this study is the interest within the South of Scotland RLUF pilot in developing
more detailed land use frameworks at a sub-regional scale. Regional Spatial Strategies (RSSs)
and Regional Land Use Frameworks both offer some opportunities for community input, and
in turn make links between land use planning and the Regional Economic Strategies (RES)
through which the national economic transformation strategy is given a regional focus.
Notably the South of Scotland RES 18 commits to supporting sustainable rural development
and the resilience of villages, including through community wealth building.
16 See the Scottish Government’s 2022 Interim Principles for Responsible Investment in Natural Capital at
https://www.gov.scot/publications/interim-principles-for-responsible-investment-in-natural-capital/
17 The core document here is Delivering Economic Prosperity, the Scottish Government’s national strategy for
economic transformation (March 2023).
18 See https://sosrep.dumgal.gov.uk/article/21953/Regional-Economic-Strategy
8
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
However, the future of regionalisation is unclear. The RLUFs are currently only at pilot stage,
and although ‘indicative’ RSSs now exist, their fuller development does not seem to have an
official timetable. If the approach does endure, RLUFs’ role with respect to the planning
system and land use more generally is also unclear, particularly because by covering land use
in general the RLUFs extend beyond the remit of the statutory planning system, which is not
involved directly in the principal rural land uses. They could become significant, with the
RLUF informing policy and decision-making across planning and economic development, as
illustrated in this diagram from the draft RLUF (p. 44)19:
A final policy development which potentially has significant implications for governance and
rural development policy in the Glenkens is the possible creation of a Galloway National
Park. At the time of writing the details and implications of this are completely unclear: all
that can be said is that if a Park is created it will affect overarching policy goals and
governance processes, and may well have unintended consequences, particularly in terms of
housing affordability. While arguably a Park oriented towards sustainable rural development
should be aligned with much of what is in the Vision, local opinion is sharply divided, and the
proposals may create and amplify cleavages within and between communities and other
stakeholders. Equally unforeseeable is how the planning and regulatory processes within a
Park would engage with the other current, evolving processes – the RLUFs, the Local Place
Plans, and the CAP/Vision.
Overall the current policy and market landscape is extremely dynamic and unpredictable.
Several key pieces of legislation are due to go through the Scottish Parliament in 2024/5, any
of which could radically change the policy and market drivers of land use change20. All of
these are relevant to future land use, and to community involvement in decision making.
19 https://sosrep.dumgal.gov.uk/media/28720/RLUF-Consultation-Draft/pdf/RLUF-Consultation-Draft.pdf
20 Some of these could have enormous impacts. For example, a significant shift in the agricultural subsidy
regime to prioritise ‘public money for public goods’, as has happened in England, could see both major shifts in
practices towards more biodiversity-friendly farming, and innovative landscape scale collaborations involving
9
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Consequently, any process established in the Glenkens should:
•
•
•
not assume that any positive policy change will happen, and therefore be designed to
create as much useful change as possible within the current constraints
be flexible enough to take advantage of any positive shifts in policy and the market
try to influence these drivers by the power of example, and advocacy based on
experience.
What are the current opportunities for community input?
Most decisions on land use outside urban areas are made by landowners and managers, and
not through the state-run planning system. This means a) that there are no formal, statutory
levers of community control over local land use decisions, either directly or through elected
representatives and b) that their input is confined to weak contributions through
consultation and ‘informal influence’. As the RLUF puts it, informal influence comes
principally through “incentives, collaboration, partnership development and applying tools
to understand the potential benefits that certain decisions could generate for land
managers, the environment, wider community and the economy” (draft RLUF p. 34).
The next subsections set out briefly what opportunities currently exist.
The planning system
Within the planning system, statutory input is limited to the right to comment on drafts of
the Local Development Plan (LDP), Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) related to the
Plan and on planning applications. Good practice would give the public more involvement
during the development of the LDP and SPG (e.g. through more participative processes than
the minimum consultation), although the extent and influence of this is entirely within the
control of the relevant local planning authority (LPA)21. Public consultation on planning
applications is just one ‘material consideration’ amongst many, can only be taken into
account at all if it applies to a defined range of issues, and will be disregarded if it runs
counter to national planning (or other) policy. Effective opposition to applications usually
rests on showing conflicts between the proposed development and existing policies, not
simply expressing opposition. In relation to the principal land use changes in the Glenkens,
the planning system is only really relevant to wind farms and related works (such as roads
and transmission lines). Some agricultural and forestry operations fall under the planning
system (e.g. new access roads, some buildings). Public input into planning decisions may
have marginal effects but is unlikely to fundamentally change land uses22.
landowners and managers along the lines of DEFRA’s Landscape Recovery programme (see
https://defrafarming.blog.gov.uk/2024/02/12/landscape-recovery-building-long-term-agreements).
21The Glenkens’ LPA is currently Dumfries & Galloway Council. If a national park were created the new Park
Authority would take over planning responsibilities.
22A Galloway National Park would almost certainly impose tighter restrictions on some forms of development,
and potentially give the public more levers over development through the planning system.
10
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Local Place Plans (LPPs)23
Sitting within the formal planning system, the development of LPPs probably provides the
greatest current opportunity for public involvement in land use planning, at least in
principle. LPPs offer the possibility of a genuinely community-based plan, with a spatial basis
allowing the identification of key assets, places to be protected or developed, and so on. In a
largely rural area such as the Glenkens, this could cover a great deal of farm and forestry
land, and allow the community to indicate land use preferences going beyond the remit of
the planning system. Dumfries & Galloway Council (DGC) have said that they are taking the
LPPs seriously, giving them high-level officer and political support, partly connected to the
development of ‘place-based’ service planning (i.e. integrated service provision by the local
authority and others, rather than land use planning in the strict sense.)
However, their potential for effective community input is threatened by the following:
1. LPPs may only be registered by the local planning authority if they conform to ‘higher
level’ (i.e. national and LPA) planning policy. Thus, for example, LPPs which oppose
renewable electricity generation and transmission developments, or the expansion of
commercial woodland, are likely to fall foul of the Scottish Government’s National
Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and Climate Change Plan. DGC’s forthcoming, revised,
Forestry and Woodland Strategy will be significant, as this will be a formal part of local
planning policy, with the status of Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG). Although the
existing Strategy is ten years old, no date exists for the publication of the updated
version.
2. Even if LPPs are registered, their role within decision making is unclear. The relevant
legislation and guidance24 merely say that they must be “taken account of” in the
drawing up of LDPs, without specifying what this means. Like other ‘material
considerations’ in planning, this means they will have to be considered but do not need
to actually influence outcomes25.
3. There seems to be a tendency for LPPs to be led by Community Councils (CCs) and to be
developed for their settlement areas, rather than entire areas covered by the CCs. Both
of these push their scope away from dealing with strategic, multi-settlement and
landscape-scale issues, such as natural flood management, water quality, habitat
restoration and maintenance and so on.
The last of these could be circumvented. There is nothing stopping a LPP from extending
across the entire community council area, including farm and forestry land. Further, the
legislation allows LPPs to be drawn up by “community bodies” which are not Community
Councils, as long as they show genuine community support. This raises the possibility of a
Glenkens-scale LPP, drawn up by a body and process which demonstrates community
support. DGC have not explored this idea, but have not ruled it out. Even in the situation
23The nature and role of LPPs are set out in the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, the Town and Country Planning
(Local Place Plans) (Scotland) Regulations 2021, and Planning Circular 1/2022: Local Place Plans.
24 See previous footnote.
25 The English experience with Neighbourhood Plans, which have a clearer statutory role as part of the LDP, is
not encouraging in terms of genuine community influence.
11
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
where 1 and 2 mitigate against an LPP having much influence in planning in a strict sense,
the existence of such a Plan might well have an informal role – see below.
Regional Land Use Frameworks
The RLUF process so far has offered some opportunity for community input, through a fairly
substantial consultation process. As noted above, the process is important in that it drove
and frames the Vision and the current study, reflecting the proposals in the consultation
draft RLUF to:
develop sub-catchment plans for land use that link to local place-plans [i.e. LPPs], to
inform opportunities for land use change and emerging Just Transition Plans for land
(draft RLUF (summary) p. 8)
which would
provide a robust platform to help guide land use change to build resilience to climate
change and lead to nature recovery e.g. through nature networks, help facilitate
better dialogue between stakeholders and, help inform communities of natural
assets in their locality and involve them in discussions around land use (draft RLUF p.
45).
In principle this would provide government support and a direct linkage into a higher
(regional) level policy making for a Glenkens-level Land Use/Local Place Plan. There are
hopes that the South of Scotland RLUF will have a role within the delivery plan for the
Regional Economic Strategy, regardless of whether the RLUFs themselves are rolled out
nationally. This in turn would create a link to the developing field of private sector natural
capital investment. A Glenkens Land Use Plan might thus have a role in giving the
communities input to important emerging policy fields which may shape significant inward
economic investment to the area in the next few years.
As a current resource, the draft RLUF contains, or is a gateway to, a wealth of biophysical and
socio-economic data, much of it in map format. While the resolution of these is probably too
coarse to support site-specific land use planning, it is certainly a useful starting point for
creating an indicative map of resources and constraints in the Glenkens.
The Regional Land Use Partnership (RLUP) process also has lessons for setting up a Forum,
which could be seen as a RLUP in miniature. Reflecting on the first phase of stakeholder
engagement (to June 2022), academics closely involved in the development of the RLUP
pilots reported that the pilots’ effectiveness was limited by: their unclear purpose,
importance and linkage to other policy fields; their perceived irrelevance to decision making
at the level of actual land use decisions, leading to a reluctance of land managers to get
involved; and the perceived association of ‘land use planning’ with the land reform agenda,
which also caused reluctance among the same group26. Care must be taken not to replicate
these weaknesses at local level.
26Peskett, L., M. J. Metzger and K. Blackstock (2023). ‘Regional scale integrated land use planning to meet
multiple objectives: Good in theory but challenging in practice.’ Environmental Science & Policy 147: 292-304.
12
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Community councils (CCs) and the representative democratic system
Community councils are in principle the most responsive level of local government, acting at
a scale where they can pay attention to the details of site-specific land use changes. Yet their
statutory role is very weak, being to “help to make public bodies aware of the opinions and
needs of the communities they represent”27. They have only consultative status with respect
to planning applications and the forestry approval system (see below) and almost no other
powers. Further, while some are well-organised and active in their communities, others
struggle to perform their functions, especially given their extremely limited resources and
voluntary nature. It is possible that the Local Governance Review28 will empower them, but
this seems unlikely.
Councils (local authorities) have more powers, but influencing their actions - especially with
respect to specific land use decisions – is difficult for citizens. Direct contact with ward
councillors may have some effect, particularly if an issue is politically salient. This is
unpredictable (in part because councillor involvement is always affected by political
considerations) and in any case unlikely to be effective, especially if an issue falls outwith the
scope of council policy.
Advocacy to change local authority policy is likely to be more fruitful, particularly if policies
are given weight in the planning system as supplementary planning guidance (SPG). Both
DGC’s Forestry and Woodland Strategy and Wind Farm Landscape Capacity Study are SPG
for the Local Development Plan. However, this avenue has been severely impacted by
financial austerity - DGC currently has no Woodland or Biodiversity Officers, hampering work
on both the Forestry and Woodland Strategy (2014) and the significantly outdated Local
Biodiversity Action Plan (2009). Other areas of policy may also be important for land use
decisions, in ways which appear to be at the discretion of individual local authorities. (For
instance, South Ayrshire Council requires all forestry applications on which it is consulted to
have their implications for private water supplies assessed. This is not the case for Dumfries
& Galloway Council.)
National politics offers little opportunity for engagement over local issues. This
generalisation is heightened in the Glenkens since the main land use changes are backed by
national government policy. As with local authorities, policy advocacy is more likely to be
possible than engagement over individual cases, and this is where the tensions between
different government policies (in particular that between rhetorical commitments to
‘community empowerment’ and ‘community wealth building’ and the centrally-set forest
creation and renewable energy targets) may have leverage with respect to shifting the
incentive and regulatory structures around land use.
The Glenkens and District Community Action Plan (CAP)
The Community Action Plan process gave communities genuine influence over a document
with the potential to shape some aspects of development in the Glenkens. Its linkage to
27https://www.communitycouncils.scot/what-is-a-community-council/model-scheme-documents-2023
28See https://www.gov.scot/policies/improving-public-services/local-governance-review/
13
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
wind farm community benefit spending makes this an unusual example of direct influence
on implementation, unmediated by the discretion of the local authority or other state
bodies. Going forward, further rounds of engagement to update the CAP will again give the
community opportunities for influence over strategy, and they have continual influence over
funding decisions through Community Council representation on the Glenkens & District
Trust (GDT), which administers these funds.
With respect to government policy and governance structures the CAP’s position is unclear.
Community Action Plans are in principle linked to place-based, integrated service provision
rather than spatial/development planning and the planning system, and so would appear to
have a slightly different role from the LPPs29. The situation is clearly not resolved at a policy
level, and is being worked out in different ways across Scotland 30. In the Glenkens, the CAP
was researched and published in 2019/2020, before the concept of LPPs was rolled out.
However, DGC seems to be giving LPPs a lead role in both spatial and service planning, so it
is unclear what the official status of the CAP is and how it is intended to relate to the LPPs
which are only now under development. Since the Land Use Vision is part of the CAP, this
ambiguity may present a valuable opportunity for the community to pro-actively integrate
the two strands, and demonstrate how this might be done in ways which are useful to other
communities and local authorities. Regardless of the formal position, the CAP has informal
status as a well-consulted-on community-based plan, which will presumably be taken more
account of by external stakeholders than less well-articulated and consolidated views of the
community and individuals.
Opportunities for influence with respect to the main land use changes
Forestry
While opportunities do exist for community input with respect to forestry, the process is
complex and clearly not widely understood in its details. Confusion arises because although
the relevant legal framework is Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)31, full EIA is
extremely unusual for forestry project. Much of the opportunity for public involvement
comes before a proposal for forest creation or management is even formally submitted to
Scottish Forestry (SF) and is thus governed more by SF policy than by regulation. SF’s
position is that the proposal development stage provides the best opportunity for
communities to influence forestry decisions directly: consultation by a forestry scheme
proposer is required by SF as part of their screening process to determine whether or not an
EIA is needed at all, and they have provided extensive guidance on what is expected of
developers at this stage32.
29 See Planning Aid Scotland’s useful comparison of the two strands of “community-led plans” at
https://www.pas.org.uk/what-we-do/community-led-plans/.
30 So, for instance, some communities see the LPPs as replacements for Community Action Plans (see e.g.
https://www.blscommunitytrust.org.uk/what-we-do/bls-community-place-plan).
31 The Forestry (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2017/113/contents/made.
32 Scottish Forestry’s Forestry Engagement and Consultation Processes at
https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/1496-forestry-engagement-and-consultation-processes.
14
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
This is not statutory consultation (in contrast to the way that consultation for a planning
application has its roots in law) but it is recommended by the UK Forest Standard, and will
therefore be assessed for every forestry proposal above certain size thresholds (both
planting and felling), regardless of whether these are to be supported by state grants. The
language of community engagement is clear in the policy and guidance, rhetorically aligning
forestry with other government policy agendas. So, for instance, Scottish Forestry’s Forestry
Engagement and Consultation Processes33 states that:
Involving local communities and stakeholders in decisions about forestry creates
opportunities not only to improve plans and proposals and thereby increase support for
them, but also to support a just transition to net zero, enhance community wellbeing and
improve social justice (p. 3).
In theory this involvement provides the opportunity for communities to affect planting
design, access, species mix and so on, and to propose additional benefits such as path
creation and economic opportunities. A more formal opportunity for public input exists later
in the process, when submitted applications are put on the ‘public register’ for four weeks.
However, both the published guidance and interviewee comments show that by this stage SF
expects any significant public concerns to have been addressed.
However, the nature of the community engagement - or the weight to be given to it in
decision making - is nowhere spelled out, which clearly leaves its effectiveness and
relevance at the discretion of Scottish Forestry. Interviewees’ assessments of this process
were quite polarised34. With some qualification, forestry professionals mainly considered
that these processes were adequate, and also that they had been improving over the years
in line with changes to the UK Forestry Standard. Foresters’ opinions differed over the most
appropriate forms of consultation, with some in favour of town hall meetings – to get away
from the perceived unrepresentative nature of some Community Councils – while others
saw such meetings as promoting conflict and poor representation, and preferred less public
techniques such as drop-in sessions. Some significant successes were reported (by NGOs,
rather than communities) in changing proposed schemes, but in general community and
NGO interviewees’ views were negative, seeing the consultation processes as ‘tick box
exercises’. They were particularly critical of the agreement35 by which the national
environmental regulatory bodies, NatureScot, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency
and Historic Environment Scotland, will not object to forestry proposals which conform to
the UK Forest Standard (except within a narrow set of specific circumstances), thus closing
off a route for a stronger environmental and heritage case to be made within forestry
development. Interviewees recognised that different forestry companies and landowners
33 Scottish Forestry’s Forestry Engagement and Consultation Processes at
https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/1496-forestry-engagement-and-consultation-processes.
34 These responses mirror very closely those from a review of stakeholder engagement in a major forestry
initiative in the Scottish Borders – see https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/817-stakeholder-engagement-toinform-development-of-a-regional-woodland-creation-framework-scottish-borders-pilot-areas-1-2/download.
35https://forestry.gov.scot/support-regulations/public-registers/scottish-forestry-and-statutory-consulteesjoint-working-agreement.
15
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
had very different approaches to community consultation, with some much more genuinely
engaged and responsive, and others uninterested in communities’ views.
Communities are also consulted by forestry managers for five- and ten-year reviews of block
management plans. The level of consultation is discretionary – depending on the perceived
relevance of a block to local communities – and is confined spatially to issues about the
blocks themselves. A minority position within the forestry interviewees was that this should
be extended to a more holistic consultation about a block’s relationship with neighbouring
non-forested areas.
There are also two structural weaknesses here, in that consultation is on a case by case
basis, rather than strategic (e.g. at landscape scale) and is also unable to deal adequately
with cumulative impact in its obvious sense. There is a requirement for cumulative impact to
be assessed, but this has a specific, technical meaning relating to new and existing woodland
in adjacent areas36 which differs from EIA under Town & Country Planning (Scotland) 1997 as
amended which consider the overall impact of existing or approved developments on
landscape, biodiversity, infrastructure etc.
Overall the situation with respect to direct public engagement in forestry planning is
problematic, whether one takes the view that existing consultation over forestry is often
inadequate (the general community and NGO view) or simply because the division over the
issue complicates discussions of how (or even whether) to improve the approach to
community involvement. It should be said that the situation has improved over time, and at
the point of writing there were several recent and emerging initiatives involving the state,
community and private sectors to further develop community engagement37. However, the
structural factors which favour developer interests remain. This matters greatly, given that
forestry creates what are often the most contentious land use decisions in the Glenkens.
There is, however, an important alterative but indirect route for input into the regulation of
forest planning via the planning system. Although forest development mainly lies outwith
that system, local authorities are consultees on forest proposals, and their policies are taken
into account in Scottish Forestry’s decision making 38. Supplementary Planning Guidance was
described by SF as setting a ‘high bar’ for development proposals, which would have to
36 This is spelled out in more detail in Scottish Forestry’s EIA Staff Procedures -
https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/foi-eir-release/2023/12/commercialconifer-proposals-for-forestry-grant-scheme-eir-release/documents/eia-staff-procedures-guidance-march2023/eia-staff-procedures-guidance-march2023/govscot%3Adocument/EIA%2BStaff%2BProcedures%2BGuidance%2BMarch%2B2023.pdf
37 See e.g. https://forestry.gov.scot/forests-people/communities/local-stakeholder-and-communityengagement-and-consultation, https://communitiesfordiverseforestry.org/ and
https://www.confor.org.uk/resources/events/stakeholder-engagement-training-scotland/.
38 See e.g. the UK Forest Standard: “Woodland creation and forest management activities are not defined as
‘development’ and so do not come within the scope of the Town and Country Planning Acts”, however,
“planning authorities have responsibility for landscape issues. They have the power to define areas of high
landscape importance and to provide for their conservation and enhancement through policies in their local
plans and supplementary guidance. Local planning authorities are consulted on forestry proposals, with
landscape and visual impacts frequently considered as important issues.” UKFS p. 64.
16
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
make a very strong case for breaching a local authority’s policy. The review of the DGC Forest
and Woodland Strategy thus offers the communities an opportunity to shape an important
input into future forest development – and heightens the urgency of the revision, despite
the constraints noted above. (Other similar opportunities may exist in other policy areas , in
ways similar to the example given above of South Ayrshire Council’s policy on forestry and
private water supplies. These were not, however, explored in this study.)
There are a few instances of innovative arrangements which give communities a significant
level of control over forestry. Outright ownership, as at Carsphairn Community Woodland39,
gives communities complete control. More limited, but possibly with greater potential for
replication, is the recent (September 2023) 20-year lease of unplanted land owned by a
forestry investment company to a community-based trust in the Upper Urr valley40. This
gives the community the right to manage the site for amenity and environmental purposes,
and is a model which might be pursued elsewhere with similarly innovative landowners.
Agricultural land use
Opportunities for community input into most agricultural decision making are virtually nil,
except for the marginal cases where planning permission is needed. Changes in farming
practice and many agricultural buildings are thus beyond formal influence. In some cases
informal influence may be exerted through community networks –this is perhaps most likely
where landowners are local and are concerned about their reputation within the community
of which they are part41. This is obviously a very individual matter.
There was evidence that farmers feel misunderstood and are defensive about being told
how to farm, in particular with respect to more ‘nature-friendly’ approaches, by people
(often characterised as ‘outsiders’, whether Glenkens residents or more distant politicians
and policy makers) who do not appreciate how difficult and marginal farming is. This view
was shared both by farmers who were conservative in their overall approach and by those
who wished to diversify and innovate but were constrained financially. Those who are
adopting a very different approach, adopting ‘regenerative farming’ approaches or similar,
were unsurprisingly more aligned with views which were opposed to traditional and
intensifying farming. However, they, too, recognised the tensions caused by non-farmers
attempting to tell farmers what to do on their land, and non-farmers also ascribed to
farmers a strong anti-interference culture.
The Land Reform Bill42 currently passing through Parliament contains provisions for the
introduction of Compulsory Land Management Plans for blocks of land of more than 1000
hectares, with a community engagement requirement. This would, for a few large estates in
the Glenkens, bring in a new route for community involvement, with unpredictable
effectiveness or prospects in the future.
39 See http://carsphairn.org/CCWL.
40 See https://glenkens.scot/glenkens-news/upper-urr-environmental-trust-signs-milestone-agreement-with-
foresight-sustainable-forest-company.
41 Interviewees speculated about this, but robust evidence from landowners of such influence (or its absence)
would be useful.
42https://www.gov.scot/news/land-reform-bill.
17
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Wind farms
The public have much greater potential input to wind farm development than to forestry or
farming, since they are subject to formal approval through the statutory planning system.
See above, however – the extent of effective public involvement through this process is
likely to be very limited, though it is useful that (in contrast to forestry and farming) the
assessment of cumulative landscape impact is part of the wind farm permitting process. As
with those other land uses, however, interviewees did note that there is considerable
variation within the sector, with some companies going well beyond statutory requirements
and others appearing uninterested in engagement.
Summary
Overall, opportunities for formal community input into land use decision making are:
•
•
•
limited to consultation, whether through statutory planning or the forestry EIA
processes, and therefore discretionary and historically weak
often in opposition to interlocking structural factors, where policy and market
forces combine to drive land use change, and are difficult to challenge
very poor at considering the cumulative and landscape scale impact of individual
changes, even where these are consulted on
and
•
viewed very differently by those in control of the processes and those desiring
more influence.
There is a fundamental divide here between those who see engagement as a way of
collectively deciding what use to make of the land (for whom the status quo is inadequate),
and those who control current land uses and see engagement as a way of getting
constructive input into proposals (and so view the current situation as basically acceptable).
Improvements to individual proposals are possible through existing routes, but not
structural change which would change the effects of the policy and market drivers at
landscape scale. Currently local informal mechanisms are also weak, with the exception of
the Glenkens CAP/Vision process and the direct route this gives to influencing (relatively
small) spending from the community benefit funds. However, unless the structural and
statutory constraints change – which is possible, but unpredictable and in the short term
unlikely – strengthening the informal routes to influence seems likely to be the most
effective approach in attempting to bridge the divide. The next section explores what this
might look like.
§3: Achieving change
Mechanisms for change
Informal influence by communities can happen either through:
18
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
•
•
agreement between community and decision- or policy-making stakeholders, with
explicit commitment to abide by this (whether among a large, inclusive group or as
‘bilateral’ agreements with single landholders); or
articulation of a community position (at any scale from single site to landscape)
based in sufficient community involvement and credible expertise to be recognised
by other stakeholders as authoritative and legitimate. This can then be deployed in
community-led campaigning and planning, consultative/planning processes initiated
by other stakeholders, and lobbying for policy change.
These informal mechanisms work through social pressure on the stakeholders to recognise a
legitimate community voice and to abide by public commitments. Always vulnerable to
being overridden by other pressures (from regulation, policy, and markets) they will be most
effective where:
•
•
•
(local) reputation matters; or
where resistance to the community input would be more expensive (in time or other
resources) than reaching agreement; or
where mutual advantage (‘win-wins’) can be achieved at low or no additional cost.
Examples of win-wins might be ‘progressive’ procurement of local goods and
services, riverside planting, community input to protect biodiversity-rich sites, path
creation in forest areas and so on.
Stakeholder agreements can achieve ‘force’ in official contexts, even if without statutory
status. This can be cumulative, in the sense that once an agreement has been recognised by
one state body (particularly if it is written into policy) it is more likely to be adopted in
further policy making. This appears to be how some policy makers see the government’s
approach to LPPs as set out in NPF4 (and perhaps also CAPs), but the idea is admittedly
“nebulous”, as one interviewee put it.
The potential for either agreement or campaigning to work is very context-dependent,
which means that learning from other places has to be done carefully. NatureScot’s
innovative and successful work with local stakeholders on land use planning in the Carse of
Stirling43, for instance, appears to have been able to generate consensus in a context where
conflicts and competition over land use were not very great. In contrast, the Glenkens Vision
is positioned in opposition to current patterns of land use change and the forces driving
them. These are not simply impersonal, external forces but are embodied locally in real
people, who are making decisions on the ground – this is a context where stakeholders have
visibly different interests. This reduces the likelihood of achieving a consensus summarised
in a single Plan, to which all stakeholders will sign up 44.
43https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/files/2017-07/Publication%202014%20-
%20SNH%20Commissioned%20Report%20676%20-%20Carse%20of%20Stirling%20%20an%20ecosystems%20approach%20demonstration%20project%20Technical%20Report.pdf.
44 This is not to detract from the achievement of wide stakeholder agreement to the Vision itself. However,
some interviewees made it clear that although they were involved in the process, the final document does not
19
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
To Plan or not to Plan?
Whether or not to work towards a Glenkens Land Use Plan is therefore an important
strategic choice, which defines different options for achieving the Vision.
The Vision proposes ‘whole catchment planning’, and it is hard to see how this could be
done without having spatial representation in the form of a Plan i.e. a map (or series of
maps) setting out both the current situation and options for the future, underpinned by the
principles articulated in the Vision. The arguments for such a Plan are:
•
•
•
it would provide a vehicle for integrating different development objectives in a coherent
way, and in particular for envisaging and planning a balance between different land uses
it would be an enduring, readily usable, and symbolically important statement of the
community’s aspirations, which could be used to influence decision making processes
both within and outwith the Glenkens
it could play a useful role in streamlining proposals for land use change (e.g. in the
forestry consenting process) by allowing communities to present a ‘ready-made’
authoritative position.
It would also nest neatly into the regional land use planning processes, providing an
exemplar of the kind of localised, sub-catchment plan set out in the draft RLUF.
Such a Plan could be developed with varying levels of assertiveness around desired
outcomes. The most forceful would present quantified cumulative targets and limits on
specific land uses, as well as locations for different land uses, and (maximally) would aspire to
giving communities a right to veto proposals which did not conform to the Plan. Weaker versions
would be more indicative, presenting opportunities and choices for acceptable and desirable
development and change in different areas, and recognising that the role of the Plan would be to
guide development rather than stopping it. (The Carse of Stirling work provides an excellent
example of this kind of indicative planning.) As a minimum, any Plan would be underpinned by a
map which would bring together as much information as possible, incorporating both expert and
lay, objective and subjective, knowledge of the landscape.
Interviewees were explicitly asked for their responses to the idea of such a Glenkens Land Use
Plan. These ranged from extremely supportive through to equally strong opposition. The
arguments against a Plan were mainly made by current controllers of land and land use decision
making. These arguments are principally that:
•
•
if a Plan did achieve any kind of statutory or officially recognised force, it would bind land
managers in ways which would be unreasonable and not based on an accurate
understanding of the land’s potential, as well as breaching their rights to manage and profit
from the land
within current structures a Plan could not have statutory weight, and therefore its creation
would mislead communities by raising unrealistic expectations of influence or control
reflect their position. The general, non-spatial nature of the Vision also makes it easier to agree to than a more
specific, spatial representation which might impact on actual land use decisions.
20
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
•
•
constraints on managers might drive away investment: the point was made that investors
are more likely to respond to positive incentives than quasi-regulatory constraints.
A final argument, made from a community perspective, was that exactly because a Plan
could never have statutory force, creating one would be a waste of the communities’ scarce
resources - in particular of time better spent on more effective activities.
Some of the interviewees who were opposed on the first two grounds suggested that they
would nevertheless contribute to such a planning process in order to have their expertise
reflected in the end product, which would need to be ‘balanced’ and ‘not too prescriptive.’ (A
‘community right of veto’ was seen as completely unacceptable.)
The importance of values, beliefs and attitudes
These sets of arguments both have their own internal logic, reflecting genuine conflicts
between the private interests of landowners and the public/collective interest in the
ecosystem and social services provided by the land. These are linked to (and to some extent
reinforced by) other differences rooted in values, attitudes and beliefs of all those involved.
Unsurprisingly, conflicting values and views emerged through the interviews on who has
rights of different kinds over land, and ultimately what (and who) the land is for i.e. the
same issues being played out in the national debates over land reform. Other evident
divisions were more about perceptions and feelings, such as land managers’ very widely
shared sense of being misunderstood and criticised by people they characterised as
misinformed and unreasonable, exacerbated in particular by the low economic returns from
farming. Farmers and foresters also seemed somewhat antagonistic, with views polarised
between farmer narratives that ‘forestry has ruined the valley’ and foresters’ position that
‘farming is an uneconomic use of land which is better suited to tree growing’. Conflicting
beliefs about ecological processes (i.e. about matters of scientific fact) were also expressed,
including climate change denial and - more commonly - alternative understandings of the
processes leading to species decline and other ecological damage. (These broadly divided
between those who see land use change as a fundamental cause of biodiversity loss, and
those who blame other factors, including ill-advised policy changes.)
None of these positions – or the divisions they cause - are unique to the Glenkens, and this
is certainly not a case of communities so divided that they cannot engage meaningfully as
partners with external stakeholders or speak with an authoritative voice. It is a case of the
normal context for and content of environmental and sustainability policy making. Divergent
and conflicting beliefs, attitudes, goals and interests are a potential constraint to any
effective stakeholder process and must be acknowledged – ignoring them is naïve and will
lead to unrealistic expectations of consensus. Some of these differences can be overcome,
or reduced, by dialogue; others are going to result in loss for some individuals and groups,
and for these the goal must be to reach compromises rather than have changes imposed.
The approach taken thus needs to be flexible and developmental. With the long term goal of
realising the Vision, or as much of it as possible, it has to be recognised that this is not
something that can be done all at once. It requires people to learn more about each other,
and about the issues, and adapt to this and to external changes. Mutual respect and
21
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
dialogue, careful choice of stakeholders and well-designed and managed interactions are key
in achieving this, and avoiding further conflict and tensions.
Resourcing change
Cutting across every other consideration about realising the Vision is the issue of how to
resource change. The central problem is the shortage of people with time to engage with
land use issues. Clearly within the communities there is much valuable work being done by
dedicated volunteers, including the unpaid members of Community Councils. Equally,
committed paid staff in the community organisations and third sector bodies have been
involved in the CAP and Vision processes, but always in the context of insufficient staff time
and stretched resources. This is obviously tied very directly to funding constraints, and in
particular the ability of organisations to recruit permanent staff. It also leaves organisations
and communities vulnerable to the impact of short-term initiatives and funding, rather than
benefitting from sustained, strategically funded and planned programmes. Here the current
situation is extremely gloomy, with a further round of cuts in public sector funding
imminent.
It is important to recognise that larger public sector bodies (such as Scottish Forestry) are
also affected by shortages in funds and staff, as are – to a lesser extent – at least some of the
private sector organisations involved. Individual staff are often responsible for large areas,
encompassing many communities. This raises serious questions about the replicability of
sub-catchment level planning, or enhanced processes of community engagement over
forestry and wind farm applications. The Glenkens communities have the advantage of being
well-organised and pro-active in engaging with external bodies, including those like
NatureScot and SOSE who have dedicated some staff time and funding in return for the
Glenkens acting as a pilot for new initiatives. This is clearly not replicable across all the
communities and catchments of Dumfries and Galloway, let alone rural Scotland. Ways
forward will require financial resources (but little time) from external stakeholders, in order
to fund time and support for community-led actions.
In the present financial climate this is problematic, and there is no obvious solution. In the
longer term there are three possibilities for additional funding, potentially at significant scale
but all currently very uncertain and unpredictable.
•
•
An increase in community benefit funds flowing from the wind farms, if many of the
planned developments on the surrounding hills are built, and the current community
benefit regime is sustained. The Glenkens might well benefit enormously from this,
though the availability of such funds is obviously very unevenly distributed 45, so support
for replication across rural Scotland would be patchy.
New sources of community benefit funds from other kinds of development, in particular
forestry. This is under discussion but currently very speculative, though there is at least
45 See https://www.southofscotlandenterprise.com/media/v0rpq3n3/baseline-report-on-community-benefits-
from-onshore-wind-projects-in-the-south-of-scotland-final-18-10-23.pdf for the current (2023) situation.
22
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
•
one example in which a percentage of the funds from the sale of carbon credits from
forest creation goes to local communities46.
A flow of income from private sector investment in natural capital, and potentially other
market responses to demand for social returns on investment. This is an emerging area,
but governmental guidelines on responsible investment in natural capital already exist47
along with support for experimental projects48. The South of Scotland is playing a key
role in this, positioning itself as a “Natural Capital Innovation Zone” 49.
46 Trees for Life’s Dundreggan estate. See https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/1484-national-forestry-
stakeholder-group-discussion-paper-delivering-local-community-benefits-and-wealth-building-14-march-2023.
47https://www.gov.scot/publications/interim-principles-for-responsible-investment-in-natural-capital.
48https://www.nature.scot/funding-and-projects/firns-facility-investment-ready-nature-scotland.
49https://www.southofscotlandenterprise.com/news/naturalcapitalinvestment.
23
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
§4: Options for taking forward the Vision
Four options are set out below, plus the ‘do nothing new’ Option 0. They have been selected
to illustrate what might be done with increasing resourcing, and how the issues around
creating a Plan in the context of significant divisions might be addressed in different ways.
The options are:
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Do nothing new
Supported stakeholder interaction (ad hoc and reactive)
Flexible stakeholder group (seeking win-wins)
Planning group (developing a Glenkens Land Use Plan)
A fully inclusive stakeholder Forum
Details of their structure and functions are given in Table 2. To enable comparison, each
option is assessed against five criteria, chosen because they collectively contribute to
achieving an effective process50. These are:
C1: Orientation towards the Vision’s goals. This is self-evidently desirable, but complex. The
Vision sets out ambitious substantive goals for sustainable development, and a wide range
of roles for any new body or process, comprising advocacy, support for local projects and
organisations, networking, awareness raising, creating ‘positive actions’ with landowners,
researching and learning, and representing the Glenkens in regional and national level land
use decision making.
C2: Capacity to act i.e. the ability to make decisions and command resources in order to fulfil
any of the goals set out in C1.As noted above, all those involved in the study were clear that
any new process or body must not be a(nother) talking shop but must lead to tangible
progress.
C3: Community support, visible in positive support for initiatives and the absence of
opposition and explicit, public dissent. Such support is a core value in itself (closely related
to democratic legitimacy), and pragmatically is essential to enable action to take place (e.g.
through attracting volunteer workers, participants in planning sessions etc.).
C4: External support and credibility, based in how the proposal fits with existing/developing
governance structures and principles, as well as external stakeholders’ interests.
C5: Resource demand. Resourcing is clearly crucial: progress beyond ‘do nothing new’
cannot be made by relying solely on already over-stretched unpaid workers, or contributions
from paid workers already at the limits of what they can achieve in their existing roles. It is
assumed that all of Options 1-4 would involve a paid worker: the resource differences are in
terms of the additional funding and unpaid work that they would entail.
50 More detail on this framework for assessing effective stakeholder processes can be found in Connelly, S. and
T. Richardson (2008) ‘Effective policy-making in the uplands: a case study in the Peak District National Park’,
in Bonn, A. et al, Drivers of Change in Upland Environments, London & New York: Routledge, pp. 376-392.
24
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
In principle these criteria are interdependent. Virtuous circles may be created in which the
criteria are mutually supportive: for example demonstrated capacity to achieve the Vision
goals might lead to greater community support, and so to greater external credibility, leading
to more financial resources and so to increased capacity to act. However, experience
elsewhere also suggests that criteria may need to be traded off against each other. For
example, capacity to act and external support may rest on moderating the goals. Note also
that inclusivity is not in itself a good thing, as while it may increase levels of support, it can
also reduce capacity to act and force compromise on goals if divergent interests are
included. Consequently, inclusivity is not a criterion used to evaluate the options. The
evaluation of the options against the criteria is shown in Table 3.
25
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Table 2: Structure, functions and resourcing needs for the 5 options
Option
Structure
Function
Resource demand
0: Do nothing
new
Existing volunteers,
working with the Vision as
the guiding principle,
accessing resources as and
when possible.
Addressing all the purposes set out in the Vision.
1: Supported
stakeholder
interaction
Small steering group
managing a paid worker.
Flexible, but focusing on win-wins around locationspecific land use issues by brokering dialogue,
levering in (low/no-cost) support,
networking/learning. Would potentially address all
the anticipated Forum functions, but probably little
advocacy or Plan creation (because of resource
constraints, and potential conflict between creating
a Plan and achieving win-wins.)
An explicit win-win finding role, more strategic than
Option 1. Would combine ad hoc responses to land
use issues and opportunities (as Option 1) with
proactively addressing issues thematically and
drawing up action plans. (Possible themes:
employment, education/learning, tourism,
procurement, water, energy etc.) The group would
also be able to advocate for policy change on the
basis of its work.
Low in terms of external resources, high at a
personal level for those involved. It might be
possible to make some gains by accessing resources
from local community benefit funds to increase
volunteers for e.g. events, networking, conferences
etc.
One FTE salary (+on-costs), supporting expenses (IT,
travel) + stakeholder expenses for events. This is the
baseline cost for the following Options 2-4.
2:Flexible
stakeholder
group
Formalised stakeholder
group with paid worker
support; as inclusive as
possible, with task and
finish groups for particular
issues. Full meetings
infrequent, possibly
irregular i.e. ad hoc,
according to need.
Also provides an opportunity for stakeholders to
come together and communicate as equals on
neutral ground. This would occur alongside the core
win-win activities, but could also be promoted
through structured events for participants to learn
about different sectors’ issues.
26
Steering group time.
Stakeholder time on an ad hoc basis, motivated by
immediate interests.
Baseline as above (Option 1).
Stakeholder time on a more regular basis: would be
more demanding and require more commitment
from some stakeholders than O1.
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Table 2: Structure, functions and resourcing needs for the 5 options
Option
Structure
Function
Resource demand
3: Planning
group
Small stakeholder group
with paid support; created
by invitation and expected
to grow organically over
time; would draw in
expertise as and when
needed.
Developing a Glenkens-scale land use Plan: a set of
maps and spatialised objectives, possibly with
targets and limits for land uses. Depending on
available resource, would also take on the role of
promoting and using this Plan in advocacy,
representation, networking and support roles.
Baseline as above (Option 1).
4: Forum
Inclusive stakeholder group
with paid support, meeting
regularly. Would include
task and finish groups, as
in O2.
Developing a land use Plan and resolving specific
land use conflicts as they arise. It would also
address all the Forum roles set out in the Vision:
this might involve strategic seeking of win-wins
through task and finish theme groups, as in O2.As
with O2, it would also provide an opportunity for
stakeholders to come together and communicate as
equals on neutral ground, with the option of
structured learning events.
Stakeholder time demands would be high on a
relatively small group.
Would also need technical skills/support to manage
data and map production. These skills would ideally
be held by the paid worker; production and IT costs
additional.
Potentially attractive to funders (e.g. SOSE/RLUP or
NatureScot) who are supportive of sub-catchment
land use planning.
Baseline as above, with additional stakeholder
event costs. The principal paid role would be more
administrative and less creative/guiding the process
than in O2 or 3, but would demand data- and maprelated skills, as in O3.
Overall demand on stakeholder time would be high,
with regular (perhaps quarterly) meetings and
interim meetings to address specific issues.
Would demand an effective and active Chair, on
whom time demand would be high.
27
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Table 3: Evaluation of the options against criteria + principal risks
Option
Orientation towards
Vision goals
Capacity to act
Community support
External support/credibility
Principal risks
0: Do nothing new
High. No reasons to
compromise on
orientation.
Low. Much is currently being
done, but too limited in time to
achieve the full potential of the
Vision.
Individual activists may have
considerable credibility, but no
collective ‘standing’ or
community representative role.
Weak in the face of ‘you don’t
represent the community’
challenges.
Dependent on a few, already
stretched, individuals, and so not
only limited in expanding the
workload but also vulnerable to
burnout/key people leaving.
1: Supported
stakeholder
engagement
High. No reasons to
compromise on
orientation.
Middling. This would be a step
forward from the volunteer-only
Option 0.Capacity to address
structural constraints -through
policy advocacy and/or creating
a Plan – probably limited, except
through the power of good
examples.
Mixed. There are advantages
from key activists being local, but
this also has disadvantages
arising from their history as
campaigners, and the divisions
around people perceived as
‘outsiders’ making changes
meeting their own
(perceived/assumed) values.
Potentially high. Achievement of
quick, visible win-wins could
make this a legitimate and locally
popular role in the Glenkens.
Dependent on a post holder with
high networking and facilitating
skills, and confidence to work
collaboratively with external
stakeholders.
Some support might be put at
risk if the process (and in
particular the paid post) is too
tightly tied to some existing
organisations.
Potentially high, but informal.
This would have to be earned
through visible successes and the
personal qualities of the post
holder. However, this would not
be a process with any kind of
authoritative voice, with no
route to formal – or even
officially endorsed informal –
status.
Community support
External support/credibility
Principal risks
Communication (and thus
learning, increased trust and
respect) between stakeholders
may well increase their capacity
to act.
Option
Orientation towards
Vision goals
Capacity to act
28
Insufficient identifiable win-wins
to make a significant difference
or build momentum.
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
2:Flexible
stakeholder group
3: Planning group
Likely to be mixed:
inclusivity/consensus
building will trade off
against the more
radical goals.
High. No reasons to
compromise on
orientation.
Mixed. High with respect to
practical site-specific win-win
actions; potentially high with
respect to strategic change on
non-land use issues (especially
actions aimed at achieving the
CAP goals around e.g.
employment). Likely to be
middling on biodiversity and low
with respect to strategic land use
planning. Overall will tend to
actions which achieve
amelioration rather than
structural change, but would
have the resources to develop an
advocacy role.
As with O1, communication
between stakeholders is likely to
have spin-offs in creating
capacity to act.
High with respect to getting a
Plan made, and (dependent on
skills and stakeholder input)
potentially high on other issues.
This option would be oriented
towards creating a powerful
advocacy tool and strategic
change - the other Vision
functions would be subservient
to that goal.
High. Could be very high if the
farmers and estates could be
brought onside, though this
would need trading off against
achieving some goals, at least at
the outset. Quick wins would
build legitimacy, and so capacity
to act on bigger issues.
High, but informal. Without
statutory force, so its legitimacy
would rest on achievements and
stakeholder buy-in - inclusivity
would matter a lot.
As with O1. The stakes would be
higher, with more structured
external stakeholder
involvement; risks degenerating
into a talking shop. Would need
to be very agile to avoid this hence task and finish groups –
with consequent demands for
skilled management.
Mixed, and possibly quite
polarising. This would have to be
avoided through extensive
consultation - both to genuinely
involve the community, to defuse
possible challenges, and to
enable registration of the Plan as
a Local Place Plan, if desired.
Mixed and polarising. External
stakeholders are very divided on
the whether a Plan is a good
idea. It would have some
informal external legitimacy/
credibility simply through being a
community creation (and so
dependent on having
demonstrably high levels of
community support). Such a Plan
would be essential for getting
any kind of statutory, or quasistatutory, formal legitimacy
either as a sub-section of the
RLUF, or as a LPP or both.
Resource limitations might
detract from capacity to act on
issues other than the Plan.
Achieving a credible, wellfounded Plan would then greatly
support capacity to act,
particularly if it gained credibility
through statutory recognition,
and/or enabling visible changes.
29
The major risk is lack of support,
both locally and externally.
Opposition is likely from key
stakeholders, depending on how
the Plan is presented and used,
and how assertive it is – the
more constraining it is perceived
to be the less land managers will
engage.
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
As with O1, communication
between stakeholders is likely to
have spin-offs in creating
capacity to act, though to a
lesser extent if the group is less
inclusive.
Option
Orientation towards
Vision goals
Capacity to act
Community support
External support/credibility
Principal risks
4: Forum
Likely to be mixed:
inclusivity/consensus
building will trade off
against the more
radical goals. In
contrast to O2, the
focus on producing a
Plan will bring conflicts
over the Vision goals
to the fore. This might
be positive, enabling
progress on reconciling
perceived interests
and overcoming some
of the
attitudinal/belief
clashes, or it might be
destructive.
Very high, if successful in
producing a Plan with all
stakeholders on board.
Potentially very low if consensus
cannot be reached.
High. Could be very high if the
farmers and estates could be
brought onside. The Plancreation element makes this
unlikely, though – local support is
likely to be mixed, and as with 3
may be very polarised.
High, but informal. No statutory
force, so its legitimacy would
rest on inclusivity and success.
The link to the regional planning
process through the RLUF should
help, and many important
external stakeholders are likely
to be very supportive (e.g.
NatureScot, SOSE.)
Failure to recruit the widest
range of stakeholders would
undermine this option
completely (and it would lapse
into O3.)
Capacity to act of smaller
subgroups likely to be higher (as
with O2), particularly with
respect to practical site-specific
win-win actions and (possibly)
strategic change on non-land-use
issues (especially actions aimed
at achieving the CAP goals
around e.g. employment).
Or it may have little support if its
claims to represent all interests
are weak. See ‘goals’ to the left:
achieving wide engagement and
interest representation will
probably be associated with
weakening goals – alternatively
pursuing the full Vision goals
would lead to low external
support.
As with O1, communication
between stakeholders is likely to
have spin-offs in creating
capacity to act.
30
If it recruits well, it then risks
either failing to reach consensus,
and so becoming a talking shop,
or failing to make a Plan (and so
lapsing into O2) or breaking up,
with a potential residue of
increased mistrust (and possibly
lapsing into O3, but with
particularly low support from
previous Forum members.)
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Table 4 provides a very brief overall assessment for each option, based on the preceding
analysis.
Table 4: Summary of assessment of options
Option
0. Do nothing new
Overall assessment
Unsustainable and insufficient to realise the potential of
the Vision.
1. Supported stakeholder interaction
(ad hoc and reactive)
Very feasible, low risk, could achieve some positive
change, but insufficient to realise the potential of the
Vision.
2. Flexible stakeholder group (seeking
win-wins)
Feasible, low risk, would partially realise the Vision’s
goals and improve stakeholder relations, but would not
achieve structural change.
3. Planning group (developing a
Glenkens Land Use Plan)
Feasible, would provide a solid basis for future advocacy
and possibly structural change; high risk of deepening
divisions between stakeholders.
4. A fully inclusive stakeholder Forum
Difficult to organise and high risk. The optimum outcome
is very attractive, but unlikely to be achieved; failure
could leave the situation worse than at the outset. Highly
demanding of volunteer time and skills.
31
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
§5: Recommendations for action
The analysis in the preceding section suggests the following:
Unattractive options:
•
•
Option 0: the status quo (“do nothing new”) - is unsustainable
Option 4: a fully inclusive stakeholder Forum - has a high risk of damaging failure.
Possible but problematic in different ways:
•
•
•
Option 1: supported stakeholder interaction - will help achieve some goals, but is
quite weak: this could be a stop-gap until greater resourcing is obtained.
Option 2: a flexible stakeholder group, seeking win-win actions and strategic
programmes - could be very successful in achieving positive actions, but is unlikely to
tackle the big structural challenges
Option 3: the planning group - could be successful in producing a sub-catchment
Plan, but risks being divisive and consequently probably weak in generating positive
actions.
The challenge is thus to combine Options 2 and 3 in a coherent and productive way. Guiding
this is the need for structures and processes which are flexible and evolving rather than
static. This is partly pragmatic, given the changing environment – a new body must be agile
enough to make links with the most promising governance initiatives and take advantage of
shifts in market incentives. (As noted above, however, it must not rely on the possibility of
positive policy shifts: the approach must be feasible and productive even without significant
change.) More fundamentally, a flexible approach can be designed to be developmental,
explicitly supporting the growth of trust, mutual understanding, positive relationships and
community development skills. This points to an approach of starting with positive and less
contentious issues, and cumulatively building capacity to tackle ‘harder’ topics and tasks in a
constructive way.
The recommended approach is therefore: a Land Use Network which will – alongside other
activities – steer the production of a Land Use and Resource Map of the Glenkens.
A Glenkens Land Use Network
Structure
A flexible network of stakeholders signed up to common broad aims but interacting on an ad
hoc basis; this would include task-and-finish groups addressing specific issues. The Network
would be steered by a small stakeholder group, and facilitated and managed by paid staff.
Functions
An explicit win-win finding role, which would combine ad hoc responses to emerging land
use issues (including mediation over contentious proposals) and opportunities, with
proactively addressing issues thematically and drawing up action plans to direct funding and
activity to support positive land-use based change. Possible themes would be employment,
education/learning, tourism, procurement, water, energy etc. with clear links made to SOSE
32
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
priorities and the policies and actions set out in the RLUF and RES. The Network would also
advocate for policy change on the basis of its work at local, regional and national levels.
A central and early function would be the creation of the Land Use and Resource Map – see
below.
Resource demand
Financial: One FTE salary (+on-costs), supporting expenses (IT, travel) + stakeholder expenses
for meetings. IT costs would include access to GIS software and GIS-capable hardware. GIS
skills would be needed, ideally covered by the single FTE staff costs, either as part of the
principal worker’s tasks or a part-time GIS/mapping specialist. The ‘headline’ figure here is
£55,000 per year.
Time: Stakeholder time on an ad hoc basis, with some being more engaged in the task-andfinish groups. Additional time input to the steering group for 4-6 representatives from
different interest groups.
Orientation to Vision goals
Middling, building to High over time. The aim would be to build capacity through action,
starting with aspects of the Vision which are less likely to be divisive, and aiming for quick
wins in terms of positive, win-win outcomes.
Capacity to act
High. An important rationale for a network rather than a regular Forum is the need for
agility, and also a reduced need to achieve consensus at each step, with participants coming
together on a pragmatic basis designed to avoid conflict and build synergies. In particular,
following the experiences of the RLUF and the FORLAND project51, task-oriented smaller
groups are more likely to be able to engage with the farming community and land managers
than a larger, consensus-or planning-oriented body. Capacity to act, particularly in terms of
advocacy, is likely to increase with demonstrable success. This is closely linked to the gaining
of recognition and support both at community level and externally.
The deliberate weakness in this proposal is in initial capacity to plan future land use. This is a
crucial aspect of the approach, which proposes a short term focus on producing a Map, and
if the conditions within the network and in the external environment are favourable, move
onward to a Plan.
Community support
High, particularly if the overlapping farming and estate communities could be brought into
the network. Demonstrable success at achieving win-wins, and across themes important to
the wider community (e.g. local employment, tourism) will generate further support and
engagement in a virtuous, developmental cycle. The Map creation process will also be a way
of recognising the range of local knowledge and values (including that of farmers), without
the contentious implications of arriving at decisions about future land use.
51 See https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/forland-landscape-
restoration/andhttps://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/38096/Forland_GSAB_SummaryReport.pdf.
33
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
External support
High. External stakeholders expressed support for such a Network – even those opposed to
the Forum and Plan ideas. In the wider governance environment the thematic outputs and
the Map are likely to have significant informal force, as providing an authoritative local voice
on development issues, and their presentation can be tailored for a good ‘fit’ with external
stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Contributing to efficient public consultation and
providing authoritative inputs into such processes, alongside building a reputation as an
honest broker in mediation of land use conflicts, will also build external support. It may
prove necessary at some future time to formalise the Network (and reliable it as a Forum,
perhaps) in order to be more recognisable in policy circles, but this is unpredictable and
should not be planned for at the outset.
Principal risks
Low. The incremental, developmental, and inclusive approach may alienate some potential
supporters of more radical approaches.
A Land Use and Resource Map
The Map would bring together as much biophysical and socio-economic information about
the Glenkens as possible, in a way which is readily usable and can be maintained with
limited resources. At present information is scattered across different locations,
organisations and communities; more is held tacitly by those who know and use the land;
yet more is still not gathered or created 52. A single Map would make this information readily
available to all stakeholders. The aim would be a resource to support many different
activities around land use in the Glenkens: the format would therefore be easy to use by
non-specialists but also be sophisticated enough to enable ‘layering’ of very different kinds
of data.
The following is an indicative range of immediate uses which emerged from the workshop
and interviews. The Map would inform and support:
•
•
•
•
•
local communities (including but not only Community Councils) in drawing up their
own plans, and in responding to consultation requests
strategic planning of actions under the CAP
the local authority in drawing up supplementary planning guidance, in particular the
Forestry and Woodland Strategy, and other policies (e.g. a revised LBAP)
local authority responses to consultation requests from Scottish Forestry and other
bodies
forest managers to create better development proposals (i.e. proposals more likely to
be acceptable by communities and SF)
52 The importance of this is spelled out clearly in the draft RLUF: “One way of increasing understanding of the
potential benefits is to provide better quality data often in the form of maps allowing these benefits to be
more easily identified. For example, there are areas of valuable biodiversity across south of Scotland, some
designated (and therefore mapped) but many are not and therefore, widely unknown. Knowledge of these is
often held locally and care is needed to identify them before land use changes occur” (p. 34).
34
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
•
•
•
the development of funded biodiversity conservation projects
thematic planning of e.g. tourism, active travel, employment sites and opportunities
and linkages between these
any future planning process, whether this is linked to the RLUF, Local Place Planning
or other initiatives.
At this stage the proposal is deliberately for a Map rather than a Plan, in that it would not
contain objectives and targets for specific locations or land uses. Clearly though, looking
forward, such a Map would be indispensable as the basis for any future Glenkens-scale land
use planning. Part of the Network’s flexibility will be to adapt and develop the Map as such
opportunities arise.
The Map creation process would be to draw together existing knowledge, starting with data
held by members of the Network53, contained in Local Place Plans, and gathered through the
current NatureScot/SOSE-supported Participatory Monitoring of Land Use project. While
exploration of this was beyond the scope of the current project, it also seems likely that
fruitful use could be made of both NatureScot’s landscape-scale natural capital assessment
tool54 and the emerging SOSE/DGC Borderlands natural capital data pilot 55. (It became clear
during the study that there are many potentially relevant current initiatives: the first step
would thus also include identifying and assessing these as a way of making the Map creation
process as efficient as possible.) Having identified gaps, and dependent on available
resources, new knowledge would be created/commissioned, including through community
processes and citizen science where appropriate.
An initial, indicative and far from exhaustive list of map layers is:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
landscapes, places and routes identified as highly valued by communities
dominant land uses; habitats; landscape characteristics; important (protected)
species
protected areas; planning and other designations
archaeological and other heritage sites and landscapes
transport and travel routes (especially including active travel)
built environment designations (housing permissions, designated light industrial
sites)
land ownership and management.
53 While much data is in the public domain in digital form, there is also a great deal which is not.
For example,
Scottish Forestry holds a great deal of the detailed environmental information from the studies which form
part of forestry proposals. These are accessible public documents, but the data is not collated in any way
which enables further use beyond the site-specific proposal. A Map would be a way of doing this and enabling
much rich and important information to be readily used.
54 https://www.nature.scot/professional-advice/social-and-economic-benefits-nature/natural-capital/farmingnature/developing-landscape-scale-natural-capital-tool-scotland .
55 https://info.dumgal.gov.uk/pressreleases/Home/Details/22648 .
35
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
A comprehensive and internationally recognised checklist and guide for drawing up these
layers would be the European Environment Agency’s Common International Classification of
Ecosystem Services56.
Linking the Network into local governance
To be effective, the Network will need to be tightly connected to existing organisations and
initiatives, and to be continuously mindful to avoid duplication of effort and inefficient use
of resources. These connections will also be needed to give the Network legitimacy both
within the local communities and with external stakeholders. It will need some ‘anchoring’
in the formal, representative democratic process, probably best achieved by CC membership
of the network. (They will, for instance, be contributors of information from their respective
LPPs, and also significant beneficiaries of support from the network for engagement with
forestry and planning proposals.) However, although some kind of grouping of the CCs would
seem in principle to be a good way to give the community a significant role in steering the
Network, the CCs are resource-stretched and without a vehicle for a collective voice. It
seems unlikely that there would be enthusiasm for establishing a new body to enable this.
The strategic, Glenkens scale of the Network and Map, and the status of the Vision as part of
the Community Action Plan, suggest that the Network be linked to the CAP and its Steering
Group (CAPSG). Again, resourcing is an issue, of both unpaid volunteers and paid GCAT staff.
As a starting point it is suggested that the Network be ‘self-governing’, with a steering group
of its own members, which liaises closely with the CAPSG, and incorporating representation
of the communities, state bodies and land use interests57. It is anticipated that this
relationship will develop over time, particularly as both the Network and CAP evolve. This
approach is rather weak in terms of democratic anchoring: the CAPSG has some CC
representation, but only indirectly as those representatives are on the CAPSG as
representatives of the GDT. This seems insurmountable, without creating additional
structures and burdens. In the absence of strong formal democratic anchorage, transparent
communication with the communities and other stakeholders will have to provide avenues
for accountability and feedback.
Of the various bodies, GCAT has the necessary legal status and expertise to be the employer.
The administration costs of this will have to be included in funding the paid post(s). GCAT
also has the relevant technical expertise and infrastructure to host the Map: the Glenkens
Hub58 already exists as an online community resource, with considerable stability of funding.
Implications for other bodies
The successful establishment of a Land Use Network in the Glenkens has implications for
other organisations if they wish to support this community-based, collaborative approach to
56https://cices.eu/resources/resource.
57 This tripartite approach follows the Land Use Commission’s Advice to the Scottish Government on the
governance of the RLUPs:
https://www.landcommission.gov.scot/downloads/5fa129aedca82_20201103%20Advice%20to%20Scottish%2
0Government%20Regional%20Land%20Use%20Partnerships.pdf.
58 https://glenkens.scot/ .
36
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
land use decision making and sustainable rural development. While the detail needs to be
worked out through dialogue with the relevant bodies – and so lies beyond this study’s
resources – the following notes are indicative of the issues. (This section does not include
participation in the Network, but is about issues that go beyond this.)
Community level. The Glenkens community organisations already have responsibility for
steering (the CAPSG), implementing (GCAT) and part-funding (GDT) the CAP and therefore
also the Vision. Making the most of the process of taking the Vision forward will require
coordination and readiness to engage with the Network’s outputs, and the issues it explores
which may quickly go beyond land use in a strict sense. There is a risk here of the Vision
‘running ahead’ of implementation of the CAP more generally: this may not matter, and it
may provide a model for how targeted resources could move CAP priorities forward more
quickly.
Local Authority level: Dumfries & Galloway Council. Combined with the LPP project, the
development of a Land Use Network and Map will demonstrate how the LPP and CAP
strands of ‘community-led planning’ can be brought together, and used to support place
planning at a larger (sub-catchment) scale. This should be useful to the Council, but may also
need positive engagement and support, and willingness to adapt policies. At present, for
instance, the Council has not developed a position on LPPs drawn up by bodies other than
the Community Councils. More generally, the local authority is in a position to make a big
difference to some of the constraints outlined above, most obviously through including in
the updated Forestry and Woodland Strategy clear policies on cumulative landscape impact
and forest design which maximise biodiversity gain and provide opportunities for community
involvement. In the context of financial austerity, DGC could also usefully look at ways to use
resources efficiently by decentralising some of its planning and development responsibilities,
along with relevant resources, to Community Councils and other community-level bodies.
Regional level. SOSE is the key organisation here, partly because it is the parent organisation
for RLUP/F process, but also because of the links identified above with the RES, and SOSE’s
significant role within the Regional Economic Partnership which ‘owns’ the RES. The
development of the Network and the Map should provide useful lessons as a pilot for subregional adaptation of the RLUF. It is also likely that the Network will generate ideas for local,
land use-based economic development which it will be unable to take forward itself, but
which speak directly to SOSE’s remit in supporting investment in natural capital through the
nascent Natural Capital Innovation Zone, as well as other local economic development
supporting community wealth building. (Relevant ideas which surfaced through the
interviews included supporting facilities for start-up businesses, and finance to de-risk farm
diversification.) The Network and Map should thus be both supported and closely observed
by SOSE.
National level. For NatureScot and HES the Network will continue and extend the work of
the ‘Community Engagement in Landscape Change’ projects and the People, Place and
Landscape programme more generally. As with the RLUF, the value here will be in
demonstrating how community-led processes can address major land use challenges.
37
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
With respect to land managers, the Network may be a useful way for the National Farmers
Union, Scotland and the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association to link their work and members
into ways of addressing land use issues collectively with a wider range of stakeholders. These
organisations were not part of this study, but the salience of farming to land use issues, and
the evidence of divisions between farming and non-farming members of the communities,
suggest that exploring mutual benefit with the farmers’ representative organisations would
be fruitful. Given the changes to Scottish agriculture policy currently under discussion, this
initiative in the Glenkens may also be of interest to the government team working on the
land use and agriculture ‘just transition’ 59.
Finally, Scottish Forestry is committed to improving the ways they work with communities,
and it was evident from this study that they are seeking innovative, effective and resource
efficient ways to do this. The approach proposed here would provide a useful pilot from
which the national body could draw useful lessons for incorporation into future iterations of
the Forestry Strategy, Implementation Plan and the guidelines on engagement and
consultation processes.
59 See, for example, the June 2023 discussion paper (https://www.gov.scot/publications/transition-land-use-
agriculture-discussion-paper/pages/2/) which calls for farmers and communities to ‘co-develop’ the envisaged
changes to farming.
38
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
§6: Conclusions
This report’s overarching purpose is to provide guidance on how the potential of the Vision
for Land Use in the Glenkens can be realised. The following factors place significant
constraints on achieving the community engagement and balanced land use set out in the
Vision:
•
•
•
•
the absence of effective statutory routes for formal community engagement in land
use planning
serious resource constraints on all stakeholders
divisions between stakeholders over appropriate and desirable ways forward: in
particular over a Plan, but also deep-seated attitudinal and value differences, and
antagonistic perceptions of others
a dynamic and unpredictably evolving governance/policy environment, with multiple
initiatives, conflicting policy trajectories, and major statutory changes scheduled for
the next two years which might significantly reshape the drivers of land use change.
In response to these, the study sought to develop proposals for pragmatic, feasible, but
nevertheless ambitious, next steps on the journey started by the Vision. It set out and
evaluated a number of options, to provide a systematic approach to assessing what kind of
processes and structures might be effective, have widespread support both within the
communities of the Glenkens and with external bodies, be flexible enough to adapt to
changing circumstances and minimise risks of failure and exacerbating existing tensions.
Therefore the following recommendations are made:
To establish a Glenkens Land Use Network with a primary aim of finding win-win solutions
to land use issues in the sub-catchment. This would combine:
•
•
•
ad hoc responses to emerging land use issues (including mediation over contentious
proposals) and opportunities;
proactively addressing sectoral issues thematically and drawing up action plans to
direct funding and activity to support positive land-use based change;
advocacy for policy change on the basis of its work at local, regional and national
levels;
and
•
as a first activity steering the production of a Land Use and Resource Map of the
Glenkens.
The Network would be a flexible group of stakeholders signed up to common broad aims,
interacting on an ad hoc basis including participating in task-and-finish groups addressing
specific issues. The Network would be steered by a small stakeholder group, and facilitated
and managed by paid staff.
The headline cost for this would be £110,000 over a proposed two year project period.
39
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
This collaborative approach, working through an expanding partnership between the
Glenkens communities and state, private and third sector organisations, would continue the
structured sequence of development planning taking place in the Glenkens over the past
few years. Following on from the creation of the Community Action Plan and its associated
Land Use Vision, this feasibility study is now recommending the establishment of a flexible
body to seek quick wins in solutions to immediate problems, strategic planning of shortand medium-term developmental actions, and a comprehensive resource mapping
exercise which will lay the foundations for further land use planning.
40
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Appendix 1: A Vision for Land Use in Glenkens
1) Land Use in the Glenkens – 2023 Context
• We are a forested area, a farming area, an energy generation area. We are a watery area,
given life by our rivers and lochs. Our natural environment is so special that we are part of the
Galloway and Southern Ayrshire UNESCO Biosphere. Our landscapes attract visitors from all
over the world. We are a peaty area and our soil stores some of Scotland’s best carbon. It is our
home, where we work, live and play. All of these land uses are intertwined and affected by
influences within and outwith our control.
• We are an organised and coherent community which has sought and achieved balance in land
use over many years through partnership working and effective engagement. However, we are
now overwhelmed by the speed and intent of land use change in the area and by the lack of
power that we hold to effect change. Coupled with top-down consultations about interrelated
policies taking place seemingly in isolation from each other, this has led to disengagement in
some and huge frustration in others. The disconnect between national and regional policy intent
and what is actually happening in the Glenkens feels absolute.
• The true seat of power in the land-use sector is opaque. No one public body holds
accountability. Community interests are not safeguarded and best practice guidelines are not
always adhered to. Statutory routes to effecting the change that communities want to see don’t
exist. Regulatory bodies are not able to keep up with market forces.
• Some of the land use developments in our area appear to be purely extractive. Most profits
and benefits are realised elsewhere, jobs are created elsewhere. Community Wealth Building
principles are not embedded or mandated and so the impact of these developments on our
communities is not a catalyst for more jobs, a circular local economy and thriving and
sustainable communities. Opportunities are being missed.
2) Our Vision
That everyone who takes value from our land returns value to it.
That the Glenkens is an exemplar of sustainable land use practice in building resilience for
climate, biodiversity & communities, where learning is valued and all voices are listened to
and respected.
Key to this will be that:
• Land use enhances local climate and environmental resilience, biodiversity and thriving
communities and supports re-population. Local plans such as the Glenkens and District
Community Action Plan ensure this. National and regional policies and drivers are aligned to this
end, and compliance with these policies is the norm. A balanced mosaic of land use enables soil
and waterway regeneration, and significant biodiversity improvements support climate
adaptation and sustainability. Repopulation is supported through sensitive house-building and
increased business opportunities. Community Wealth Building is an underpinning priority.
• There is a balance of land use, access and ownership, achieved using whole catchment
planning. There is more biodiversity, repopulation, nature-friendly farming, multi-functional
forestry, business and tourism opportunities, all supporting a strong local and circular economy.
Cumulative effect is a key consideration.
41
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
• Every part of the community feels included. We are informed timeously about the issues that
are relevant to us and have an influence over regional and national policy to support a Just
Transition to Net Zero. We continue to engage with the wider issues because our voices are
heard, valued and acted on. Nothing about us without us!
• We have strong partnership working. Representatives of all land use stakeholders, including
community representatives, participate in new and functional regional and national mechanisms
that allow them to effectively advocate for themselves and to influence incentives and land use
policy tools.
3) Recommendations for Action.
We want to make this vision a reality through positive actions and collaborative working.
Locally, we plan to:
a) Embody best practice in using land for biodiversity protection, climate mitigation &
adaptation and support of a flourishing local economy, sharing learnings with the GSA
Biosphere, regionally and nationally and continuing to learn from others.
b) Seek funding to resource a local Land Use Forum that is inclusive of all stakeholders and
designed to narrow the gap between sectors. The Forum will continue these important
discussions and allow us to:
• Advocate for our vision of land use in the Glenkens at regional and national level.
• Support and network local environmental or land use projects.
• Enhance community-level biodiversity and environmental awareness, including briefings on
upcoming consultations.
• Support key consultees in land use applications (e.g. Community Councils) to submit informed
and balanced responses.
• Create positive actions that will help landowners reach their targets while mitigating the
impact on or enhancing habitats and biodiversity.
• Research and drive adoption of learning from other areas that would make a difference to
biodiversity in the Glenkens.
c) Use our local Action Plans to encourage enhanced biodiversity in every aspect of Glenkens
land use change. Acknowledge through these plans the links between biodiversity and climate
resilience.
d) Seek funding to collate existing Glenkens mapping data and fill in the gaps to create baseline
land use mapping. Create a publicly accessible and maintained database of environmental data
for the Glenkens and district.
Regionally, we need:
a) A Regional Land Use Framework and a Local Development Plan that take into account hyperlocal issues of cumulative impact and / or high environmental sensitivity. There must be
mechanisms in place to systematically identify and then address issues across the South of
Scotland, not just action driven by high-capacity communities. A Communities Rep on the SoS
RLUF Advisory Group with a clear mandate to engage, represent and advocate is an important
first step.
b) Adequate local authority or regional resources within D&G Council, the GSA Biosphere and
Scottish Forestry, based on catchment or geographic areas, to support local compliance with
regional policies, guidance and strategies such as the Forestry and Woodland Strategy, Local
42
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Biodiversity Action Plan, Local Development Plan and Place Planning. This resourcing would
enable:
• Immediate action on the D&G Forestry and Woodland Strategy (2014) and Local Biodiversity
Action Plan (2009) reviews.
• Incorporation of catchment-level planning and community benefits, by ensuring that
community representatives are included in review processes as strategic partners rather than
consultees.
• Having Community Wealth Building, respect for local knowledge and sense of place enshrined
in all scheme reviews and new policies.
• Meaningful community participation in local land use decision making on a case-by-case basis
as per Scottish Land Commission guidelines.
c) Community Councils to be statutory consultees for land-use decision making by both private
and public sector projects and for them to be resourced sufficiently to have a sufficiently
representative and technical view .
d) To have the rules over compensatory planting changed from replacing like-for-like to like-forbetter environmental gain. To have biodiversity offsetting for developments within the Glenkens
and district done within the Glenkens and district , not elsewhere in the region.
Nationally, we need:
a) National mechanisms and drivers that value and respect the rural voice and by design balance
climate, biodiversity, productivity and thriving communities, and enforce compliance with best
practice. Community Wealth Building principles embedded across all policies and subsidy
schemes related to land use and waterways.
• The Land Rights and Responsibilities statement incorporated into subsidy regimes.
• Holistic subsidy schemes for agriculture and forestry that acknowledge that Climate +
Biodiversity are linked and set conditions accordingly.
• Economic and financial systems are adjusted so that they have positive rather than negative
effects on sustainability. Specifically, the cost of public harm should be factored into the
financial cost of development,
b) Clarity on the roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of all public bodies involved in land
use decision making. Followed by a gap analysis to reveal why the unintended consequences
that we see are taking place, followed by actions to fix them.
c) Not just to be consulted with – we want to be listened to and able to effect change through
robust channels that all communities can access. For example:
• A clear statutory route for community stakeholders to influence decision making on priorities
for local land use.
• Our Land Use Forum recognised as a strategic partner for representing Glenkens and district
issues.
• Mandated membership of community representatives on the groups that steward areas that
have been designated as important regionally, across Scotland and across the UK. (For example:
Rural Stewardship Scheme / Environmentally Sensitive Area Scheme / Woodland Planting Grants
/ RLUFs)
d) Land Reform that creates a mosaic of varied but balanced land ownership and land use across
the country.
43
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
4. Process
This document is the output from a land use discussion programme run in the Glenkens by the
Social Enterprise Academy on behalf of the South of Scotland Regional Land Use Partnership
(RLUP) Pilot. It received funding from the Scottish Government through the Scottish Rural
Network and South of Scotland Enterprise, and it is part of a wider Community Learning
Programme being trialled in rural communities from four RLUP pilot areas across Scotland. Two
‘Lighting the Spark’ webinars were held in October 2022, followed by 6 online sessions, where
participants heard inspirational regional and national stories on land use best practice, debated
the issues that the Glenkens currently faces and discussed the Vision and necessary actions for
the area.
The Glenkens Community and Arts Trust then convened a Working Group of community
representatives to distil that work further into this document. It is aligned with the GSA UNESCO
Biosphere’s Mission to ‘promote a balanced relationship between human interaction and the
natural environment, through the establishment of effective partnerships, community
engagement, innovative projects, research and learning. Ensuring that local communities act
collaboratively and responsibly to build thriving sustainable societies in harmony with their
natural surroundings.’
It was discussed fully at the final CLP event on the 31st January 2023 with national, regional and
local stakeholders. Their comments on the Recommendations were reviewed and the majority
suggestions were incorporated into a final-draft version. This was published in the June / July
2023 edition of the Glenkens Gazette and on the Glenkens Hub Glenkens Hub - Land Use in the
Glenkens, seeking public review and comment. This final version including feedback from that
public review stage was adopted by the CAP Steering Group as an Addendum to the Glenkens
& District Community Action Plan in June 2023.
Thanks very much to all who contributed to this Vision – your input is greatly appreciated. We
hope you will see your views, edits and passion for this area reflected here! Copies will be sent
to the SoS RLUP Advisory Group and the SoS Regional Economic Partnership, plus other regional
and national stakeholders, and we hope it will help local and regional groups work together
more effectively for balanced Land Use in the Glenkens.
June 2023
44
Feasibility Study into the creation of a Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Appendix 2: List of interviewees
Local community ............................................. 5
Farming ........................................................... 3
Forestry (state) ............................................... 3
Forestry (private)............................................. 3
Energy (private) ............................................... 1
Conservation NGO .......................................... 3
County/regional state organisation ................ 2
National state organisation ............................. 2
Total
22
Note: A number of individuals fell into more than one category. They are grouped here by
what was considered most relevant to their contribution.
45
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Feasibility Study into Glenkens Land Use Forum, March 2024
Description
An account of the resource
This feasibility study provides recommendations and guidance on how the potential of the Vision for Land Use in the Glenkens could be realised.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_20
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Dalry Community Council, GCAT
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
land use
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/624/240708_Land_Use_event.jpg
dd03be47015becaf315eddc1b68d8853
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/624/240708_LandUseEvent.pdf
385eefb7a7273e9a3e0f734a2465a36b
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Dalry
Community
Council
Moving the Glenkens Land Use
Vision forward.
8th July 2024
The Smiddy, Balmacellan
Agenda
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Glenkens Land Use Vision – Helen Keron
Wider Context – Morag Paterson
Report findings: Feasibility Study into the creation of a
Glenkens Land Use Forum – Dr Stephen Connelly.
Report findings: Participatory Monitoring of Landscapes –
Dr Kerry Morrison
Land Use in Local Place Planning – Becca Nelson
Q&A / Discussion / Next steps.
1. Wider Context
Helen Keron,
GCAT Executive Manager,
New Galloway
1. Glenkens Land Use Vision
• The ‘Glenkens and District Community Action Plan’ was
published in September 2020.
• 4 key themes:
•
•
•
•
A Connected Community
An Asset Rich Community
An Economically Flourishing Community
A Carbon Neutral Community.
• In July 2023, ‘A Glenkens Land Use Vision’ was adopted as an
Addendum to the CAP.
• GCAT leads on delivery of the CAP.
Land Use Vision Process
• 2022: Glenkens selected as one of 5 pilot areas in the RLUP areas to carry out
a Community Learning exercise around land use. (SEA)
• 2022/23: Dalry selected as a pilot area for a Citizens Panel on climate change.
• January 2023: GCAT facilitated a community engagement process that
resulted in the creation of the Glenkens Land Use Vision.
• July 2023: Land Use Vision adopted as an addendum to the Glenkens CAP.
Including a number of recommendations at a local, regional and national
level.
• November 2023: NatureScot and SOSE funded a suite of projects building on
some of these recommendations.
Glenkens Land Use Vision
The Vision: That everyone who takes value from our land returns
value to it.
That the Glenkens is an exemplar of sustainable land use practice in
building resilience for climate, biodiversity & communities, where
learning is valued and all voices are listened to and respected.
• Published here: https://glenkens.scot/land-use
Key to this will be that:
• Land use enhances local climate and environmental resilience, biodiversity and
thriving communities and supports re-population.
• Community Wealth Building is an underpinning priority.
• There is a balance of land use, access and ownership, achieved using whole
catchment planning.
• Cumulative effect is a key consideration.
• Every part of the community feels included.
• Nothing about us without us!
• We have strong partnership working.
• We know we can’t do it alone.
The three projects
• Feasibility Study into the creation of a Glenkens Land Use Forum.
• Feasibility Study into Participatory Monitoring of Land Use Change in the
Glenkens.
• Creation of a Local Place Plan for Dalry and a template LPP for other
Glenkens communities that incorporates land use issues.
Thanks to SOSE and NatureScot for their support of these projects, and to all
the authors and volunteers who have committed so much time to them.
A word of caution
• Need to consider governance models going forward – Network /
sub-group.
• A paid resource will be needed to take the issue much further
forward.
• GCAT and the current volunteers are running out of capacity.
• Even a paid resource needs support, so any grant funding
will need to take that into account.
• Need to stick carefully to advancing the Vision of balance and
partnership working.
2. Wider Context
Morag Paterson,
Dalry Community Councillor,
Dalry
Glenkens Vision – Wider Context
National
Regional
Local
Agriculture and forestry subsidies
Carbon credits
Place Planning
Regional Land Use Partnership
Sub-catchment planning
Peatland Restoration
Local Development Plan (3)
Biodiversity credits
Local land use network
Woodland and Biodiversity Strategy
Land reform
Live projects
Just transition
Net Zero
National Planning Framework (4)
Natural Capital Innovation Zone
Opportunities?
Considering land-use in a much wider context
- intrinsically connected to other agendas
such as education, housing, health and
well-being, local economic development.
Bringing together multiple operators and
communities locally for sub-catchment level
opportunities (connectivity, recreation, local
employment, skills and education, housing
projects etc.)
Engage with:
•Businesses
•Local groups and organisations
•Regional Land Use Partnership
•Natural Capital Innovation Zone
•Local Authority
•NGOs and other organisations like GSA Biosphere
•Government agencies e.g. SEPA, Scottish Forestry and
NatureScot
•South of Scotland Enterprise
•NHS
Lack of resources/capacity
Siloed culture
Challenges
?
Too few people ‘round the table’
Lack of influence over national actions like
agricultural or subsidy changes
Lack of influence over local decision making
Diversity of local perspectives
3. Glenkens Land Use Forum
Dr Stephen Connelly,
Dalry
Feasibility Study into the creation of a
Land Use Forum in the Glenkens
Dr Stephen Connelly
8 July 2024
Introduction
• A next step in the development of the Glenkens’ capacity to
plan and shape its future:
Community Action Plan Land Use Vision this and
other studies implementation of the Vision
• SOSE and NatureScot funding for GCAT and Dalry Community
Council
• Who am I?
• The next 15 minutes: why and how; main
conclusions/recommendations; how this fits into everything
else; next steps?
Purpose, approach, methods
How can the potential of the Land Use Vision be
realised?
• through a Forum – which might draw up a Land Use Plan?
Or something else?
Starting point:
People matter: interests, emotions, beliefs…
…but so do structures of government and the market
Approach is pragmatic but idealistic:
what can be done in the face of:
combined market and policy forces +
very limited and weak opportunities for community
input +
a changing and unpredictable policy environment?
Gathering
information
• Listening empathetically
to all stakeholders –
especially those who
might not be supportive
• 22 interviews:
forestry, energy,
farming,
conservation,
governance, residents
• missing: big
farms/estates
+ policy documents, press
articles
a set of 5 options
Options assessed for:
• Alignment with the Vision’s goals for:
o sustainable development
o a body/process which can advocate; support
local projects and consultations; network;
raise awareness; create ‘positive actions’
with landowners; represent the Glenkens;
research and learn (!)
• Capacity to act
• Community support
• External support and credibility
• Cost – in time and money
A set of options…
Option
Overall assessment
Do nothing new
Unsustainable and insufficient to realise the
potential of the Vision.
Supported stakeholder
interaction (ad hoc and
reactive)
Flexible stakeholder
group (seeking win-wins)
Very feasible, low risk, could achieve some
positive change, but insufficient to realise
the potential of the Vision.
Planning group
(developing a Glenkens
Land Use Plan)
A fully inclusive
stakeholder Forum
Feasible, low risk, would partially realise the
Vision’s goals and improve stakeholder
relations, but would not achieve structural
change.
Feasible, would provide a solid basis for
future advocacy and possibly structural
change; high risk of deepening divisions
between stakeholders.
Difficult to organise and high risk. The
optimum outcome is very attractive, but
unlikely to be achieved; failure could leave
the situation worse than at the outset.
Highly demanding of volunteer time and
Principles for
recommendation
s
Maximise chance of
achieving something
worthwhile
Minimise risk of making
things worse
Recognise changing and
unpredictable policy
environment
Build in a developmental
approach: increasing trust
and understanding more
ambitious futures
Conclusion 1: not a Plan…
• Why have a Plan (i.e. maps+proposals)?
• statement of the community’s aspirations
• can set targets/limits on land uses
• streamlines proposals for land use change (e.g.
for new plantations)
• nests neatly into the regional land use and
local place planning processes
• Why not have a Plan?
• with statutory force, it would unacceptably
bind land managers and discourage investment
• without statutory force, it would be pointless /
misleading / time-wasting
• creating a Plan would increase divisions
Conclusion 1: …but a Glenkens Land Use Map
• avoids these problems: provides a resource and a platform
• collates/collects disparate and scattered information:
include community knowledge and values
identify info gaps
build up a log of change
• enables layering e.g. riverine woodland + land holding;
valued views + curlew habitats + new plantations
• feeds directly into Regional Land Use Partnership work
For: project planning, funding bids, policy advocacy,
community consultation responses, plantation design…
…and could turn into a Plan over time (with trust/buy-in)
Conclusion 2: not a Forum but a
Network
• a home for the Map + a base for positive
action
• proactive: thematic studies on ‘what is to be
done?’ with respect to land use and…
…employment, education/learning,
tourism, procurement, water etc.
= spatial planning for the CAP + LPPs
• reactive: responding to proposals, mediating
conflicts
structure: a worker, a steering group, a
network, task-and-finish groups
How does this link with everything else in the
Glenkens?
• Draws on and draws together Local Place Plans
o adds a Glenkens-level
• Takes forward the Glenkens Community Action Plan (CAP).
o A Map could be the spatial version of the CAP – showing
where things should happen
o The Network could be a delivery (or at least planning)
arm of the CAP Steering Group
Potential for overlap / lack of role clarity
• Draws on the Participatory Monitoring study.
How does this link with everything
else beyond the Glenkens?
Regional Land Use Partnership (RLUP)
The RLUP wants ‘sub-catchment’ land use
frameworks
But what are Regional or sub-catchment
frameworks for? To ‘inform’ decision
making?
The Council’s Local Development Plan process
• Could it be(come) a Glenkens Local Place
Plan, with weak but statutory status?
As long as it delivers something useful for us,
the rest is a bonus…
What next?
Some
questions for
discussion…
Who runs the Network and creates the Map?
The CAP Steering Group (more effective?) or
the community councils (more visibly
democratic)?
Who funds it?
Where do we start…
… a map?
… a theme?
… or do we want to jump straight to creating
a Land Use Plan?
4. Participatory Monitoring
Dr Kerry Morrison,
Balmaclellan
The Task
To Design a
Participatory
Monitoring
Scheme of
Land Use in
the Glenkens
•Engage with Glenkens
communities in a creative
manner to understand the values
they associate with landscape
and how they can be monitored.
•Design a participatory
monitoring framework to
document landscape change over
time.
Get Out
And About
And Engage
Wild swim meets…...Boating on the Ken….. Crafting groups …….
Photography groups…............Writing groups…… Art classes……
D&G Arts Festival Networking Meet up ……..…………………………..
Community woodlands with volunteering opportunities…………...
Singing groups .…. Ornithology group ………. Producers’
market….. The Glenkens Story: Music-Making: Past, Present and
Future ………. Woodland creation consultation for Duchrae,
Lochinvar
Out and About: The Process of
Engagement and Recording Land Use
The
Stewartry
Ornitholog
y Group,
Balmaclell
an
From Corriedoo along the A702 towards Dalry
The cows, black
The calves, white-ish
Suckling
Lying
Clustered together
On high ground
Rush, Wet land indicators
16 black cows
12 white-ish claves
In the air, strong, sweet, pungent dung aroma
melding and fading with the wind and the grasses
Rams across the road
Stare at me
I draw him
curiously
Staring back at me
Fixed
point landuse
monitoring
I record the lane where I live. I photograph the
changes that are happening…
No-one hears me or hears what I’m concerned about.
I’d like to be involved in something like this…
It’s not just about recording the landscape changes,
it’s also about recording emotions and how I feel
when changes happen…
I don’t record the landscape, but I do write protest
songs about loss of nature.
I record the birds in the garden. I’m a qualified bird
ringer and I ring the birds in my garden.
I’m a botanist and I would love to be involved. I
particularly love hedgerows and am concerned about
their loss…
I worry about Ash Dieback and what will happen
along our lanes lined with ash…
Tormentil, Eyebright, Thyme
Artist
Responses to
Land Use in
the Glenkens
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
The whinchat rests its weary wings, over,
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
The skylark hovers overhead, sings too
So before you bring the darkness
Or use your poison spray
Look down to the ground. Look all around, over
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
For among the broom and hawthorn,
The riggit Galloways graze,
Written in response to the loss of
marginal grassland habitats in the
Glenkens through either
commercial Sitka spruce dominated
forestry or farming intensification
and the impact this is having on
whinchat and other farmland birds
Susan Bielinski
And atop the blackthorn the whinchat songs, over
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
The cuckoo calls across the glen, over
Tormentil, eyebright, thyme
Cairn Chorus
Cairn Valley Song Cycle. In 2016, Cairn Chorus
commissioned new material to illustrate:
what our landscape means to the community, what
community means to us and how changes in a rural
community affect us.
Galloway Sangstreams— Songs Of Life, Land And
Legacy (2024) follows on from this with new
commissioned works alongside pieces from Cairn
Valley Song Cycle. This growing body of work, created
and performed by members of our community is
inadvertently recording/monitoring changes in land
use, and actively singing out the importance and
relevance of land use to local people - past, present,
and future.
deliberately inconclusive investigations into absence
Helmut Lemke
Ted Leeming and Morag Paterson
Morag Patterson, The Species Scrolls, 2023
Ted Leeming. Artful Migration, 2023
The Glenkens Story: Music Making Past, Present, and Future
We are producing material, data, and snapshots of our landscape.
We are reshaping the landscape to increase biodiversity, bring back and regenerate lost
landscapes, increase access to nature, and working towards economic and
environmental sustainability.
We are creatively responding to our landscape through song and music, creative writing,
performance, and the visual arts.
Environmental organisations, groups, independent environmental scientists, and nature
enthusiasts are collecting quantitative data.
We are participating in the array of Nature & Culture opportunities that the Glenkens
landscapes offer.
Throughout the Glenkens, people are actively participating in these landscapes and are
invested in them.
A Land-Use Festival
Could it happen across the Glenkens? Perhaps in all the community halls?
How can I get involved?
Our area needs something like this.
A biennial land use festival, what a fantastic idea.
And it would have art and science stuff? Wow, that’s a great idea.
I’m really interested in this, but I don’t live in the Glenkens. Could I still be
involved? Maybe I should move here.
This is just what we need!
Proposed themes for monitoring & recording Land Use and Changes Over Time
Theme
Example
1
Treasured places and views
Otter Pool, views from Waterside Hill
2
Landscapes at risk
‘unproductive’ and unprotected areas
3
Climate adaptation
Forest to bog, riparian tree planting, regenerative farming
4
Climate change impacts
Flooding, droughts, storm damage
5
Landscapes undergoing change
New forestry, changes in farming practice
6
Micro recording
Species, water quality, and sounds
7
Work, rest, and play
Dog walking, wild swimming, cycling, rambling,
meditation
8
Inspiration, spiritual connectedness, and aesthetic
appreciation
Deeply personal connections to landscapes and nature
9
Just because/it’s on my doorstep
Hedgerows, verges, lanes
10
The overlooked
Scrubby, dank areas, post-industrial and brownfield sites,
lay-bys
Land-Use Festival Themes
Thank You
5. Land Use in Local Place Plans
Becca Nelson,
Glenkens Community Space Network
facilitator,
Dalry
Land use in Dalry’s
Local Place Plan
Local Place Plans were introduced in the 2019
Planning (Scotland) Act
Schedule 19: Local Place Plans
Introduced by section 15A
Preparation of local place plans
(1) A community body may prepare a local place plan
(2) A local place plan is a proposal as to the
development or use of land
(3) It may also identify land and buildings that the
community body considers to be of particular
significance to the local area.
Planning circular 1/22 (extract)
4. Local Place Plans are community-led plans
setting out proposals for the development and use
of land. Introduced by the 2019 Act, these plans
will set out a community’s aspirations for its future
development. Once completed and then
registered by the planning authority, they are to
be taken into account in the preparation of the
relevant local development plan.
The LPP must comply with:
• NPF4
• Local
Development
Plan
• Locality plan
• Regional
Spatial
Strategy
NPF 4 highlights the climate emergency
and biodiversity crisis
Information gathering:
data/GIS mapping
Community engagement
Workshops
Underlying principles section of LPP
• Nothing about us without
us
• Community wealth building
• Everyone who takes value
from our land returns value
to it
• Climate crisis
• Biodiversity/Nature crisis
Template Local Place Plan
• As well as the Dalry LPP, a template LPP has been created.
• It has parish-wide Land Use considerations embedded in it, like
Dalry’s.
• It also amplifies (instead of duplicating or reinventing) the
Community Action Plan.
• GCAT has made this template available to all Glenkens Community
Councils.
• An additional package of support (my time!) is also available to
advise and facilitate the process, using the D&G Council grant
available for LPP creation.
6. Q& A / Discussion /
Next steps?
7. Appendix slides for
reference
(From a presentation of the Reports and
Vision to Scottish Government, May 2024)
From the Glenkens Land Use Vision
We are a forested area, a farming area, an energy generation area.
We are a watery area, given life by our rivers and lochs.
Our natural environment is so special that we are part of the Galloway and
Southern Ayrshire UNESCO Biosphere.
Our landscapes attract visitors from all over the world.
We are a peaty area and our soil stores some of Scotland’s best carbon.
It is our home, where we work, live and play.
Effective partnership working
CAP SG –
community
decision
making
Monthly meetings
between Chairs to
check in on CAP
delivery through
GCAT
GCAT –
lead on
delivery
Delivery
of CAP
prioritie
s
GDT Chair and
up to 3 GDT
Trustees sit on
CAP SG
GDT –
bring in
the
money!
Clear separation
between GCAT
(project delivery) and
GDT (project funder)
Land Use Context
Overwhelmed by speed and
intent of land use change in
the area and by lack of power
that we hold to effect
change.
Little opportunity for
partnership working with
developers, owners and
managers
The disconnect between national and
regional policy intent and what is
actually happening in the Glenkens
feels absolute.
Market forces / outdated woodland strategy /
inflexible forest grant scheme options mean
cumulative impacts and habitat connectivity are
not adequately assessed.
Land Use context
Land use developments in our area appear to be essentially extractive. Most profits and
benefits are realised elsewhere, jobs are created elsewhere.
Community Wealth Building principles are not embedded or mandated. Therefore the
impact of these developments on our communities is not a catalyst for more jobs, a
circular local economy and thriving and sustainable communities.
Lack of community agency in decision making or governance
.
Low awareness of and/or attention to Just Transition and LRRS principles by developers,
owners and managers.
Dalry Parish – case study
36% of
parish
currently
planted or
consented
for
commercial
planting (up
from 26% a
decade
ago). More
plans in
pipeline.
Issues
concerning
private
water
supplies
Grazing
lands
change
hands,
hedgerows
pulled out.
Waterside
Hill, a
treasured
landscape difficult to
engage with
manager
and owner.
Off-market
land sales
Land Use Forum –
Policy and Strategy
Alignment
Local
NSET
RES
RLUP
& RLUF
Glenkens Land
Use
Network
LRRS
Natural
Capital
Innovation
Glenkens
Land
Use Map Zone
Just
Transition
D&G
Strategy
LocalWoodland
Place
Plans
Community
Wealth
Building
D&G
LBAP
Glenkens Community
Action Plan
Land
Reform
Local Government
Reform
Scottish
Forest Strategy
Regional
ARCB
National
Next steps for us
• Seek funding for the Network Convenor role.
• Share learnings from and promote engagement with the
Reports.
• Formalise Land Use stakeholder group as a Community Action
Plan sub-group.
• Continue to create LPPs that amplify community concerns and
link to the Glenkens Community Action Plan.
• Continue to build advocacy for rural communities.
• Continue working for improved outcomes on current
development proposals.
Opportunities & Challenges
Opportunities:
• Innovative private/public/community partnerships.
• Testing zone for new policies and ideas - pilot schemes designed for
replicability.
• Linking national and regional strategic outcomes to direct delivery on the
ground.
• High-capacity community offering excellent value for money!
Challenges:
• Sectoral lobbying for status quo
• Lack of flexibility and responsiveness within grant and subsidy schemes.
• No resources within the Glenkens to progress this at present.
Further information
•
•
•
•
•
CAP Delivery Report, June 2023: Glenkens Hub - CAP Update Report June 2023
Community Action Plan 2020:
Glenkens Hub - Community Action Plan (CAP) - Overview
CAP Steering Group records:
Glenkens Hub - Community Action Plan (CAP) Steering Group
GCAT: GCAT – GCAT
Land Use page, Glenkens Hub (including Land Use Vision and Steve and Kerry’s
Reports): Glenkens Hub - Land Use in the Glenkens
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Moving the Glenkens Land Use Vision forward
Description
An account of the resource
A ‘Land Use in the Glenkens’ meeting was held on 8th July 2024 in The Smiddy, Balmacellan to report and discuss the recent land use projects
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_21
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Land Use Forum
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
land use
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/625/240711_Education_LearningEvent_Presentation_cover.jpg
944493924c3cd7ba56294786110f9b75
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/625/240711_Education_Learning_event.pdf
fac21d1ca1dded2a3d0235f4d6e17589
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Education and Learning
in the Glenkens
11th July 2024
Caroline Reeves,
CAP Steering Group Member
Timings
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
7pm:
7:05:
7:40:
7:50:
8:00 - 8:20:
8:20:
8:55:
9:25:
9:30:
Welcome
Industry Panel
Brief reactions / clarifications
Theona Morrison (CoDeL)
Break
Educational Panel
Q&A / discussion.
Wrap-up and next steps
End
Richard Nash,
Natural Power Consultants.
Education and Learning
in the Glenkens
Presenter: Richard Nash
Date: 11 July 2024
© Natural Power 2024
Working to create a world powered by renewable energy
Education and Learning in the Glenkens
A potted Bio about me
Richard Nash
o Chartered Certified Accountant for 27 years.
o Also represents the years I have worked within the Fred. Olsen group
of companies.
o Working in Shipping & Freight, Cruise Lines, Travel Agency and now
within the Renewables sector.
o Last 10 years as Director of Finance and Board Company Secretary
for The Natural Power Consultants Limited and its subsidiaries.
o For the last 3 years, am a non-executive Board Member on the D&G
College Board, chairing the Finance and General-Purpose committee.
o Resident of New Galloway & Kells for 10 years.
o Two children, who went to Dalry Primary and Secondary schools
before completing their Highers at Castle Douglas.
© Natural Power 2024
Education and Learning in the Glenkens
Who are Natural Power?
o Head Quarters at The Green House,
based 5 miles from Dalry.
o Have offices in Stirling, Glasgow,
Inverness, Newcastle, Aberystwyth
and Dumfries. Also in United States,
Ireland and France.
o Provides consultancy and
operational services exclusively for
renewable energy projects.
o This includes:
Creating a world powered by Renewable Energy
•
On-shore wind farms
•
Off-shore wind farms
•
Solar
•
Battery and other energy storage
•
Renewable heat
© Natural Power 2024
Education and Learning in the Glenkens
The staffing resource problem…
o The renewables industry has matured.
o Means there are now more roles in the industry than suitably
experienced or qualified individuals.
o High demand for staff with a low supply has pushed up wages
in the industry.
o Staff no longer travel for (what was) a hippy idealistic industry.
o D&G is an area not blessed with leading Higher Education
providers producing the talent needed for the future.
o These issues makes it difficult to attract new staff to the
Glenkens.
o Natural Power expects to continue growing by 12% annual
through to 2030.
This represents a fantastic opportunity for our local talent,
if we can get this right!
© Natural Power 2024
Education and Learning in the Glenkens
Skills pathways to employability at Natural Power:
Local education route for skills required:
Glasgow
University
(Dumfries Campus)
NP’s requirement:
Ecologist &
Environmental
Scientists
D&G College
Engineers &
Geotechnical
Internships
Data analysts
On the job
learning
Back-office
support skills
Secondary
Schools
© Natural Power 2024
Education and Learning in the Glenkens
Great example of when it works:
o Creating a link between D&G College and Natural
Power, including introductions and linking up the right
people.
o Worked with D&G College to refine their Wind Turbine
course to better fit our needs.
o Resulted in three summer placements. By the end of
the summer, two locally based staff were recruited by
Natural Power as Wind Turbine technicians.
o D&G College named the course after Natural Power
that is a recognised national qualification in Scotland.
o The achievement was recognised and showcased in
the Scottish Funding Council report. →
o Addresses Natural Power’s skill gap.
© Natural Power 2024
Thank you.
© Natural Power 2024
Matthew Bacon,
Vattenfall.
Green Jobs for
Glenkens
Let’s build a fossil fuel free future
30/07/2024
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
13
Introducing Vattenfall
Our plans in the Glenkens
Maximising careers & jobs as we build
What jobs?
How Quantans Hill's community benefits can
support skills, careers and jobs
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
Introduction
100%
8 million
1.0 million
Owned by the Swedish State
Electricity customers
Electricity network customers
2.1 million
2.3 million
20,995
Heat customers
Gas customers
Employees
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
Introduction
Location of our operations
and major plants
Harsprånget
Stornorrfors
Forsmark
Uppsala
Wind
Biomass
Hydro
Gas
Vesterhav
Syd and
Nord
Horns Rev 3
Ringhals
Sandbank
Kriegers Flak
Dan Tysk
Amsterdam
Hollandse
Kust Zuid
Thanet
Nuclear
Coal
Largest facilities marked with a circle
1 Heat Berlin is to be divested to the State of Berlin during 2024
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
Solar
District
heating
Berlin
1
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
17
Quantans Hill Wind Farm
Our next opportunity to support local jobs
Proposal submitted to Planning Feb 2023
An investment in Glenkens to
• 14 turbine development plus battery storage
• Create new apprenticeships – with Vattenfall and
contractors
• Bring an estimated £7m boost to local economy
• Deliver up to £16m community benefits package with flexible,
community-led approach targeted to meet community priorities.
• Around £110 million capex investment
• 30-35yrs operational life
• Over 250Ha+ of land for biodiversity enhancement
including new native broadleaf planting and restoration of
heathland and peat
• Carbon emission savings of around 4m tonnes
• 15km of new sign-posted, accessible tracks through
restored habitats
• Improved access to and understanding of important
WW2 crash site and other features of historic interest
• Currently awaiting determination and a consultation
response from Dumfries and Galloway Council
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
18
Study findings
Workforce and skills requirements in Scotland’s onshore wind industry – May 2024
Findings
• To meet 2030 ambition:
• 2024 Scottish onshore wind FTEs: 6,900
• 2027 Scottish onshore wind FTEs: 20,500
• 90% of these roles are in construction. Operations and
maintenance is smaller requirement but over a much
longer timeframe.
Skills shortages identified
Wind turbine technicians, high voltage engineers, planning
officers, speciality consultants (environmental and
technical), civils and construction, digital skills
Particular challenges in remote and rural areas
• Nearly 50% of these construction roles and 40% of
operations roles will be needed in Highland and Dumfries
and Galloway.
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
19
What jobs?
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
20
Jobs and careers in wind farm development
Construction phase
For info on careers, qualifications etc go to www.myworldofwork.co.uk
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
21
Vattenfall's apprenticeship programme
We will do our part but others in the industry needed for transformational change
• New scheme announced in May 2023.
• Our aim is to create 50 new apprenticeships by
2030 locally to where our projects are granted planning
permission.
• Roles will be both with Vattenfall and across our supply
chain. Mandatory for our main contractors.
• Will be a mixture of Modern and Graduate
apprenticeships in variety of roles including Project
Management, Electrical and Mechanical Engineering,
Construction, Environmental Management and
Communications.
• Will also be working directly with local schools to support
delivery of Foundation Apprenticeships.
• Vattenfall partnership with Developing the Young
Workforce in local schools to promote opportunities
locally.
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
22
Community
benefits
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
Confidentiality – High (C3)
23
Community Development Strategy
If consented, Quantans Hill Wind Farm could generate a community benefits package worth up to c£16million
Strategy
• Developed by independent
consultants in 2021
• Desk-based research and stakeholder
engagement
• Identified 8 Strategic Objectives with re
commended actions
• First Strategic Objective related to jobs
and young people
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
24
Potential outcomes
Indicative at November 2021
Relevant to job creation, skills and training
• 10-15 years of employment for a full-time salaried Project
Officer
• 250-350 residents upskilled;
• Around 50 qualified apprentices fully subsidized.
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
25
Conclusions
• Huge opportunities for South-West Scotland as a key regional
hub in the UK to create high quality jobs across a long-term
construction and operational pipeline.
• Opportunities for young people and older people looking to
retrain. Roles for both graduates and non-graduates.
• Incumbent on wind farm developers, supply chains,
communities, schools and colleges, and local authority to work
together on a strategy and joined up schemes.
• None of this can happen without swift approval from consenting
authorities.
• Today’s planning permissions are tomorrow’s jobs.
Construction work at South Kyle Wind Farm, Dalmellington, March 2023.
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
26
Abi Mordin,
Propagate CiC
Theona Morrison
Community Development Lens,
Uist
The Glenkens and district Community Action Plan was published in 2020 and has a
goal that the Glenkens will be a connected, resilient and carbon neutral place,
where people will want to live, to work, to bring up their families, and to grow old.
The Glenkens & District Trust has commissioned a piece of rigorous research to
explore developments in, and discussions around, rural education in Scotland
and beyond, particularly in areas that are suffering depopulation and have seen
a decline in school rolls.
CoDeL ( Community Development Lens) shines a light and evidences ‘green
shoots’ in island and rural communities. CoDeL was the first to recognise that
young people, were staying, returning and settling in Uist.
What do we educate our children for?
While enabling them to be the best
that they can be in a global society,
how much depends on what they
know about where they are?
Hebrides experience: The LA adopted a formal education strategy in
2008 designed to stem population decline. We had amongst the
worst population projections: a decline of 25% in total population
and one-third in the working age population by 2046
This strategy meant every child had the entitlement to nationally
accredited, industry recognised qualifications linked to employability
within the local economy, informed by LLMI.
In parallel, every young person experienced a workshop based on a
New Economics Foundation model which provided an ‘economic
literacy of their place’.
In Uist, an accredited Leadership course was also delivered.
CoDeL: Increasingly, we could see that young people
were returning, staying and moving to Uist.
Budgets and planning were based on declining
population.
Our obervations were doubted – so we decided to
count the young adults.
We counted 469 young adults across 7 islands, with a
population circa 5,000 ( a very high percentage).
The research methodology followed principles of
participatory rural appraisal, which emerged in the
developing world but now widely practiced across the
globe.
Redefining Peripherality
2021 research commissioned by the Northern Periphery and Arctic research project.
CoDeL were the lead partner in research from multiple universities and civil organisations from
Finland, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Greenland and Canada to the Highlands and Islands of
Scotland and Ireland.
Findings presented at the European Rural Pact conference, at COP26, the World Rural Health Conference
and the European Rural Parliament.
“One of the most stimulating, visionary but also evidenced and well-informed documents I’ve come
across in relation to post-Covid.” David Bryan, Head of Sustainable Business, Social Enterprise Academy.
CovidEcon-MR-Part1-Key-finds-Recos-Summaries.pdf (codel.scot)
Results ……..
What and how do we measure impact:
Important to measure what is relevant not just
what is measurable……E.g. SfW, NPAs
Foundation Apprenticeships
➢This resulted in James Hutton / SRUC recognising that we
had data which had not been hitherto picked-up.
➢Subsequently, with funding from SEFARI, we worked with
JHI, SRUC and CLS on the Islands Revival project which
resulted in the Islands Revival Declaration. The top line
of which states
We affirm that there is credible evidence of ‘green
shoots’ of population turnaround in the Scottish
islands, which as yet does not show up in official
statistics.
New Research………………
Ulva ferry
Strontian is a remote rural village on the Ardnamurchan peninsula, over an hour
away from Fort William by car and ferry. The Communities Housing Trust (CHT)
has worked with the community over a number of years facilitating
a Community Place Planning exercise, which included the delivery of affordable
housing and providing project and development agency services on Scotland’s
second community-owned primary school.
Glenkens and District Trust Research
Brief: To explore developments in, and discussions around, rural education in
Scotland and beyond, particularly in areas that are suffering depopulation and have
seen a decline in school rolls.
Methodology:
• Ensure Glenkens voices are heard, using the CAP Steering Group and GDT
Trustees.
• Bring in relevant aspects from Redefining Peripherality research.
• Use CoDeL networks to explore wider developments – Iceland and Ireland
connections as well as rural Scotland.
Output:
• Written report in September / October.
Break
Anne Paterson
Small Rural
Schools in
Scotland in Focus
Anne S Paterson OBE
July 2024
The definition of place often begins with the
geography and the demography of place and
is further shaped by how these influence the
economics and sustainability of
communities.
The way places are linked and perceived is
important for how inhabitants interact with
place.
94% of the land mass of Scotland is rural and
17% of the population are resident in rural
areas.
34% of Scottish Schools are rural
Rural education is part of Scotland’s
inclusive and equitable education
HOWEVER - Very little research undertaken
about rural schools in Scotland – we don’t
know if they are beautiful.
Is small beautiful? A scoping review
of 21st-century research
on small rural schools in Europe –
Fargus-Malet, M and Bagley,C (2021)
• Relationships between small
rural schools and communities
an increasingly popular theme.
• Broad perspective from inside
and below a closer look at the
situation of small rural schools
and the people/communities
involved.
Rural Schools Under Pressure – Fargus and
Bagley (2022)
• Financial pressure
• Staff’s intense (and often
unmanageable) workload
(including teaching head teachers
having a dual role)
• High staff turnover and difficulties
in recruiting and retaining qualified
staff
• Falling pupil enrolment
• Professional isolation of teachers
and headteachers
• Inadequate infrastructures
• Challenges in delivering a broad
and wide-ranging curriculum
• Pedagogical multi grade teaching
Solutions to support sustainability – Fargus
and Bagley (2022)
Training and professional development programmes for teachers and principals, which are
tailored for working in the small rural school environment
Suitable material resources
School collaborations, clusters and netrworks to reduce professional isolation and boost
schools’ resources
Distance learning, virtual learning environment and the use of ICT (when the right
infrastructures are provided, ie appropriate digital structures and teacher and pupils’
digital competence to use them).
Policy in Practice
and Practice in
Policy in small
rural school in
Scotland –
Paterson, A (2020
commenced)
Importance of context in relation to enacting
national, local authority policy in Scotland
Importance of community expectations and
national policy
Knowing me, knowing you – the lived
experience
Innovation - sustainability, thinking outside
the box
Relationships of place, people and policy
• Policy - development, implementation, results (policy makers)
• Place – community, home, school, demographics, topography (walking with the
place)
• People – children, teachers, parents and community (values, purpose,
interconnections)
Corbett (2021), Grunewald (2008)
“IT TAKES A VILLAGE TO RAISE A CHILD”
(African Proverb)
• Rural Communities play a huge part in educating a child and achieving inclusive
and equitable education. Our communities build the potential for our children to
be successful and know they are supported in their learning. These communities
need to be supported by policy to become inclusive, equitable and provide
opportunities for all
Rural Researcher responsibility, respect and
reciprocity
• Encourage self-reflection – your standpoint
• Other ways of thinking and knowing are valued and treated equally
• Transparent and open engagement with the community from the outset
• No to deficit views but also do not ‘romanticise the lived experience of the rural’
• Confidentiality can be challenging in small rural places: ensure participants are
given opportunities to amend or refine their comments early in the process
• Giving back to the community – learning from rather than about the Other
(Anderson & Lonsdale 2014)
• Language of wakefulness – alert awareness responsive to communities where
diversity is cherished and wondering about possibilities.
(Clandinin and Connelly 2000)
•
Ethically awake to criticism and comments which encourage ongoing reflection
and inquiry.
• For further discussion points or views on rural education and in
particular around policy and place please contact:
• Anne.Paterson@strath.ac.uk Twitter #@garvachy11
Suzie Dick - apologies
Helen Keron
Community Action Plan
• The ‘Glenkens and District Community Action Plan’ was
published in September 2020.
• 4 key themes:
•
•
•
•
A Connected Community
An Asset Rich Community
An Economically Flourishing Community
A Carbon Neutral Community.
• A Glenkens Land Use Vision was adopted as an addendum in
July 2023
Community Action Plan Goal
The Glenkens will be a connected, resilient and carbon neutral
place, where people will want to live, to work, to bring up
their families, and to grow old.
It will be somewhere that other places in Scotland will look to for
inspiration.
This is fully aligned with the D&G Council Locality Plans and the
South of Scotland Regional Economic Strategy.
It represents non-silo’ed thinking that embodies ‘Place’ and
Community Wealth Building in their widest senses.
Community Action Plan
• GCAT leads on delivery of the Community Action Plan.
• The CAP Steering Group owns the CAP, assures delivery and
keeps it relevant.
• The Glenkens and District Trust administers the community
benefit monies through Foundation Scotland.
Partnership working for CAP delivery
CAP SG –
community
decision
making
Monthly meetings
between Chairs to
check in on CAP
delivery through
GCAT
Delivery
of CAP
priorities
GCAT –
lead on
delivery
GDT Chair and
up to 3 GDT
Trustees sit on
CAP SG
GDT –
bring in
the
money!
Clear separation
between GCAT
(project delivery) and
GDT (project funder)
Evolving context
• The Community Action Plan does not explicitly mention
education – it was created in 2020 in the context that the
current educational provision was assured.
• However, Education and Learning is an underpinning
element of the ‘Economically Flourishing’ theme, and the
overall goal of sustainable communities.
• Effective cradle-to-grave Education and Learning
provision is a crucial part of community wellbeing and
empowerment.
• It is a key factor in averting depopulation.
Working together
• The CAP Steering Group knows that it does not have
all the answers.
• However, it is committed to seeing the principles of
community empowerment and voice adhered to.
• This will both achieve the CAP Goal and regional and
national priorities.
Working together
• Is there a third path to walk, between the status quo
and no provision at all?
• A creative solution based on a vision of thriving rural
communities where current and future economic
development is underpinned by innovative
educational provision?
• And done in strategic partnership with the Council,
communities and businesses, where all parties are
valued for their expertise?
Andrew Pyle
QUIZ: Who Said?
If you live in Scotland you are Scottish.
Small is Beautiful.
Education is the Generation of Happiness.
Learning by Doing.
The Glenkens is awash with talent.
Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to
freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to
join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other
than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic
society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the
prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or
for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This article shall
not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of
these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the
administration of the state.
Q&A / Discussion
Effective partnership working
for CAP delivery
CAP SG –
community
decision
making
Monthly meetings
between Chairs to
check in on CAP
delivery through
GCAT
Delivery
of CAP
priorities
GCAT –
lead on
delivery
GDT Chair and
up to 3 GDT
Trustees sit on
CAP SG
GDT –
bring in
the
money!
Clear separation
between GCAT
(project delivery) and
GDT (project funder)
Natural Power Appendix: DYW
© Natural Power 2024
Quantan’s Hill Indicative funding allocations
NB these figures are indicative - full consultation with local communities will be entered into at later stage
The potential deliverable benefits for communities in Carsphairn and GDT over the operational lifetime of the wind farm (estimated to be up to 30 years)
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
81
Potential deliverable benefits for the communities of
Carsphairn and GDT over 30yrs - Quantan’s Hill
NB these figures are indicative - full consultation with local communities will be entered into at later stage
Confidentiality: C1 - Public
82
Anne Paterson References
• Anderson, M. & Lonsdale, M, in White, S.,& Corbett ,M.,(2014). Doing educational research in
rural settings: Methodological issues, international perspectives and practical solutions.
Routledge
• Clandinin, D.J. and Connelly, F.M. (2000) Narrative inquiry : experience and story in qualitative
research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Corbett, M., 2021. Structures of feeling and the problem of place in rural education. S. White & J.
Downey (eds) Rural Education Across the World: Models of Innovative Practice and Impact.
Singapore, Springer, pp.167-183.
• Fargas-Malet, M. and Bagley, C. (2022) ‘Is small beautiful? A scoping review of 21st-century
research on small rural schools in Europe’, European educational research journal EERJ, 21(5),
pp. 822–844. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211022202.
• Gruenwald, DA. & Smith G.A.(eds) 2008) Place-based Education in the Global Age: Local
Diversity, London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Further information
•
•
•
•
•
CAP Delivery Report, June 2023: Glenkens Hub - CAP Update Report June
2023
Community Action Plan 2020: Glenkens Hub - Community Action Plan
(CAP) - Overview
CAP Steering Group records: Glenkens Hub - Community Action Plan
(CAP) Steering Group
GCAT: GCAT – GCAT
Education and Learning page, Glenkens Hub: Glenkens Hub - Education
and Learning
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Education and Learning in the Glenkens event
Description
An account of the resource
The Glenkens Community and Arts Trust (GCAT) hosted an Education and Learning event in the Glenkens on 11th July 2024, on behalf of the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan Steering Group.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_22
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
CAP Steering Group
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
education
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/626/240730_Ed_Dept_CAP_SG_Meeting_Note.jpg
c864efe24d1ca64ea9367d1bb224fa2d
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/626/240730_Ed_Dept_CAP_SG_Meeting_Note.1.pdf
ffa3b2409e5fedbdc3cb56d23288ff2d
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
OFFICIAL
Meeting Note
30 July 2024
The Smiddy, Balmaclellan
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mr John Paterson, Chair of Glenkens Community Action Plan Steering Group
Ms Fiona Smith, Chair of the Glenkens and District Trust and Community
Action Plan Steering Group member.
Ms Caroline Reeves, Community Action Plan Steering Group member and
Chair of the E&L event on the 11th.
Mr Stew Gibson, Chair of Dalry Schools Parent Council
Ms Helen Keron, Executive Manager, GCAT
Dr Gillian Brydson, Executive Director Education, Skills and Community
Wellbeing
Apologies – None
Purpose of the meeting was to build relationships and share understanding of the
issues related to education provision in the Glenkens. While there is a pressing
matter over educational provision at Dalry secondary school there was
understanding that the meeting would benefit from a wider discussion. There were a
number of points circulated that we agreed to talk to at the meeting:
•
DGC strategic vision for Education and Learning was discussed with the
recognition of the need for a strategic approach towards a modernised and
sustainable school estate. There was debate over the key principles that
emerged during the consultation and the risks of falling rolls for finance and rural
provision.
https://dumfriesgalloway.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s58719/Transformation
%20Update%20-%20School%20Models.pdf
GCAT raised concerns that, taken to their ultimate conclusion, the existing
principles could facilitate and lead to rural depopulation. The policy and context
of the current debate on rural depopulation raises the issue as to whether the
principles are still wholly appropriate in a rural context and whether they need to
be reviewed through the rural lens.
•
Actions from the event on the 11th which designed to inform and inspire, in
response to the changing nature of education provision in remote-rural Glenkens.
The full write-up from this event is published on Glenkens Hub - Education and
Learning in the Glenkens event. The CAP Steering Group is delighted that the event
has prompted these ongoing conversations with the Education, Skills and
Community Wellbeing Department.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
•
Dalry Secondary School; Challenges set out from both perspectives. It was
agreed that GB to discuss further options with the Chair of Dalry Secondary School
Parent Council Stewart Gibson, and a meeting to be held with Head of Education
Resources, John Thin and the Headteacher, Steven Foster. All were of the view that a
positive and future focussed discussion was required recognising that there were
national issues that we could only work together to influence.
GB raised that rolls at Dalry Primary School and nursery provision were also a
pressing concern. It was agreed that the immediate focus for the Council, School
Management and Dalry Secondary School Parent Council discussion would be 215yrs educational provision, ACTION GB to arrange meeting with those noted above
A broader discussion over 15-24yrs employability and learning to be shaped by
community and industry partners. 'ACTION GCAT (TBD)
ACTION GB to introduce HK to Frances Woodifield. FS to contact Dame Barbara
Kelly for an initial discussion.
• Employment connections and commitments with Developing Young Workforce.
GB to meet with Natural Power in the afternoon and have a discussion regarding
enhancing the school/employer links. ACTION GB to consider curricular model with
the Headteacher and build senior phase opportunities as part of normal school
focus on employability coordination group. Consideration of Glenkens learning hub
where CLD and employability, retraining and upskilling could be the focus linked to
local employment needs. The role of SOSE in the shaping of this was helpful and
some examples were shared where other communities were taking forward similar
work. ACTION; HK to establish connections with SOSE.
• Community transport – HK is the route for requests, although it is early to
consider any specific requirements at this time. NO ACTION REQUIRED until the
meeting with the school re curriculum is established.
•
Mothballing Policy - A member officer working group is now established and
due to commence in September. The composition and chair of the group is
being finalised and can be confirmed following the recess. ACTION GB
It was agreed that a further meeting be established to engage again on the work
todate. Timescale early Oct, ACTION Ingrid Gemmell / HK to arrange and support.
OFFICIAL
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Education Department and CAP Steering Group Meeting Note - 30th July 2024
Description
An account of the resource
The Education and Learning event held in the Glenkens in July 2024 catalysed a very useful meeting between the CAP Steering Group and Dr Gillian Brydson, Director of the Dumfries and Galloway Education, Skills and Community Wellbeing department. The meeting has led to actions that are being worked by both sides, and hopefully heralds a new era of community and Council partnership working on these critically important issues for the area.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_23
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
CAP Steering Group
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
education
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/627/241015_CAP_SG_DGC_meeting_write-up.jpg
d406cf610c0e990759fe90b14521e809
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/627/241015_CAP_SG_DGC_meeting_write-up.1.pdf
14da800ef6b8974b0b339353e645f58b
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
Glenkens Community Action Plan Steering Group.
Education and Learning sub-group.
Write-up of meeting 8th October 2024.
Fiona Smith and Sarah Ade, representatives of the Glenkens Community Action Plan
Steering Group, and Helen Keron, GCAT Executive Manager, met Gillian Brydson,
Director of Education, Skills and Community Wellbeing and Ingrid Gemmell, Stewartry
Ward Officer, on Tuesday 8th October 2024.
The actions from their July meeting and future plans for partnership working to find a
sustainable model of education and learning in the Glenkens were discussed.
GCAT updated the meeting on conversations with SOSE and The Crichton Trust about
the possibility of the creation of a rural Skills Hub in the Glenkens. This would be for
post-16, so not statutory education, but of course of great relevance to Skills and
Community Wellbeing. Neither SOSE nor the Council are resourced to lead on this idea,
despite the long pipeline of rural industries coming into the Glenkens. Developers are
interested but there are too many moving parts at present for them to grasp on to. The
Crichton Trust however has some extremely interesting ideas for rural skills training and
GCAT will look forward to working with them on that.
Gillian confirmed that the contract into research into depopulation mitigation is out
with procurement for quick quotes which will be open until the 8 November 2024. She
confirmed later that ‘the Glenkens community will be the rural community that will be
part of the community engagement programme’. This research will report in March
2025.
Gillian confirmed that she is holding dates for a meeting with the Chair of Dalry Parent
Council and the new Head of Dalry and Castle Douglas Secondary Schools to progress
next steps with respect to Dalry School (later confirmed for the week of the 28th
October). The secondary school currently has 11 pupils across S1-S4, and the number
transitioning up to S1 will be confirmed in November.
Fiona confirmed that the CoDeL report into models of education for rural areas will be
published in November, as an evidence-based research report designed to inform next
steps for all parties.
We updated Gillian and Ingrid that the Community Action Plan Steering Group were in
the process of formalising their Education and Learning sub-group, with membership to
be drawn from Glenkens residents, Glenkens Parent Councils, Elected Members,
Developer / business representatives and Ingrid, on behalf of the E,S & CW dept. Gillian
suggested the addition of a Developing The Young Workforce (DYW) rep, which was a
good idea.
We stated our hope that the Education and Learning sub-group could be a valuable
resource to the Council, adding in a deep place-based understanding of the
implications of Council decisions to the wide policy-based context that the Council has
to work within. Also our hope that the depopulation work would act as a lever to review
national urban-biased policies that are unintentionally exacerbating rural depopulation.
It was agreed that the South of Scotland Regional Economic Partnership should have a
role in this work, amplifying the voice of the South of Scotland and the rural lens to
Scottish Government.
Gillian updated that the Mothballing Policy group, consisting of 5 Members and
Officers, and Chaired by Gail MacGregor, had had its first meeting. This is a cross-party,
cross-D&G group that will report its recommendations to full Council in March 2025
after engagement with stakeholders. We reiterated the Glenkens commitment to
working with the group in a constructive manner to achieve the best outcomes for our
remote-rural context.
We raised the question as to whether the E,S&CW dept could give any assurance about
the timeline for Dalry Secondary School. It was discussed that it was very hard for P7
parents to make the decision to send their children there in the absence of any
confirmed period of the status quo. With the CoDeL report, the Mothballing Policy and
the depopulation research all reporting late this year / early next year, it was hoped that
a firm decision could be made now to maintain the status quo while the implications of
these reports were analysed. However, Gillian could not make any commitment about
this.
The group agreed to meet again after the CoDeL report was published, to reflect on the
findings and next steps.
Thanks to Fiona and Sarah for volunteering their time and expertise on this important
matter, and to Gillian and Ingrid for continuing to engage as we all strive towards a
sustainable place-based solution for education and learning in the Glenkens.
Helen Keron, 14th October 2024
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
CAP Education and Learning sub-group meeting with Dumfries and Galloway Council - 8th October 2024
Description
An account of the resource
Fiona Smith and Sarah Ade, representatives of the Glenkens Community Action Plan Steering Group, and Helen Keron, GCAT Executive Manager, met Gillian Brydson, Director of Education, Skills and Community Wellbeing and Ingrid Gemmell, Stewartry Ward Officer to discuss actions from the July meeting and future plans for partnership working to find a sustainable model of education and learning in the Glenkens
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_24
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
CAP Education and Learning sub-group
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Glenkens & District Trust
CAP Theme 3
education
-
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/628/A_Review_of_Rural_Education_in_the_Glenkens.jpg
e578f167cd838e0b357b12f35e341e67
https://glenkensarchive.scot/glenkens_archive/files/original/20/628/A_Review_of_Rural_Education_in_the_Glenkens.1.pdf
c4646c5b4c7416e47f85cee92e2fd64f
PDF Text
Text
pdftext_placeholder
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Community Action Plan
Description
An account of the resource
Documents relating to the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan, initially drawn up by Glenkens & District Trust in 2020.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Text
Any textual data included in the document
A review of rural education
in the Glenkens
Commissioned by the Glenkens and District Trust
Written by Thomas Fisher and Theona Morrison, CoDeL
November 2024
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 2
Executive Summary
This report reviews the links between education and the sustainability of rural communities.
The review focuses on opportunities and challenges for educational provision in the Glenkens,
a dynamic and engaged rural community in Dumfries and Galloway (D&G).
The research reviewed some of the latest national and international research, and created
case studies of practical strategies for delivering education in rural areas. The researchers also
facilitated community sessions and interviewed people with relevant insights.
Key findings:
✓ Educational opportunities are intricately bound up with community and economic
development, as well as housing provision, and should not be seen in isolation.
✓ The provision of rural education plays critical roles in …
•
delivering on national (Scottish) and local (D&G) policy to support thriving rural
communities, directly addressing depopulation and developing skills, opportunities
and resilience for their long-term sustainability;
•
equipping rural communities with the skills to respond to the twin climate and
biodiversity emergencies, building on existing local knowledge and experience;
•
sustaining vibrant local economies, through education that meets the recruitment
needs of local employers, in the present and the future, and encourages enterprise.
✓ Recent rigorous research shows that school closures lead to local rural depopulation in
the medium term.
✓ Place-based education can contribute to the sustainability of rural areas. It rebalances
schooling not just to focus on ‘learning to leave’, but gives young people skills,
opportunities and genuine choice to pursue their lives and careers locally, or elsewhere.
✓ Small rural schools face challenges, but can deliver many benefits to their communities
and pupils, giving them a sense of belonging, respect and resilience to become
responsible and contributing individuals, whatever pathway they take beyond school.
✓ There are many successful models of educational provision that have been developed to
sustain rural communities in practice, for example,
•
learning locally relevant rural skills, drawing on local knowledge and resources
(Perthshire);
•
developing curriculum opportunities and accredited qualifications that create
pathways for young people into local employment and enterprise (D&G, Outer
Hebrides and the Isle of Wight);
•
Developing life-long learning opportunities through diverse community
organisations, in partnership with the public and private sectors (Uist and Denmark).
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 3
Hearing the voices of local people led to an emerging vision for education in the Glenkens: to
create an educational hub at the heart of the community to deliver rural place-based learning
from cradle to grave. The hub could become a centre of excellence for relevant rural skills, for
example for the land-based and renewable energy sectors.
This review was commissioned by the Glenkens and District Trust to set out options for
educational provision to support the goal within the local Community Action Plan “to be an
area where people will want to live, work, bring up their families and grow old.”
The review was delivered by CoDeL, a social enterprise based in the Outer Hebrides with
knowledge and experience in rural and island issues across Scotland and internationally,
including depopulation and education.
About the authors
CoDeL’s two founding Directors, Thomas Fisher and Theona Morrison (who is also the current Chair of
Scottish Rural Action that delivers the Scottish Rural Parliaments), bring extensive experience and
understanding of rural issues, not just through research and policy development, but also direct lived
experience of delivering and facilitating community action across a wide range of sectors for 20+ and
30+ years respectively in the Outer Hebrides, and previously in many different contexts within
Scotland, Britain, Europe and internationally.
Both Theona and Thomas have direct and long-term experience of innovating and delivering education
and learning that directly addresses the specific needs of rural communities and local economies.
Theona worked for almost 20 years for the Education Department in the local council in the Outer
Hebrides, including a strong focus on enterprise education informed by a deep understanding of local
economic literacy. In particular, she developed education linked to the needs of the local economy,
and was part of the team that ensured the council adopted the Vocational Education Strategy in 2008.
She managed the development of the first crofting course for schools delivered at the local secondary
school in Uist, and supported the development of other vocational training matched to the needs and
opportunities of the local economy, e.g. in health and social care. She has continued to support this
kind of work as a member of the UHI Post Graduate Nursing & Midwifery Committee and of the
advisory group that supported Community Land Scotland to develop curriculum resources for schools.
Thomas organised the first Children’s Parliament group of children aged 8 to 13 in Uist and Barra,
worked for almost a decade at the local adult education centre, Cothrom, a local social enterprise with
a special focus on adults facing challenges in their lives. At Cothrom he developed the Enterprising
Young People’s programme with Theona at the Education Department, delivering enterprise
workshops for all senior phase pupils across the Outer Hebrides. Thomas also developed two
mentoring programmes for young people, and, as a long-term facilitator for the Social Enterprise
Academy, designed and delivered the first Wide Horizons programmes for young unemployed people,
which have been delivered across the Highlands and Islands, and a range of leadership programmes,
including for young leaders in rural and island communities.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 4
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 2
About the authors ............................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction to this review............................................................................................................. 5
Introduction to CoDeL .................................................................................................................... 6
Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 6
Context and issues............................................................................................................................. 7
The context: the Glenkens and Dumfries and Galloway .................................................................. 7
School closures and rural depopulation ......................................................................................... 9
Centralisation vs. local educational provision ............................................................................... 10
Opportunities and challenges of small schools ............................................................................. 13
The demands of the twin climate and biodiversity emergencies ................................................... 16
A note on integrated policy .......................................................................................................... 18
Potential models: evidence from within and beyond Dumfries and Galloway .................................. 19
Example 1: Rural skills (Breadalbane Academy and the Rural Skills Training Centre) ..................... 19
Example 2: Subject offerings and accredited qualifications relevant to the local economy
(Outer Hebrides, Dumfries and Galloway, and the Isle of Wight) .................................................. 20
Example 3: Offering wider curriculum choices in small schools (Shetland and e-Sgoil) .................. 23
Example 4: Rethinking local food (Propagate)............................................................................... 25
Example 5: The Interns Project under the Galloway Glens Initiative.............................................. 26
Example 6: Enterprising Young People in the Outer Hebrides ....................................................... 26
Example 7: Life-long learning within the community (Uist and Denmark) ..................................... 28
Conclusions: looking forward ........................................................................................................... 29
Key principles emerging from this review ..................................................................................... 29
An emerging vision for educational provision in the Glenkens ...................................................... 31
Is the ambitious vision practical and achievable? ......................................................................... 33
Assets and strengths that can contribute to the realisation of the emerging vision ....................... 34
A note on housing ........................................................................................................................ 36
Reflections on options for education in the Glenkens ................................................................... 36
Concluding remarks ......................................................................................................................... 37
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 38
References....................................................................................................................................... 39
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 5
Introduction
Introduction to this review
This review was commissioned by the Glenkens and District Trust (GDT). The Glenkens is an active and
engaged rural community in Dumfries and Galloway (D&G). The Trust, established in 2011, is a fund
distribution body to resource, enable and stimulate community development in the Glenkens and
surrounding communities, defined as the Community Council areas of Balmaghie, Balmaclellan,
Carsphairn, Corsock & Kirkpatrick Durham, Crossmichael, St. Johns Town of Dalry, Dunscore, Glencairn,
New Galloway & Kells and Parton.
The decision to commission this review was triggered by the proposed mothballing of Dalry Secondary
School, but GDT wanted to review options for educational provision within the area more generally,
rather than focusing just on the future of Dalry. GDT wanted “research to explore developments in,
and discussions around, rural education in Scotland and beyond, particularly in areas that are suffering
depopulation and have seen a decline in school rolls”. The aim is that this report “will be used to inform
local groups, the Education Forum and the Council on potential options for educational arrangements
in our area. Among other benefits this should support the goal in our Community Action Plan to be an
area where people will want to live, to work, to bring up their families and to grow old. It could also
be used to input into consultations by the Council’s Education Department on the future of education
facilities in the Glenkens.”
These aims reflect the integration of this review within other community processes, including the
Glenkens and District Community Action Plan (CAP; see here) and the Education Forum set up by the
CAP Steering Group, at the same time that GDT commissioned this review.
The Glenkens is in fact a highly organised community that adopted the CAP in 2020, with three closely
connected but distinct voluntary entities to ensure delivery and accountability of the Plan: GDT, the
Community Action Plan Steering Group and the Glenkens Community and Arts Trust (GCAT).
At an event on Education and Learning in the Glenkens in July 2024 (see here), Helen Keron, Executive
Manager of GCAT, explained:
The underlying aim of the CAP is for the Glenkens to be ‘a connected, resilient and carbon neutral
place, where people will want to live, work and visit, to bring up their families, and to grow old’.
The Community Action Plan is fully aligned with D&G Council’s Locality Plans and the South of
Scotland Regional Economic Strategy – it represents non-siloed thinking that embodies ‘place’ and
community wealth building in their widest senses.
The CAP does not explicitly mention education; it was created by the communities in 2020 in the
context that the current educational provision was thought to be assured. However, Education and
Learning is an underpinning element of the ‘Economically Flourishing’ theme of the CAP, and the
overall goal of sustainable communities. Cradle-to-grave education and learning provision is a
crucial part of community wellbeing and empowerment, as well as averting depopulation.
Can we work together to find a pathway between the current status quo and no provision at all?
We are looking for a creative solution based on a vision of thriving rural communities where current
and future economic development is underpinned by innovative educational provision, working in
strategic partnership with businesses, communities and the Council and where all parties are
valued for their expertise.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 6
Introduction to CoDeL
GDT commissioned Community Development Lens (CoDeL), based in Uist in the Outer Hebrides (or
Western Isles), to deliver the review. CoDeL was launched in 2018 on the back of community-rooted
research on young people returning, settling or staying in Uist. This led to collaboration with the James
Hutton Institute on the Islands Revival blog bringing together case studies of island communities that
were turning the tide of depopulation. This work changed the narrative around island demographics
within Scotland.
During Covid CoDeL led the partnership for an EU-funded research project that included 13
universities, research institutes, public bodies and private and social enterprises. The project
researched the economic impacts of Covid on so-called ‘remote’ rural communities across the
Northern Periphery and Arctic, from Canada to Finland, and including Scotland and Ireland. This
research changed the narrative on ‘remote’ communities, highlighting their strengths, assets and
resilience in times of crisis. The research earned CoDeL the Best RSA Blog Post of 2022 Award from
the global Regional Studies Association.
CoDeL has continued to do community-rooted research, on young island voices, rural social enterprise,
community responses to evolving environmental policies, and case studies on community action in
Uist and the Glenkens (working with GCAT, the Galloway Food Hub and Bairn Banter). CoDeL also
delivers Uist Beò, an innovative digital platform to support repopulation within Uist (see here).
CoDeL’s two founding Directors, Thomas Fisher and Theona Morrison (who is also the current Chair of
Scottish Rural Action that delivers the Scottish Rural Parliaments), bring extensive experience and
understanding of rural issues. This comes not just through research and policy development, but also
from direct lived experience of delivering and facilitating community action across a wide range of
sectors for 20+ and 30+ years respectively in the Outer Hebrides; and previously also in many different
contexts within Scotland, Britain, Europe and internationally. Both Theona and Thomas have direct
and long-term experience of innovating and delivering education and learning that directly addresses
the specific needs of rural communities and local economies (see further about the authors at the end
of this report).
Methodology
This report is based on a review of relevant published literature, interviews, case studies, and local
community engagement.
Literature review
Although not always easy to find, there is in fact a significant and growing body of published research
on rural education from across Europe and North America, on the challenges and opportunities of
small rural schools and how rural education intersects with the development and sustainability of rural
communities, including around depopulation. What was immediately apparent from this research is
how common the themes and challenges, policy measures and opportunities are across different
countries and places, and how emerging research is influencing insights elsewhere within Europe and
North America. Dr Anna Karlsdottir, a Nordic academic, for example pointed to “a rapid decrease in
the number of schools in rural areas in the Nordic countries” (personal communication). The situation
in the Glenkens, and in Dumfries and Galloway generally, is far from unique, and examples and
research findings from other countries are of significant relevance.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 7
Interviews and case studies
A larger research project would have allowed more extensive processing of this growing body of
published research, which makes clear the impact of rural education policy on the future of young
people and of rural communities. This is especially the case when such policy is not designed within a
more integrated policy framework, including around depopulation and the climate emergency.
However, the published research does not often reveal practical strategies for delivering effective rural
education that can support and sustain local communities and economies amidst the current
challenges, not least financial constraints. That is why the methodology included searching for some
unpublished materials as well as interviews of individuals with relevant experience and insight. The
interviews and other communications have included senior staff within Education Scotland, a senior
education policy maker in Ireland, and Headteachers or teachers from other schools.
The insights from this have been captured in a range of case studies found in the appendices to this
report, including some case studies written by CoDeL itself. These have been supplemented by case
studies which were shared at the event on Education and Learning in the Glenkens in July (see
Glenkens and District Community Action Plan Steering Group et al, 2024). Material from the case
studies is cited in this report, but those who want more detail can view each of the case studies.
Community engagement
The third major component of the methodology has been community engagement, participating in
the July event in the Glenkens, delivering two community sessions in the Glenkens itself in September
(attended by current and former parents and pupils, and the new Head Teacher at Dalry), and
conducting seven interviews, including with the Executive Director of Education in D&G Council. The
published research, especially on placed-based or place-conscious education, demonstrates that
effective educational provision that is rooted in local places and communities must be adapted to the
specific context in each place. For example, the local economy and the network of potential partners
for engaging with local education will be different in each place. That is why voices and insights of
local people are just as important as any published research. Indeed, with the deep commitment to
education that communities in the Glenkens have demonstrated over many decades, it is apparent
that there is significant insight and experience within the Glenkens, which has informed this review
and could help with developing and implementing effective local educational strategies in future.
Context and issues
The context: the Glenkens and Dumfries and Galloway
The Glenkens is a collection of remote-rural villages in Dumfries and Galloway, facing significant
challenges of social isolation, rural poverty and inequity of provision. It has an older demographic,
with very low numbers of 18-35 year olds. At the same time, the Glenkens has a track record of
community empowerment stretching back decades, with many and diverse community organisations
and actions. The Glenkens is increasingly organised and ambitious, aligned across the area around the
Community Action Plan, published in September 2020 after significant community consultation.
The Glenkens fall within Dumfries and Galloway (D&G) in south west Scotland. The region is a highly
rural area, with agriculture accounting for 70% of land, and woodland a further 25%, with only three
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 8
towns with a population of more than 5000 people. The opening paragraph of the Vision for Land Use
in the Glenkens (see here) reflects much of D&G as a whole (although not its coastal areas):
We are a forested area, a farming area, an energy generation area. We are a watery area,
given life by our rivers and lochs. Our natural environment is so special that we are part of the
Galloway and Southern Ayrshire UNESCO Biosphere. Our landscapes attract visitors from all
over the world. We are a peaty area and our soil stores some of Scotland’s best carbon.
At the same time Dumfries and Galloway faces significant demographic challenges. The D&G Council
Plan for 2023-28 (see here) expects the overall population to decline by almost 3% by 2028. Dumfries
and Galloway has a greater proportion of older adults and a median age of 49.6 years compared to
Scotland's (42 years). The population is aging and it is expected the proportion of older adults will grow
over time with the number of younger people decreasing. The population projections by National
Records of Scotland (NRS) in 2018 predicted that by 2043, for every 10 people of working age there
will be 9 children or older adults, compared to 7 currently.
The overall vision and ambition of the D&G Council Plan for 2023-28 is “to be a successful region, with
a growing economy, based on fairness, opportunity and quality public services, where all citizens
prosper. Working in partnership, with connected, healthy and sustainable communities. The region
will be the natural place to live, work, visit and invest.”
From the Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan for 2023-28:
on education
“The Council will improve education and learning opportunities to help all our children, young people
and citizens fulfil their potential. This starts with pre-school, then school, before progressing into
further or higher education or transition into work.
“We will work with our partners to create and promote lifelong learning opportunities so everyone in
the region can live a meaningful and fulfilling life, and contribute to their community.”
** Places of learning are inclusive, sustainable and meet the needs of local communities.
** Children, young people and adults transition successfully through all life stages.
** Young people and adults succeed in what they want to achieve.
** Local people can build their skills and confidence.
Such educational provision will not only directly address aspirations for education within D&G, but also
the second principle in the Plan on supporting our citizens, specifically addressing inequalities “to
ensure inclusivity, accessibility, celebrate diversity and secure social benefits of change” for all, including
in rural communities. One data point in the plan is that “4549 adults and children reported improved
mental health and wellbeing through the Council’s lifelong learning activities”.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 9
School closures and rural depopulation
The impact of school closures on rural populations has been keenly debated and researched in many
countries, in Britain, across Europe, North America and elsewhere. Some of the most recent rigorous
research comes from Scandinavia, which has seen significant school closures across rural areas. The
tensions within policy are very similar. “In the debates on possible school closures, policy makers often
express their hopes of cost reductions and higher quality in education. On the other hand, local citizens
fear that closing their local school will have adverse effects on the community and lead to population
decline.” (Sørensen et al, 2021, p.226).
Evidence from Denmark and Finland confirms a robust and statistically significant link between school
closures and depopulation.
Sørensen et al’s research on the impact of the closure of eight rural schools in one municipality in
Denmark concludes that there is clear evidence of a negative population effect of rural school closures:
… a statistically significant population decline of 7.6 percentage points was found in the eight
communities affected by school closures throughout the 10-year post-closure period. Stated
differently, we found that the population development in the affected communities would have
been 7.6 percentage points more favourable if the schools had not been closed. (p.233)
Lehtonen (2021) analyses the community-level population effects of 518 school closures that were
carried out in Finland during 2011–2018. Of these school closures, 66% were in rural areas.
The major finding of this study is the association of school closures with depopulation of the
communities around the closed schools. The results indicate that after school closure, the
population of the surrounding community decreases more than before the school closure.
Therefore, a primary school seems to be an increasingly important element of the critical services
that impact household location decisions. (p.145)
Both studies reveal important aspects of the depopulation that results from school closures. First, the
impacts of school closures are often very local, within the immediate local communities. Lehtonen’s
analysis in Finland focuses on small catchment areas: the 5-km and 10-km catchment areas
encompassing the local communities surrounding the school closures.
Second, there is a time lag in those impacts. Sørensen et al used a 10-year timeframe, discovering that
“the population decline first got statistically significant from the sixth year following the closures and
onwards. … if we had used a post-closure period shorter than 6 years, we would not have found any
significant population effect.” (p.233)
It is obvious that a school closure may not lead to families moving away immediately, as they are bound
by many other social, cultural and economic ties. “The delayed materialization of negative population
consequences suggests inertia in the reaction towards the school closures. Residents in the affected
areas may need time to evaluate the new situation and to possibly react to it, e.g. by moving away”
(Sørensen et al, 2021, p.231). And the critical impact of reduced in-migration of families returning or
settling, because there is no local school, will also take time to manifest itself in the data, as research
from Canada demonstrates (Foster et al, 2021, p.23)
… the [Canadian] data analysed for this article provide support for the common belief that the
presence of community schools helps communities, rural, urban, or otherwise, retain and attract
young population. We find that communities closer to a school [both elementary and secondary]
are more likely to see inmigration of school-age children.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 10
The evidence from Ireland also lends support (see Case Study 4 in the Appendices). “National and
international data supports the Inishbofin islanders’ contention that appropriate education provision
on the island increases sustainability of the community, as stated in their submission to the
Department of Education requesting a post-primary school on the island.” When the Department
turned down this request on the grounds of small pupil numbers, the Ombudsman for Children’s Office
challenged the decision on the basis of human rights, and stated, “If the school was opened the
numbers would grow as living on the island would be made viable for families with children or planning
to have children, and families who have left ….. could now return with their children.”
It is these two important insights, the local impacts and the time lag for those impacts to arrive, that
distinguish the research from other earlier studies, which often used wider regional or municipal data
and shorter timeframes, such as 2-year or 4-year post-closure periods. In consequence, earlier studies
delivered either mixed results or no population effect of rural school closures.
Sørensen et al complemented their demographic analysis with qualitative research, interviewing local
people on the impact they experienced from the school closures (pp.231-33). They “reported of
families with children who had moved away from the village as a direct result of the school closure.”
The most frequent negative consequences mentioned included “depopulation, difficulties in attracting
and retaining families with school-aged children, eroding social connections”, “less people
volunteering and a decline in the number of members in local associations” pointing to “an erosion of
social capital in the community” and even “social fragmentation”, especially among children who were
sent to different schools after their local school closed.
The research by Sørensen et al in Denmark and by Lehtonen in Finland confirms a robust link between
school closures and local depopulation, which comes after a time lag, and is supported by the research
from Canada also.1
This presents a significant challenge to Dumfries and Galloway, a rural region facing an ageing
population and depopulation, that has 100+ schools, many of them small and old. Critical
considerations for council policy are not just financial constraints, or even just educational policy, but
the wider impacts of school policy in the context of overall council policy, especially in addressing
depopulation. As the Commission on the Delivery of Rural Education in Scotland recommended back
in 2013 (Scottish Government and COSLA, 2013),
Local authorities, together with their health and other Community Planning partners, should
consider rural education holistically for their area, from early years to further and higher education,
actively seeking solutions to enhance the viability of rural communities. [emphasis added]
Centralisation vs. local educational provision
“The reasons behind school closures in most countries are cited typically as financial (i.e. small rural
schools are too costly to run in comparison to larger schools).” (Fargas-Malet and Bagley, 2022, p.830).
In the recent long period of deep austerity it is not surprising that many local authorities have struggled
with maintaining small schools. Nevertheless, financial reasons are not the only factor involved. For
1 Dr Anna Karlsdottir, a spatial geographer at the University of Iceland and Nordregio, who has reviewed spatial disparaties in
the significant school closures seen across the Nordic region this century (e.g. in Karlsdottir et al, 2019), writes: “One thing is
sure, that the attraction value/amenity value of potential future inhabitants with kids declines with local schools closing
down. That then reduces the regional ability for transition and renewal.” (personal communication)
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 11
example, issues like the breadth of curriculum choice and other opportunities, as well as pupil
socialisation, are important other considerations for children and parents.
However, extensive relevant research suggests that there may well also be underlying biases against
rural education, biases that are in fact reflected across much public policy. Michael Corbett was the
first to articulate these concepts most clearly, in his thesis and book, Learning to Leave (2007), about
rural education in Nova Scotia in Canada. The blurb for the book states:
This innovative case study from Nova Scotia analyzes the relationship between rural communities
and contemporary education. Rather than supporting place-sensitive curricula and establishing
networks within community populations, the rural school has too often stood apart from local life,
with the generally unintended consequence that many educationally successful rural youth come
to see their communities and lifestyles as places to be left behind. They face what Michael Corbett
calls a mobility imperative, which, he shows, has been central to contemporary schooling. Learning
to Leave argues that if education is to be democratic and serve the purpose of economic, social,
and cultural development, then it must adapt and respond to the specificity of its locale, the
knowledge practices of the people, and the needs of those who struggle to remain in challenged
rural places.
Learning to Leave has triggered much additional research. For example, Gulløv and Gulløv (2020)
clearly analyse how children and young people in rural Denmark are educated to leave, from early
learning in nurseries through the choices that young people are forced to make in terms of their
secondary education, all within a system in which almost all further and higher education has been
highly centralised in the past few decades.2 The impact on further rural decline is hardly surprising.
In a later lecture, Corbett (2021) argues that centralisation promoted on the premise of increased
efficiency has in fact long been core policy across developed economies, from health-care provision to
education:
… the relentless centralization and bureaucratization of public services whose mandate is
principally driven by the establishment of performance norms and the application of standardized
indicators to quantify relative performance across space. These comparative metrics, in turn,
support managerialism and the marketization of education. (p.2)
Corbett analyses how such centralisation has its roots in thought and policy since the mid-19th century,
since when the primacy of centralised and urban centres was seen as embodying modernity and
progress, while rural, and especially small rural, was seen as backward and in decline. Powerful
economic and political dynamics, which have drawn social, cultural and educational policy and practice
in their wake, have led to the rapid growth of urban living and an apparently relentless decline in rural
populations.
The evidence from Canada and Denmark confirms that these processes have meant that schooling in
rural areas has often focused on educating young people to leave or even escape their place, and to
pursue aspiration and success in urban centres, through the pursuit of ever more specialist and
2
Gulløv and Gulløv directly link the findings of their own research to Corbett’s: “As argued by Corbett & Forsey (2017),
in the organisation of the education system, curriculum, assessments, counselling, teachers’ preferences and indeed
the whole educational mindset there is a fundamental orientation toward an urban middle-class way of life with an
emphasis on individual aspirations and social flexibility. These values permeate the students’ beliefs and hierarchies in
terms of what is desirable and recognisable. Despite the fact that a local sense of social commitment and attachment
is regarded in general as positive in the local setting, the high-school students [in Denmark] refer to it mostly as an
obstacle which has to be overcome in order to gain success in an urban, middle-class way.” (p.122)
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 12
narrowly-defined knowledge, which is assigned the highest value in our economic and social
structures.
Significant recent publications suggest that many research agendas, including on education provision,
have in fact been deeply influenced by a deficit perspective on rural areas, rather than recognising and
valuing the many assets and strengths of rural communities. In the book Ruraling Education Research
Roberts and Guenther (2021) devote considerable attention to this issue:
… remote is often conceptualised as peripheral to the city by distance as well as socially and
culturally. However … for people whose families live in remote towns, it is the city that is distant
and peripheral. Such perspectives are rarely considered in discussions of educational policy. To
address this, and other, implicit biases, this chapter examines how language socially constricts the
‘problem’ to be solved, rather than implicitly valuing people, places, and communities. (p.13,
emphasis added)
The counterpoint to centralisation rooted in seeing rural areas as backward is a strong emerging focus
within research, as well as practice on the ground, of place-based or place-conscious education.
Place-conscious education is a response to more than a century of what Wendell Berry (1997) called
‘unsettlement,’ or the progressive emptying of the countryside, which has detached the majority of
people in advanced capitalist societies from the sources of the energy, food, and materials
necessary for shelter and comfort, while at the same time vilifying rural people and places as
backward. A focus on place in education also confronts “metrocentric” education and social policy
that fail to account for differences between places and how rural areas have been largely absent
from key educational discussions. (Corbett, 2021, pp.1-2)
Many of the principles underlying a place-based approach to education are in fact reflected in the
principles set out in the Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan overall for supporting communities:
They are also reflected in Scottish Government policy: “We know that a place-based approach to
applying national, regional, and local policies will be essential to sustainably and effectively address
depopulation.” (Scottish Government, 2024, Addressing Depopulation Action Plan). This applies to
education policy as much as policies in any other sector.
The next section on small schools will reflect more on the value of place-based education. Here we
conclude that the drive for efficiency savings, especially in times of austerity, presents a significant
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 13
challenge for Dumfries and Galloway as a primarily rural region, but also an opportunity to build on its
extensive rural assets. One of the key principles to emerge from this research (see pp.29-30 below) is
that rural education “needs to be rooted and connected in the place, drawing on local assets,
connections, networks and partnerships, and incorporating local experience and knowledge, including
experience and skills in adapting rapidly to changing circumstances. Educational provision needs to
demonstrate in practice, from nursery through further and higher education to life-long learning, that
it values local assets and strengths, experience and knowledge.” With its over 100 schools, most of
them rural, Dumfries and Galloway is well placed to develop this principle in practice. And, as we shall
see, this is also critical amidst the twin climate and biodiversity emergencies.
It is important to recognise that there should be no assumption that young people must stay in their
rural areas. What is required is to recognise “a core tension between pedagogies of belonging and
pedagogies of mobile aspirations” (Cuervo et al, 2019). What is required is a significant rebalancing of
schooling that does not just focus on learning to leave, but gives rural young people genuine choice
and opportunity (a) to pursue their lives, and work, locally within their community, or (b) to migrate
elsewhere, whether to urban or other rural places, or (c) to pursue a mix of these options. Including
significant opportunities to develop skills relevant to rural life (see the Case Studies from the Western
Isles and on Breadalbane for examples) can contribute to this rebalancing to give young people
genuine choice, including to develop a career path locally.
And the community consultation complemented this focus on formal schooling to include broader
educational provision for the community as a whole that enables local rural people to enhance their
knowledge and skills to meet their personal and community aspirations throughout their lives. This is
already reflected in the Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan for 2023-28: “We will work with our
partners to create and promote life-long learning opportunities so everyone in the region can live a
meaningful and fulfilling life, and contribute to their community.”
Opportunities and challenges of small schools
In the previous section we explored a potential bias within much policy against rural, seeing it as
backward. It is also important to draw attention to a potential bias against small schools. The two
biases are of course closely related, as reflected in Fargas-Malet and Bagley’s article in 2022, titled “A
scoping review of 21st-century research on small rural schools in Europe”. The authors report that
in several countries ... there is a policy bias which presumes that rural schools are somehow
deficient, that multi-age teaching in small rural schools is ‘inferior’ to age homogenous teaching in
larger schools, and that the way to improve rural education is making schools bigger. Significantly,
these prejudices seemingly exist despite little or no hard evidence that pupils in small schools do
worse than others in larger ones. (p.830)
This is confirmed by Sørensen et al (2021: p.226):
Studies have found that school closures have reduced costs, while empirical studies on whether
sending pupils to larger schools improves student achievement have produced mixed results.
Moreover, several studies have stressed the importance of the local school for the local community.
Thus, small rural schools have been found to promote social cohesion and social capital, be rich on
parent involvement, and to contribute to the general ‘health of a community’.
The authors (p.227) quote Wood, on rural schools as “not only an educational establishment, but also
a focal point for community life”.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 14
Fargas-Malet and Bagley’s review of research on small schools identifies a range of common
challenges, including financial pressures and inadequate infrastructure, falling school rolls and the
challenges of delivering a wide-ranging curriculum. There are also challenges around recruiting and
retaining teachers, as well as challenges for teachers in the job, including intense workloads, multi-age
teaching and professional isolation.
Nevertheless, Fargas-Malet and Bagley conclude their review as follows (pp.839-40):
despite all the challenges mentioned, teachers and principals have expressed being satisfied with
working in a small rural school, and some believed that it was a good learning environment for all
pupils, including those with special needs. In fact, small rural schools have also been shown to
provide multiple opportunities to teachers, principals, pupils and the communities they serve.
Firstly, small rural schools are possibly well placed to provide ‘a place-based curriculum’, which
emphasizes children’s relationship with nature and promotes local history and culture. Secondly,
small rural schools appear better able to form strong links to their communities, as well as utilize
the communities’ potential to enrich the educational experience of their pupils, which in turn builds
social capital and social cohesion. Thirdly, small rural schools have shown their potential to identify
and address pupils’ individual needs. Finally, small rural schools have been used as a testing ground
for innovation. In relation to all of the above, and returning to the title of our paper, small would in
some ways still appear to be beautiful!
In Ireland, according to Joe McHugh the Minister for Education and Skills in 2019, almost half of all
schools are small schools, and almost 15 per cent of all Irish children attend one (see Case Study 4 in
the Appendices). The Irish Government takes a positive attitude towards small schools, both primary
and secondary, and is committed to supporting and strengthening them:
Small schools can and do provide an excellent education to our children, right in the heart of their
communities. I went to a small school as a child. I live in an area where small schools are a facet of
life and that is replicated up and down the country. They are often the heartbeat and lifeblood of a
community. … Ní neart go cur le chéile – we need to work together to find new ways of supporting
small schools [to ensure their long-term sustainability].
This commitment to small schools continues, with the Secretary of State for Education in Ireland,
Minister Foley, stating in May 2024 that
small schools are a support and a beacon for local communities. They are at the heart of educating
generations of young people and providing a focal point for families and communities. … small
schools collaborating and working together offers promise for the future.
Similarly, in 2023 the Nordic Rural Youth Panel (Nordregio, 2023) also included the following
recommendation among its 40 recommendations for rural revitalisation: “Working to maintain and
develop smaller schools in rural areas, as they are important for both children and the local
community. At the same time, cooperation should be promoted between smaller schools ”.
It is important to emphasise that while the research on small rural schools cited above includes many
small primary schools, some small secondary schools are also included in the evidence base, including
in the Irish example.
The advantages of small schools featured prominently in the community consultation in September,
where ex- and current pupils of Dalry primary and secondary school shared a story or example of how
their small local schools had benefited themselves or others (see Box and also the Appendices).
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 15
Dalry school provided a safe space to feel
comfortable and a sense of belonging away
from a difficult homelife. Teachers had enough
time / small class numbers to notice, to care.
Positives of smaller groups and
friendships ... Smaller groups – children
/ students have to learn to get on with
each other and understand each others
differences / opinions / likes / dislikes.
True inclusivity, &
kindness, & being
part of the village.
If it weren’t for Dalry I would have to
go to a larger school which I have
already tried and then decided I much
preferred Dalry so I came back.
A small, close knit community where
families know each other and look out
for each other. Open space, fresh air,
nature on our doorstep. Incredible sense
of community, unlike anywhere else!
In small community schools children are aware of
backgrounds of other kids; helps with acceptance
and understanding if behaviour problems arise.
Schools don’t have
hierarchical system.
Students can talk
“back” to teachers;
different relationship.
Dalry welcomed my daughter when she joined
2 years ago. The way she settled in so easily
helped us to feel a part of our new community.
An obvious challenge for small schools may be to offer a wide subject choice for pupils, which the
community consultation identified as a significant concern for current and potential future parents
within the Glenkens. Evidence from two small secondary schools interviewed during this research
demonstrates that a flexible and can-do approach by the school management can overcome this
challenge to deliver significant personalisation of pupil choices across a wide range of subjects,
especially when sharing teachers with other neighbouring schools, and supplemented with some online provision also.
The evidence from Ireland reinforces this (see Case Study 4 in the Appendices):
Notwithstanding the additional challenges faced by [five small post-primary] island schools arising
from their off-shore remote locations, these Education Training Board island schools have built up
a reputation for being well led and managed, academic excellence, resilience, innovation in
adopting and adapting teaching and learning methodologies, including experimenting with
distance learning to best support their communities.
When it comes to pupil socialisation, some families want to choose larger schools, but small schools
can deliver advantages, including for particular pupils. This is reflected in the Glenkens already, where
the D&G Council’s willingness to give parents a free choice about which school their children attend
has meant that 5 our of the current 13 pupils at Dalry Secondary School come from outwith the
catchment area. One of the main attractions for families is the small size of the school which allows a
more personalised education with closer relations among peers and between pupils and teachers.
Head teachers of small secondary schools I spoke to feel that the pupils coming out of their schools
are often more socially able than those coming out of larger schools due to the fact that pupils
relate to people of all ages and have learned to work alongside others who they may not see eyeto-eye with, and therefore develop empathy and respect for others. (Sarah Ade)
Small schools deeply connected to their community can also be very good at nurturing a sense of
belonging and being rooted. In a rapidly and sometimes dramatically changing world, a sense of
belonging, of having an identity that is deeply rooted, can be a critical strength for young people
growing up in today’s world. As one of the participants in the community consultation said,
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 16
Going to Carsphairn and then Dalry enabled me to feel truly rooted within my community; from
this I was able to move away and engage with other communities, before coming ‘home’ to raise
my own children. I think a strong sense of community is key to feeling secure and grounded in life
[generally].
The case study of Baltasound Junior High School in Shetland (Case Study 3 in the Appendices) shows
how much a school can actively build connection with the local community. In the fortnight prior to
the interview, the coastguard, the fire service and the local health centre had all visited the school or
been visited by pupils. The school even has “Bring your Parent Days”, where parents follow their
children for the whole day in school. The Headteacher explained, “They are absolutely knackered at
the end of the day, but they love opportunities to come into the school. We are the hub of community
activity. One school, one community.”3
The demands of the twin climate and biodiversity emergencies
There is rapidly increasing evidence of the impact of the climate and biodiversity emergencies, on local
communities, nations and globally. These emergencies demand responses across all policy areas.
Within their Plan for 2023-28, Dumfries and Galloway Council has positioned Safeguarding our Future
as the very first principle:
•
•
Address the climate emergency: urgently respond to climate change and transition to a carbon
neutral region.
Protect our natural capital: protecting and enhancing our region’s natural capital and habitats
through conservation and sustainable development.
In the Scottish context, the vast majority of natural assets, including Scotland’s biodiversity, are located
in rural Scotland, including of course within Dumfries and Galloway. Education will therefore play a
key role in addressing the climate and biodiversity emergencies, by enabling rural people and
communities to have the skills and be equipped to manage those resources effectively.
As the Commission for the land-based learning review reported to the Scottish Government
(2023:1):
The Commission has sought to review learning in Scotland’s land-based and aquaculture sectors from early years to adulthood …. The aim of the work is to help deliver a just transition to net-zero,
by ensuring the learning system equips people with the skills and knowledge both they and the
Sector requires and that the workforce is sufficient.
… Collectively these [land-based] industries utilise and manage the majority of Scotland’s land and
coastal areas and have the largest impact on our environment. More recently, the land-based
industries have also been included within ‘Green Careers’ recognising the key role the Sector plays
in nature restoration, climate change mitigation and adaptation.
… the wide variety of career opportunities available across all of the Sector’s industries reflect the
specialist skills and knowledge required to produce food and raw materials from our natural
environment in a safe and sustainable manner. This includes the need to manage land in a way
that continues to provide a range of ecosystem services such as flood protection, pollination and
opportunities for recreation. The recent increase in the number of skilled workers needed to meet
3
The day includes having school dinners with the pupils. “Complaints about the quality of school dinners tend to stop
after this!”
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 17
long term Scottish climate and biodiversity targets also presents an opportunity to improve
wellbeing and increase our national connection with nature.
Yet across the Sector, businesses are experiencing workforce shortages and struggling to recruit.
Given their importance in terms of food and materials production, addressing the nature and
climate crises and supporting rural communities and the economy, it is imperative that we find
solutions which attract more entrants, widen the pool of applicants, and increase training
opportunities.
Likewise, the Irish Government published The 2nd National Strategy on Education for Sustainable
Development – ESD to 2030 in June 2022 (see here). Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) has
three interlinked and equally important strands: Environmental, Social and Economic Sustainability.
The accompanying ESD to 2030 Implementation Plan 2022 – 2026 sets out the roadmap to achieving
its targets by 2030 “across the Education Sector from early learning and care to third level and beyond
to non-formal and informal education”.
ESD aims to ensure that all learners have the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable
development. ESD is acknowledged as a key enabler for the achievement of all 17 Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs).
Funding of €250,000 is being delivered to organisations to support them in carrying out ESD related
projects to schools, including, for example, making the school and its grounds more sustainable;
teacher training in ESD; student projects; collaborative projects between the school and the local
community, etc.
None of this should be seen as a call for urban based experts needing to educate backward rural
residents. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES) has stated very clearly that current policies and frameworks “emanating from predominant
political and economic decisions based on a narrow set of values ... will fail to deliver on climate and
biodiversity” until they incorporate the understanding, perspectives, values and worldviews of local
communities and indigenous peoples (IPBES, 2022). This places the experience, knowledge and
worldviews of local communities, especially rural communities, at the very heart of effective responses
to the climate and biodiversity emergencies.
Abi Mordin, founder member of Propagate (see Case Study 9 in the Appendices) and local resident, is
just one among many with local experience and knowledge rooted within Dumfries and Galloway itself.
In reflecting on education amidst the climate and biodiversity emergencies, Abi states,
The principles of soil function are still not being taught in schools and agricultural colleges, despite
the fact that healthy soil is vital for plant growth and nutrition, is more resilient to the impacts of
flood and drought, and stores more carbon. The understanding of the role played by soil has
progressed dramatically in recent years, but information about management for carbon
sequestration, soil health, climate change, livestock and people has not yet been incorporated into
the curriculum.
The Dumfries and Galloway Learning for Sustainability Partnership Group has been set up, having
identified big gaps in the provision of education across food, food security and sustainability. The
Learning for Sustainability Action Plan highlights the importance of embedding this into the
curriculum, but this is not yet being delivered in schools as teachers have not been trained to deliver
the subject.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 18
A note on integrated policy
The overall vision and ambition of the Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan for 2023-28 is
to be a successful region, with a growing economy, based on fairness, opportunity and quality public
services, where all citizens prosper. Working in partnership, with connected, healthy and sustainable
communities. The region will be the natural place to live, work, visit and invest.
The plan itself sets out an integrated vision across different sectors and policies, and seeks to embrace
the creativity and resilience of local places and people, and to make rural communities and places
vibrant and thriving.
With over a third of the council’s budget spent on education, educational provision within D&G’s many
rural communities must play a critical element of any strategy to deliver on the council’s vision.
Educational provision cannot be seen on its own, but must contribute to delivering environmental,
demographic and economic sustainability for rural communities across D&G. This includes investing
in people through education: “Dumfries and Galloway is shaped and defined by the people who call it
home. They are its lifeblood and reflect the history, heritage and culture of the region.”
This means that considerations for educational provision are not just financial constraints, or even just
educational policy, but the wider impacts of school and education policy in the context of overall
council goals, especially in addressing depopulation. The Commission on the Delivery of Rural
Education recommended back in 2013 (Scottish Government and COSLA, 2013),
Local authorities, together with their health and other Community Planning partners, should consider
rural education holistically for their area, from early years to further and higher education, actively
seeking solutions to enhance the viability of rural communities. [emphasis added]
This is reflected in the D&G Council Plan:
Together with partners, the Council will strive to promote a region of opportunity and innovation –
where natural capital drives green growth, ambition and quality of life rivals the best in the UK,
communities are empowered and cultural identity and heritage are cherished. This will enable people
to thrive and attract a new generation to live, work, visit, learn and invest in the South of Scotland.
The box contains some other relevant recommendations from the Commission, which were
highlighted by our Irish sources who derived inspiration from the Commission’s work.
The Commission for the Delivery of Rural Education was asked to review the Schools Consultation Scotland
Act 2010 and its application, and make recommendations on the delivery of all aspects of education in
rural areas. Thirty-eight clear recommendations were made, including:
•
The Scottish Government and local authorities should agree a coherent rural regeneration
strategy to support economic outcomes for rural areas.
•
Local authorities, the Scottish Government, teaching institutions and trade unions should work
together to explore innovative solutions to reduce the barriers to teaching in remote areas; and
to ensure effective delivery of CPD to teachers in rural schools, learning from international best
practice to reduce teachers’ isolation and sustain skills and development.
•
There must be a commitment to resource the curriculum in small rural secondary schools to
support the achievement of positive outcomes and destinations for young people. This will
require innovative and flexible arrangements to be developed including use of local primary
school teachers and other experts within the local community. (Note: Experts within the local
community were used in the Outer Hebrides to deliver the boatbuilding and crofting courses.)
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 19
Potential models: evidence from within and beyond D&G
This section contains evidence of good practice that is captured in the case studies. The case studies
demonstrate potential models that could prove effective in addressing some of the issues and
challenges set out above. Many of the examples focus on the links between education and the local
economy and community, including pathways into employment for young people, but also supporting
local enterprise. Others deal with curriculum choices, including learning to help address the climate
and biodiversity emergencies. And the final example focuses on life-long learning opportunities.
Example 1: Rural skills (Breadalbane Academy and the Rural Skills Training Centre)
An obvious starting point for reviewing potential models is delivering education on rural skills that are
relevant to rural communities across D&G, including of course within the Glenkens. There is an existing
Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) accredited National Progression Award in Rural Skills, described
as “a starting place for candidates pursuing a future in one of the major land-based industries” (see
https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/41752.html); it also includes a qualification at National 4 level.
The case study of Breadalbane Academy in the Appendices demonstrates just how effective education
for rural skills using these SQA qualifications can be. Initially developed with funding from Lantra,
delivery of the course builds on significant assets and opportunities, like the many farms and estates
within a 10-mile radius of the school. The subject provides opportunities to gain qualifications, specific
tickets (e.g. in operating quad bikes and maintaining chainsaws) and significant practical work
experience. There are many different pathways, so it is great for diverse pupils. The course delivered
at Breadalbane has received glowing SQA reports, not least because of how good many of the local
partners are in delivering opportunities for practical experience and learning.
The current course lead at Breadalbane reckons that 50% of pupils taking rural skills end up in local
employment in land-based activities. Many of them might have done so anyway, as they come from
families with similar employment. However, not only does the rural skills course provide opportunities
to gain tickets, qualifications and experience, it also values, affirms and accredits skills that some pupils
come with already through their family background. This is hugely important for place-based
education, recognising and building on local skills, and valuing pupils for skills they may already have.
As the course lead said, “I have learnt a huge amount myself about sheep, pigs and deer from pupils
who could easily deliver a lesson based on knowledge and skills they are already masterful in”.
An example from within Dumfries and Galloway of working effectively with local partners to deliver
locally relevant skills is the forestry classroom at Dalbeattie High School funded by Jas P Wilson, a large
forestry and firewood machinery suppliers and engineers based in the town. And here are reflections
by Wallace Currie, a lecturer based at SRUC’s Barony campus in Dumfries and Galloway (Currie, 2024):
As a former lecturer and Nuffield Scholar who’s traveled extensively to study global agricultural
education, I’ve seen the transformative power of integrating rural topics into learning. … In the
Netherlands, Switzerland, and New Zealand, for example, students engage directly with
agriculture, gaining insights into food production and sustainability. These experiences equip young
people with practical knowledge, foster a deep connection to the land, and prepare them for futures
in rural industries or as informed consumers. … By integrating topics like farming, environmental
stewardship, and sustainability into early education, we can inspire a passion for these fields long
before young people consider their careers.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 20
Example 2: Subject offerings and accredited qualifications relevant to the local
economy (Outer Hebrides, Dumfries and Galloway, and the Isle of Wight)
The rural skills qualifications are just one example of subject offerings in local schools that include
qualifications to meet recruitment needs of local businesses, in the present and the future, and to
provide pathways for pupils to realise those opportunities, either by staying or returning. Such
offerings are critical if educational provision is going to address depopulation, whether within the
Glenkens, Dumfries and Galloway as a whole or elsewhere, and the range of potential subjects and
qualifications is significant. In addition many local employers state that they have recruitment gaps,
which is confirmed within the wider community.4
The Box takes information from Case Study 1 in the Appendices to reflect the strategy adopted by
Comhairle nan Eilean Siar (CnES), namely a formal Vocational Educational Strategy, to address similar
needs across the Outer Hebrides.
To address the dire population projections, a formal Vocational Educational Strategy was introduced and
adopted in 2008. Local Labour Market Intelligence (LLMI) was key to informing decisions around which
courses would be introduced into the curriculum, based on ‘where the jobs would be in the future’. If it
was identified that a sector of the economy was struggling with recruitment gaps or predicted to expand,
but an appropriate course didn’t exist, a writing group was established and the courses were
commissioned, written, verified and accredited, with parity of esteem to sit alongside the qualification
diet offered to pupils. It was important that courses were not just for the less able, but relevant to all
pupils.
Such courses included, at National 5 level, Harris Tweed, Crofting, Maritime Skills and, at Higher Level 6,
Local Food Production, which could provide progression following a number of courses including the
crofting course. The strategy meant every child had the entitlement to a nationally accredited industry
recognised qualification linked to employability within the local economy informed by LLMI.
The delivery of the courses, along with many Skills for Work courses, were delivered, at least in part, by
an industry experienced tutor. This gave pupils learning in context and relevance which proved successful
and popular with pupils.
Other courses were already available through SQA but were not necessarily offered by the schools. In this
case any accredited presenting centre could verify and deliver the course. For example, a collaboration
between Stirling University and the Western Isles Health Board created a Pre-Nursing Scholarship to
address recruitment gaps in the nursing sector. Further collaboration followed with the Education
Department of CnES and Cothrom, a local training centre. All this enabled young people to gain relevant
work-based experience in the local hospital, clinic and GP practices and gain qualifications, equivalent to
at least two Highers, for entry into a nursing degree. Subsequently this was replaced by the Foundation
Apprenticeship in Health and Social Care, with the addition of the Scottish Vocational Qualification (SVQ)
2 in social care, which is essential to access employment within the social care sector.
This was a council wide programme of curriculum development, including local labour market intelligence,
effective partnerships (including with employers in the public, private and Third sectors), course design, all
4
Compare the situation in Nordic countries: “There is already a severe lack of care workers, nurses, ICT workers,
carpenters, electricians, mechanics in many rural areas of the Nordic countries” (Karlsdottir et al, 2019, p.21).
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 21
within an overall integrated strategy. Initially the delivery of specific courses was located in one secondary
school (e.g. maritime studies in Barra and crofting in Uist), but as internet-based teaching was developed
across the Outer Hebrides (including through e-Sgoil, CnES’ online teaching and learning platform), some
of the courses became available to pupils in the other secondary schools also.
Obviously a different set of qualifications will be relevant within the Glenkens and within Dumfries and
Galloway. We have not engaged in any review of local labour market intelligence in D&G. However,
drawing on the D&G Council Plan for 2023-28, as well as the record of the Education and Learning in
the Glenkens event, some of the key sectors within the local economy that (a) provide opportunities
for local young people to stay and (b) support the sustainability of local communities are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
agriculture, forestry and renewable energy;
other land and environmental based activities (UNESCO biosphere, peat restoration, dark
skies, etc. etc.);
all public sector services, including health and social care;
digital services;
culture, heritage (including industrial heritage) and arts;
hospitality and tourism;
a wide range of micro- and community enterprises.
The following figure, taken from the D&G Council Plan for 2023-28, reflects the largest employment
sectors currently across Dumfries and Galloway as a whole.
It is equally important to consider, like in the Outer Hebrides, which jobs are likely to be needed in the
future. A very good example comes from the presentation by Vattenfall Wind Power at the event on
Education and Learning in the Glenkens in July (See Case Study 8 in the Appendices). Senior Project
Manager Matthew Bacon is currently overseeing the site design and planning permission process for
the Quantans Hill wind farm near Carsphairn, and said,
Onshore wind is a growth area, and the number of qualified employees needs to vastly increase to
meet the demands of the 2030 deadline. Most of Vattenfall’s renewables developments will be in
the Highlands and Dumfries & Galloway, and there are a huge range of roles in the sector, ranging
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 22
from construction, forestry, turbine construction and maintenance to environmental work and
project managers. … the Climate Exchange May 2024 report … showed that operational positions
needed on wind farms are predicted to rise by 250% by 2030 in Dumfries and Galloway, from 112
to 395 positions. These are long-term, well-paid roles.
Vattenfall’s apprenticeship programme will create 50 new apprenticeships by 2030, working with
Developing the Young Workforce. The company is looking to recruit across a wide range of ages to
both graduate and early stage apprenticeships. Vattenfall asked consultants to come up with a draft
strategy for the community benefit fund from Quantans Hill wind farm if consented, and through
this have identified objectives relating to jobs and young people, including access to local economic
opportunities. This could lead to training 250-350 young people and providing up to 50 qualified
apprentices, although these numbers are currently indicative and the strategy is still a draft.
However, this potentially offers huge opportunities for South West Scotland in terms of renewables
posts. The benefits of this scheme can potentially be maximised if other wind farm developers work
with Vattenfall on supply chains and with schools and colleges to develop a joined-up scheme.
While there was need in the Outer Hebrides to develop new qualifications, which may also be
appropriate for the Glenkens and for Dumfries and Galloway as a whole, many suitable courses already
exist in the SQA menu of courses, and can be utilised quickly. Examples include:
•
•
•
•
Foundation Apprenticeships in Health and Social Care, to which can be added SVQ 2 in Social
Care as that is a requirement to work in the sector ( https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/76825.html);
Construction Skills (https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/94698.html);
Engineering (https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/31441.html), into which some renewable energy
has been embedded;
Hospitality (https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/31584.html), which of course includes front of
house skills etc.
For such courses, a key element is ensuring relevant local work-based placements for pupils, e.g. in
local hotels and restaurants for hospitality.
There are in fact many obvious local partners to develop further tailored pathways into employment
for pupils. The next sections provide evidence from Propagate and the experience of the Galloway
Glens Initiative. Here is an offer from another dynamic company within the renewable energy sector,
Natural Power Consultants (NPC) (see Case Study 7 in the Appendices):
NPC is willing to work with local young people to help them to move into the Renewables sector,
either through relevant courses at local further and higher education institutions, or through the
introduction of a skills pathway. A skills pathway could help young people from the area to study
for qualifications which were more directly relevant to the skills needed by local employers. NPC
has already been in touch with Castle Douglas/Dalry Secondary Schools and Kirkcudbright
Academy.
To illustrate that developing a locally relevant curriculum is already happening in a variety of different
places, not just in the Outer Hebrides, Education Scotland highlighted the work of the Cowes Enterprise
College in the Isle of Wight around its maritime curriculum. The Glenkens is a part of Dumfries and
Galloway which is not coastal, but the box on Cowes further illustrates what can be achieved through
curriculum innovation within a school environment. And the college has produced a how to guide on
designing a careers driven and local context curriculum (see here).
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 23
Cowes Enterprise College, a secondary school academy in the Isle of Wight, has sought to create a broad
and sustainable curriculum that is anchored in their local maritime context, which they call Maritime
Futures. It includes teaching curriculum subjects through immersion in maritime topics, for example
design and build of model boats in design technology using concepts taught in science; looking at
migration by sea and a case study of the Mary Rose in history; and, in geography, studying containerisation,
coastal defences and tourism in the local context. Local employers and maritime experts routinely deliver
lessons, and pupils become engaged in the interactive and practical learning. Maritime Futures has
inceased attainment and motivation among pupils, and instilled a sense of place, changing “their
perspective of where they are living from backwater to centre stage”.
The Academy is currently working on designing a specific accredited maritime course for those pupils who
find the above maritime projects interesting. Maritime Futures also seeks to create positive associations
with local economic opportunities, with students having encounters with local employers and job
opportunities. And these do not only include standard maritime careers. In history, for example, the
pupils have learnt alongside professional curators and conservators, and heard from a professional
shipwreck diver.
The College has created a series of resources to inform and inspire others, including an introduction on
their website (see here), a case study of Maritime Futues and its impacts (see here) and the how to guide
on designing a careers driven and local context curriculum (see here)
In concluding this section, it is critical to point to the evidence from the Outer Hebrides, the Isle of
Wight and elsewhere that a focus on practical and vocational qualifications relevant to the local
economy is not a recommendation for the traditional two-tier educational system, with some pursuing
more academic subjects and others more vocational qualifications. Any vocational provision must be
nationally recognised and accredited with parity of esteem so that it does not become seen as the
place for the less able. Indeed, many of these qualifications can lead on to excellent employment
opportunities in sectors that are important for the future.
In terms of parity of esteem, the crofting course in the Outer Hebrides, for example, is perceived as
being on a par with biology applied in a locally relevant context. With such parity of esteem, these
qualifications are equally relevant to all pupils, even if the focus is skewed toward local employability.
If the accreditation levels stand equally alongside a more traditional offer, it means that for young
people who are likely to go on to Higher Education, the offer is still relevant for them and contributes
to them recognising that the area they grew up is a place to return to. Some pupils on the crofting
course have gone on to gain their PhD and returned to the islands, have become Vice Chair of the local
agricultural committee and office bearer of the livestock committee, all rooted in their community, and
contributing to the local community.
Example 3: Offering wider curriculum choices in small schools (Shetland and eSgoil)
One of the challenges that small schools may confront is offering a wide subject offering for pupils. It
is clear that in the Glenkens some parents have chosen to send their children to other schools because
they provide wider subject choices.
We specifically discussed this with two very different small secondary schools who have successfully
developed personalised choices for their pupils. The evidence demonstrates that a flexible and can-
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 24
do approach by the school management can in fact deliver significant personalisation of pupil choices
across a wide range of subjects, especially when sharing teachers with other neighbouring schools,
supplemented with on-line provision also.
So an exclusive focus on “efficiency”, that would argue that it is inefficient financially to offer subjects
for very small pupil numbers, may be partly misplaced, based in particular on comparisons with urban
schools with larger classes. A small rural secondary school can offer a wide choice of subjects, but
each year it will deliver only those subjects that pupils actually choose – fulfilling pupil personalisation
and choice. This delivers an effective and desirable personalised educational offering for individual
pupils without the need to allocate resources to those subjects not chosen by the specific cohort of
pupils.
Baltasound Junior High School in Shetland (see Case Study 3 in the Appendices) offers English and
Maths, three sciences, two social sciences, music and art, home economics and technical subjects
(including IT). Modern languages are also possible through e-learning. The school shares some
teachers with secondary schools on other islands, and each year the Head Teacher at Baltasound
spends significant time and energy timetabling classes based on pupil choices that year. This is done
in a public space, so that pupils see the HT doing it, and even make suggestions.
Key features of this approach are flexibility and the determination to make things work. When
numbers are small, the school may combine classes (e.g. teaching chemistry to S3 and S4 pupils in the
same class). One year the school added a computer game development course in computer science,
based on the aspirations of the specific cohort of pupils that year.
If there are gaps in teaching provision, then the school will find a way round. Currently they don’t
have a teacher trained in Home Economics, but a teacher is delivering the subject supported by other
Home Economics teachers elsewhere to ensure alignment with SQA accreditation. When the school
was without a technical teacher, they used e-Sgoil (the only time they have done this). And if a pupil
is very keen to do a different subject than those on offer, the school will seek to be really flexible to
make it work. This has happened for example in the case of a pupil who wanted to study Modern
Studies. On another occasion a subject choice for one pupil could simply not be timetabled, but they
had the ability to pursue this choice through self-study, and the school allocated support from a
qualified teacher in that subject. The Head Teacher commented,
I have a relative who works in a big secondary school in England, even with some large subjects
running identical classes in different rooms at the same time. There is no tailoring, no flexibility, no
ability to go off on an interesting tangent. They don’t even know all the names of their pupils.
Many of our former pupils are still in touch with the school. Very few pupils don’t do well here, and
then excel when they move to Lerwick in S5. Most continue the trajectory from their junior
secondary. All the pupils are given a lot of responsibility at a young age. They take personal
responsibility and become effective contributors.
Obviously such flexibility requires a flexible allocation of human resources, which may be challenging
for a small school by itself and for D&G Council as their employer. However, in the case of Dalry
Secondary, for example, the school is currently linked with Castle Douglas Secondary, which is very
important to deliver a full choice of subjects.
In addition, web-based learning can further widen what subjects are offered and delivered. One of
the original purposes of e-Sgoil in the Outer Hebrides was to ensure that (a) all pupils across the islands
would be given the same subject offering, not just those in the largest school in Stornoway, and that
(b) all pupils would have access to more specialised subjects that might be taught in person in any one
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 25
of the four secondary schools (see Case Study 1 in the Appendices). Obviously it took significant
resources to develop e-Sgoil, which now earns some of its income from providing services beyond the
Outer Hebrides. However, offering wider choices through e-Sgoil to pupils across the four secondary
schools within the Outer Hebrides is not resource intensive once the technology platform is in place.
A key success factor is simply coordinating timetabling across the four schools to allow pupils in
different schools to share the same class times.
As Anne Paterson said at the July event on Education and Learning in the Glenkens, “Distance learning
and technology is available but has not yet been capitalised on. It could work by digitally pooling
classes so that young people can take subjects with their peers in other schools whilst physically
present in their local school.” This only requires the support of a non-specialised teacher for pupils in
those schools joining on-line.
Example 4: Rethinking local food (Propagate)
Like renewable energy, regenerative food production, as well as sustainable management of soil, are
also critical for the climate and biodiversity. And skills around food production are vital for a
sustainable future: local food production that contributes to sustainability, food security, health and
nutrition, and reduces food miles. These topics align with the predominantly rural region of Dumfries
and Galloway.
In terms of delivering opportunities in these subjects for pupils, local partnerships are once again key.
There is already an active local social enterprise, Propogate, committed to “rethinking local food”. The
Galloway Food Hub, set up by Propagate, is already stimulating demand and awareness of local food
(see Case Study 9 in the Appendices).
Through Propagate there are existing opportunities that could provide pathways for young people into
work that can directly address the climate and biodiversity emergencies. These opportunities could
also use land around schools, for example around Dalry School, while Propagate’s own small market
garden can host workshops and training days.
Some of the learning and other programmes available through Propagate that could be co-delivered
in partnership with local schools are:
•
•
•
Cultivate - 'grow your own' programme with 8 sessions on learning about organic veg
production.
Veg Power - developed to link veg growing with healthier cooking. Profiles a 'veg of the week'
each week over 10 weeks, and looks at food systems and food justice. The course signposts
to Food Hygiene training, and so leads towards a number of progression pathways around
growing, preparing, food hygiene and hospitality.
Permaculture design courses and Growing Food in Small Spaces which are linked with the UK
'Children in Permaculture' project.
In terms of accreditation for engaging in such learning opportunities, again there is the menu of rural
skill qualifications at SQA which could easily be aligned to the skill set and delivery partners in
agriculture, horticulture and permaculture in the local area. The previous example of rural skills at
Breadalbane Academy is instructive, where the course lead ensures that whatever learning and work
the pupils deliver is aligned with the SQA qualification, to ensure that the pupils not only learn and
share valuable skills but gain recognition for their skills through an accredited qualification.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 26
Example 5: The Interns Project under the Galloway Glens Initiative
The first examples of relevant models have focused on learning opportunities within schools. The
Galloway Glens Initiative’s interns project (‘Galloway Rural Skills’, see Case Study 6 in the Appendices),
provided opportunities for young people beyond school, providing pathways into work through a
programme of internship/work experience positions: 15 roles were supported over 4 years.
Key to the success of the programme were the partnerships with the local employers who hosted the
interns. These included a couple of large employers, Drax and Natural Power Consultants, but also
smaller employers: Galloway Fisheries Trust, GCAT/Catstrand, Crichton Carbon Centre (an
environmental charity), Carsphairn Community Woodland, Czernin-Kinsky Scottish Company Ltd (a
family-run forestry company), Mr Pooks restaurant as well as the Better Lives Partnership.
These internships were full-time and paid for 6 months with 50% funding intervention. Two of the
roles supported were subsequently extended for a further six months.
The Galloway Rural Skills project had a number of aims, some directly linked to addressing
depopulation:
•
•
•
•
•
to provide work and training opportunities;
to give young people a chance to see what it was like to work in Dumfries and Galloway;
to illustrate the range of heritage-related and other careers available in the region;
to address the current departure rate of young people;
to introduce a new range of employers to the benefits of internships/work experience
programmes.
Beyond the selected candidates, the approach and overall programme sought to take every
opportunity to highlight the merits to young people of working and living in Galloway. Later roles were
advertised on the indeed.com website. This advertised the role but also advertised the concept of
working in Galloway, raising the profile of the range of careers available. It was hoped that even people
who didn’t apply would start to think about Galloway as an attractive place to work
The Galloway Glens Team were keen that the interns weren’t simply taken on for basic duties,
essentially just at a subsidised rate. Hosts were therefore asked to make the internships as rewarding
as possible, with maximum benefit for intern future employment. A strong and active approach to
recruitment was vital to the success of the intern programme.
At least 9 out of the 15 interns have continued working in the sector of their internship:
•
•
•
•
3 secured a permanent role with the host, and 2 more a subsequent role with the host.
2 secured a permanent or subsequent role in the sector, but not in D&G.
1 entered further education in the sector of the internship.
1 was able to continue independent self-employed work.
Example 6: Enterprising Young People in the Outer Hebrides
The D&G Council Plan for 2023-28 confirms that 98.8% of all businesses in D&G are micro (below 10
employees) or small (below 50). The case study from the Western Isles in the Appendices also points
to the critical importance of micro-enterprise within a local rural or island economy. In so-called
‘remote’ rural areas the vast majority of enterprises are in fact micro-enterprises (although the
Glenkens does have a noticeable number of small or larger enterprises based in the area).
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 27
Engaging with work opportunities through micro-enterprise can be more challenging, with many
micro-entrepreneurs struggling to provide apprenticeships, even though these are critically important
for sustaining, for example, local trades and local farming. The Galloway Glens initiative, which
adopted a very flexible and can-do approach, is a good example of what a focused but flexible
partnership with smaller local enterprises can deliver.
The D&G Council Plan also states that the region experienced 420 new start-up businesses in 2022.
Fostering and sustaining micro-enterprise, including the most micro with no or only a few employees,
as well as community and social enterprise, is a key strategy for the sustainability of rural communities,
and needs to be reflected in rural education provision.
A broad base of private, public, third sector and community enterprises is more resilient than being
dependent on just one or two larger employers, who may bring inward investment and offer multiple
jobs in one sweep, but such external investment can be fickle. In a global market, cheaper labour
elsewhere will pull the plug in a relatively short time after start-up funds have been swallowed up.
One strategy that can contribute to a broad base of enterprise within the local area is effective
enterprise education and support that could enable some young people to set up their own business.
There have long been a range of enterprise programmes which have enabled school pupils to trial
setting up an enterprise, including in the Outer Hebrides.
However, the Education Department in partnership with the local social enterprise, Cothrom,
delivering adult education, co-designed and delivered the Enterprising Young Peoples programme that
linked exploring enterprise opportunities with local economic literacy (see Case Study 1 in the
Appendices). Over a few years, day-long workshops were delivered to every senior phase pupil across
the Outer Hebrides, in which every pupil set out and presented an enterprising idea, whether private
businesses, social enterprises or community projects. Because the workshops enabled pupils to
understand the local economy and identify local enterprising opportunities, all the ideas they came up
with were very strongly rooted within the local context.
While the programme provided some follow-up through coaching for those young people who wanted
to take their ideas forward into practice, this element was never adequately resourced. At the same
time, the impact of the programme was not so much short-term, found in how many pupils
implemented their enterprising ideas (very few, not least because all were still at school), but more
likely to be long-term. When each participating pupil presented their idea at the end of the day, and
got positive feedback from community representatives, the overwhelming impact was the sense of
just how many good enterprising opportunities there were within the local economy.
It is very difficult to determine the contribution of the many different initiatives over more than two
decades that have led Uist and Barra in the Outer Hebrides to experience the largest number within
any Scottish islands of young people returning in their 20s and 30s. However, the Enterprising Young
People’s programme, which was delivered to more cohorts in Uist and Barra than elsewhere, has
contributed, by demonstrating to young people that there are so many opportunities they could return
to in the future, should they wish to.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 28
Example 7: Life-long learning within the community (Uist and Denmark)
Example 2 above sets out evidence on the progress made in the Outer Hebrides to develop
qualifications and pathways relevant to the local economy. It is equally important to recognise other
contributing factors that have delivered life-long learning opportunities in particular (see Case Study 1
in the Appendices).
Like many other rural areas in Scotland, Uist (the seven inhabited islands from Berneray to Eriskay in
the Outer Hebrides) has benefited from learning opportunities provided through a local college, Lews
Castle College (LCC), now part of the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI). LCC’s learning
centre in Benbecula next door to the secondary school provided opportunities for young people and
adults to engage in further and higher education, and at times extended the curriculum offer for senior
phase pupils by taking courses at the centre, courses that were not taught in the school.
What is more distinctive to Uist is the extent of life-long learning opportunities developed by the
community sector over the last 30 years. Cothrom, a charitable adult learning centre was initially set
up in 1992 to help women back into work, a mission that ensured a long-term commitment to
childcare, including eventually the creation of Cothrom’s own Gaelic-speaking nursery. Another fullday all year round nursery was established by a community organisation in North Uist as well; this has
now been absorbed into the new primary school built for North Uist.
Over the years Cothrom has developed a wide range of life-long learning opportunities for adults, with
a strong focus on learning and support services for young people and adults facing challenges in their
lives. Accredited qualifications included SQA qualifications in horticulture, delivered in partnership
with another community organisation, Tagsa Uibhist. The collaboration has contributed to a significant
expansion of local horticulture. Tagsa developed the largest community growing project in Uist, which
was managed for a time by three graduates from the first cohort of the horticulture course. 5 And it
was the partnership between the local council’s Education Department and Cothrom that delivered
the Enterprising Young People’s programme (see Example 6 above).
Taigh Chearsabhagh, the arts and heritage centre set up in 1994, has long collaborated closely with
LCC (now UHI) to deliver art courses at further and higher education level, recently being able to teach
a full BA. The primary inspiration for art at Taigh Chearsabhagh has always been the distinct island
environment. And the local community riding school offered accredited qualifications in equestrian
studies.
Most recently, the Gaelic music and culture organisation within the community, Ceòlas, first set up in
1996 to run an annual summer school, entered into partnership with UHI. They jointly built a £7 million
cultural centre, Cnoc Soilleir. This was opened in 2022 and now delivers community-based courses
and events in Gaelic language, music and culture, as well courses accredited by UHI, including resident
academic staff in music and in archaeology.
Gaelic music, dance and culture have in fact long been part of community-based learning, including
for young people through the two annual feisean (one in South Uist, one in North Uist, both targeted
at children, with many of the tutors being young people themselves), as well as a range of local dance
schools.
5
For more detail on the emergence of a multi-pronged and integrated strategy, led by Tagsa Uibhist, to start
rebuilding a local food economy in Uist, see the CoDeL case study at http://codel.scot/community-actions-inuist-and-glenkens, which also includes three case studies from the Glenkens.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 29
The evidence highlights two important characteristics of these educational opportunities delivered
through the community sector. First is their organic growth over many years, with community
organisations responding to needs as well as opportunities as they arose within local communities.
Second is the extent of partnerships, among different community organisations, between these
organisations and the local college delivering further and higher education, and also with the local
council. The Enterprising Young People’s programme was delivered through an innovative partnership
agreement between local council and community organisation as equal partners equally responsible
for all outcomes, rather than a typical Service Level Agreement or equivalent, in which the
commissioning authority holds much of the power.
There are of course many different models to deliver life-long learning in rural communities. An
example of a very different model is the folk high school in Denmark (see Case Study 5), a non-formal
residential school offering learning opportunities in almost any subject. Most students are between 18
and 24 years old and the length of a typical stay is four months. It is a boarding school, so students
sleep, eat, study, and spend their spare time at the school. There are no academic requirements for
admittance, and there are no exams - but students do get a diploma as proof of their attendance.
One of the core ideas of the folk high schools is equality and mutual learning between teachers and
students. Everybody has the same duties and the same rights. Classes are characterised by the free
word, dialogue and an open curriculum which can be changed during the course. The main focus is to
discover and strengthen the unique skills of each student in a challenging yet supportive social
atmosphere. “The task of the schools is to create a climate where culture is a reality.”
There are approximately 70 independent folk high schools located all over Denmark, offering learning
opportunities in more than 300 different subjects. Every year in Denmark, an average of 40,000 people
attend a folk high school for courses of varying lengths.
Conclusions: looking forward
Key principles emerging from this review
Some key themes have emerged from both the secondary research and the case studies, which this
section draws out as a series of principles that are important for the delivery of rural education. (To
make the principles support a broader framework for policy and action, additional principles have been
included, around creativity, inclusiveness and digital skills which were discussed in meetings with the
Steering Group for this research, but which were not a focus of the primary and secondary research
gathered for this report.)
Educational provision needs to …
•
6
be rooted and connected in the place, drawing on local assets, connections, networks and
partnerships, and incorporating local experience and knowledge, including experience and
skills in adapting rapidly to changing circumstances. The last is essential for the resilience of
rural communities and in preparing young people for jobs in the future that have not yet been
conceived.6 Educational provision needs to demonstrate in practice, from nursery through
Tapping into the resilience that rural communities so often display will strengthen young people’s own
resilience within a fast changing world, whether they stay or move away. The focus on what works well locally
is therefore good for young people wherever they may evetually end up.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 30
further and higher education to life-long learning, that it values local assets and strengths,
experience and knowledge.
•
A better education that is rooted locally also strengthens young people’s ability to choose
where to go. So education provision needs to value and support local communities and their
sustainability, e.g. giving young people education and learning that delivers genuine choices
and opportunities, equipping them to go anywhere, whether they stay, leave or a combination
of both, rather than only “learning to leave”.
•
deliver to the needs of the local economy; and provide opportunities for young people and
those engaged in life-long learning to meet those needs through learning that links to the local
labour market and local community action.7 This principle relates not just to the local
economy as is, but also enabling young people to identify enterprising opportunities that (a)
enable them to forge their own paths and (b) address needs that are currently not being met
within the local area, or society more widely.
•
support creativity, which is critical for young people and adults to respond to and demonstrate
resilience in the face of the rapid changes like climate change that all of us are facing, and will
continue to do so in future. 8
•
be inclusive, meeting the needs of all. This includes provision of education and learning for
those with diverse and special needs, and can build on the strengths of small schools where
diverse pupils may often be taken at ‘face value’ without stigmatisation or labelling.
•
give young people the opportunity to apply and develop their digital skills so that they can
thrive in an increasingly digital world, but also practice skills for adaptability in the face of
rapid change and uncertainty, e.g. about the impacts of AI on future work. Intergenerational
work, with young people helping adults in their community to acquire better digital skills can
bring mutual benefit, including valuing the digital skills that many young people already have.
•
urgently needs to adapt learning and practice to the demands made by the twin climate and
biodiversity emergencies, equipping young people and adults with the necessary knowledge,
experience and skills to live more sustainably. These are diverse, for example ranging from
technical skills for renewable energy through growing local food to social capital for
community resilience.
7
Relevant strategies can include, as some examples, using local assets as educational resources (see Examples 1
and 4 above), delivering accredited qualifications that relate directly to local labour markets but are recognised
nationally (see Example 2 above), and providing relevant life-long learning opportunities (see Example 7).
8
The following are comments from Andreas Schleicher, OECD Director for the Directorate of Education and Skills
and Special Advisor on Education Policy to the Secretary-General at OECD in an Education Scotland podcast (7
March 2024): “We found that, across the board, everywhere where we looked at this, 15-year-olds were less
creative than 10-year-olds.” “Our education systems destroy some of the capabilities that are innate to us as
humans … this kind of compliance-based, conformity driven culture in education drives out some of the creativity
that in early childhood develops very naturally.” “There’s a more global trend towards more project-based
learning where students set their own goals and have to become good at monitoring their own learning progress.
What we all know that in the world of today it’s not what you do in school – it’s your motivations, your capacity
to continue learning throughout life on your own, to organise yourself, to have that inner resilience that’s
increasingly important.”
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 31
An emerging vision for educational provision in the Glenkens
In this report we have set out relevant secondary research, concrete examples of positive action
elsewhere that deliver effective education within rural communities, and some broad principles that
can frame educational provision in rural areas. An important strand of the research was also to hear
the views and voices of local people within the Glenkens itself, who have the direct experience of
education in the area.
Such engagement was facilitated through two community sessions (involving parents, current and
former pupils and teachers), as well as conducting interviews with some community representatives,
all in September 2024. These sessions facilitated local voices and information sharing that have been
included in sections of this report. What was also apparent was the commitment and passion for
education that was shared among the participants from the Glenkens, and the depth of relevant
knowledge and experience, insight and aspiration within local communities.
The sessions focused on direct experiences of local education, in the past and the present, and
aspirations for the future. The latter led to the emergence of ideas for a vision for education provision
in the Glenkens, and the following diagram seeks to capture some of the elements of the vision.
The short sessions did not allow the creation of fully integrated visions within and across the two
sessions, and to ensure that all participant voices are heard, we have included two Appendices (11 and
12), one of our notes while participants were contributing their ideas verbally, and the other of what
each participant themselves recorded on paper.
Clearly parents, pupils and other stakeholders wanted to see an educational hub or campus at the
heart of communities in the Glenkens, for rural place-based learning from cradle to grave. The hub
would not just be located in one building, but also have mobile elements that can take educational
provision out into communities.
The obvious core of such provision are the current primary and secondary school in Dalry. The vision
seeks to demonstrate a positive and sustainable future for those schools as part of a wider educational
offering that can sustain high-quality and innovative educational provision, relevant to the local area,
at the heart of the Glenkens.
An essential part of a vision relevant to the local area would be to develop a centre of excellence with
a special focus on giving young people the opportunity to develop essential rural skills, especially skills
for the land-based and renewable energy sectors, enabling young people who want to to stay, or those
who leave, to return later.
Some of the examples or models from elsewhere cited in the previous sections of this report would be
highly relevant for developing such a centre of excellence. What is striking in fact is how much those
positive examples or models from elsewhere align with the vision from within the local community in
the Glenkens.
Inclusive, accessible, safe
making strong, viable & healthy
community
good place for families
encouraging new generations to
stay, or come, and thrive
I know that anything is possible
Opportunities for all
I can be who I want to be
For all ages and abilities
Everyone encouraged to learn,
but not necessarily academic
I feel safe and supported, and
confident in my chosen path
Child / person specific
Flexible, including flexi-schooling
Individual pathways
Challenging, and happy to learn
Mentoring and self-directed learning
people can leave, but not forced to
Learning / Wellbeing Hub / Campus
... in centre of community
Wide selection of subjects
... from cradle to grave, so that people do
not have to leave
Traditional and modern skills
... life-long & intergenerational learning
“Small” that enables ...
Nurturing, support, kindness
Sense of belonging
Practical skills and academic options
Everyone getting on with each
other, both peers and across ages
Apprenticeships & local job opportunities
Everyone valued
Outdoor learning & non-traditional settings
Rooted within community
On-line learning with cutting-edge
technology to expand choice; also mobile
options to take learning into community
Rural skills and trades brought back
Practical skills for life
Community contributing to skills teaching
“Past skills for future communities”
with local decision-making and control,
devolution
Children managing mental health
Not hierarchical, different
relationship btw teachers & pupils
After-school clubs &
activities outside
teaching time
drawing on what is already there;
there is so much going on locally and
nature on doorstep
Eco-sustainable buildings
Sports, arts, crafts,
growing food
People come in and children go out
Renewable energy
Entertainment &
social opportunities,
as well as learning
Self-sufficiency
Great food, locally sourced; some
prepared by children
Resources from windfarms
Good transport
Is the ambitious vision practical and achievable?
A critical question is whether such a vision for an educational hub, a centre of excellence, is practical
and achievable. The evidence from the views of multiple stakeholders captured in this review, and
from the research and documentation reviewed, suggests it is practical. In fact it meets the needs and
aspirations of (a) the communities within the Glenkens, (b) key private sector actors and (c) the
Dumfries and Galloway council.
For local communities critical elements include educational provision that is local, avoiding potentially
very long bus journeys; that is able to meet the needs and aspirations of individual pupils effectively;
that delivers opportunities for life-long learning; and that, not least, contributes to repopulation within
the Glenkens by helping to make the area a great place to live and work, for young people and families
to stay, return or settle. As the Glenkens Hub argues on education and learning (see here):
The provision of high-quality education for our young people and learning opportunities for our
whole community is a key under-pinning of thriving communities here in the Glenkens. We know
that lack of provision leads to families leaving the area, which is completely at odds with our aims
of achieving sustainable communities through averting de-population.
Locally-based private businesses, many operating in land-based activities like renewable energy and
forestry, want skilled individuals whom they can recruit locally, knowing that will lead to greater
employee retention, rather than being forced to bring in (often expensive temporary) workers from
outside. And recruitment gaps for local businesses are found across the board, including among local
community organisations and social enterprises.
Despite The Green House in Dalry being Natural Power Consultants’ head office, recruiting staff to
the Glenkens with the right skills and experience is a challenge. Across the board, the renewables
industry is growing rapidly because of the move towards Net Zero, and companies are struggling
to recruit from an insufficient pool of potential candidates. (See Case Study 7 in the Appendices)
And the Education and Learning Directorate within Dumfries and Galloway Council aspires to
improve education and learning opportunities to help all our children, young people and citizens
fulfil their potential. This starts with pre-school, then school, before progressing into further or
higher education or transition into work. We will work with our partners to create and promote
lifelong learning opportunities so everyone in the region can live a meaningful and fulfilling life,
and contribute to their community.” (D&G Council Plan for 2023-28)
The vision for educational provision in the Glenkens directly addresses these aspirations, and links very
closely with the Rural Skills Training Centre being developed with funding from D&G Council and South
of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE). The SQA qualifications in rural skills are particularly relevant to the
Glenkens, and the Rural Skills Centre could provide significant opportunities for collaboration between
local schools and the wider community.
Depopulation across Dumfries and Galloway, which is almost all rural, remains one of the biggest
challenges confronting the Council. The emerging vision provides a positive response that could
deliver an innovative and effective strategy to turn around depopulation in rural areas, delivered
through partnership working across the community, private and public sectors. It would deliver
pathways to work opportunities that enable young people, and their families, to stay, return or settle
in the area. With very strong links to rural skills and land-based activities, the vision can also evolve to
include a centre of excellence for learning within the community that directly addresses the challenges
of the climate and biodiversity emergencies.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 34
With the distinct mix of a highly active community within the Glenkens, many local employers and
enterprises, including local trusts, from large to small, and a local Council aspiring to find positive and
sustainable solutions, there can be few better areas within D&G than the Glenkens to develop and
demonstrate such an innovative educational strategy that directly addresses depopulation and climate
challenges, that delivers the sustainability for local rural communities that is critical if rural areas across
D&G are going to survive and thrive. The strategy could develop an innovative partnership, rooted in
the Glenkens as a place, that demonstrates best practice in responding to the challenges of rural
depopulation and the climate emergency, enabling it to attract attention and funding for its ambitions.
It would also be recognised under the Scottish Government’s Rural Delivery Plan, and its Action Plan
to address depopulation. The Plan “endorses the importance of local leadership and seeks to
exemplify the maxim ‘local by default, national by agreement’. We know that a place-based approach
to applying national, regional, and local policies will be essential to sustainably and effectively address
depopulation.”
Assets and strengths that can contribute to the realisation of the emerging vision
The emerging vision is sufficiently coherent and accords with the needs and aspirations of all sectors
that it could act as a sound starting point for collaboration. Critical for success would be to build on
existing assets and strengths within the community and area. This research has identified many of
these.
Assets and strengths within the community sector ...
The Glenkens is fortunate to have highly active communities, with a plethora of active community
organisations (see here). These include organisations and trusts with significant experience in
community ownership of assets and engaging constructively with local windfarms. They also include
organisations focused on local heritage, local land and natural assets, including the Carsphairn
Community Woodland that is developing the Rural Skills Training Centre. And of course many of these
community organisations themselves require skilled employees.
Activities across the area are coordinated under the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan (see
here), with its four key themes of a Connected Community, an Asset Rich Community, an Economically
Flourishing Community and a Carbon Neutral Community. The Plan is being progressed through an
organisational structure for effective delivery, governance and accountability shared across the
Glenkens and District Trust, the Glenkens Community and Arts Trust and the Glenkens & District
Community Action Plan Steering Group.
In addition to a highly active and organised community, families and communities within the Glenkens
have long had a very strong commitment to education. This is evidenced in:
•
the very high educational attainment of Dalry Secondary School in the past;
•
the significant local experience in delivering alternative educational provision, for example at
Kilquhanity School (since the 1940s) (see Case Study 5 in the Appendices);
•
the determination with which local communities have fought school closures, such as
Carsphairn primary school and Dalry secondary;
•
the expertise in establishing groups like Bairn Banter (see Case Study 10 in the Appendices),
including a deep commitment to developing outdoor educational provision for children;
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 35
•
the high levels of flexible schooling currently exercised by parents in the Glenkens;
•
the active and dynamic parent councils in the area.
This strong commitment was clearly reflected in the attendance at the sessions CoDeL facilitated in
September, and in the ambitious vision that emerged.
Assets and strengths within the private and enterprise sector …
Many of the key sectors within the local economy are land-based, including agriculture, forestry and
renewable energy, with a range of businesses, from micro to large. The hospitality and tourism sectors
are also important. And the community sector is a critical part of the local economy too, not just
delivering vital services, but also providing employment in community enterprises and charities. (For
a list of many local businesses see here.)
There are significant local employers with an interest in local education and learning. These include,
for example, Natural Power Consultants Ltd and Vattenfall Wind Power, who presented at the event
on Education and Learning in the Glenkens in July 2024, setting out their needs for skilled workers to
recruit (see Case Studies 7 and 8 in the Appendices).
Young people in the Glenkens struggle to see a future for themselves in the area because of limited
job opportunities. Lack of higher education facilities in the area is also a challenge for employers
like Natural Power Consultants who normally recruit at graduate level ….
South West Engineering and Fabrications Ltd is a good example of a local small business employing 15
employees, including many local people. However, they face recruitment gaps as well, especially in
critical skills like fabrication and welding, and a fifth of their workforce comes from abroad.
There are no shortages of local businesses, whether private or community, micro or larger, that can
contribute to enriching educational provision in the Glenkens by highlighting opportunities, sharing
experience, contributing to elements of the curriculum, and offering opportunities for work experience
and internships, apprenticeships and jobs (see Case Study 6 for some examples).
Critical for the success of delivering on the emerging vision will be larger businesses, potentially
including windfarms (such as Vattenfall), that might also contribute financial and other resources, not
just work opportunities.
Assets and strengths within the public sector …
Dumfries and Galloway has a long history of delivering rural education, including through a multitude
of small schools, as well as supporting diverse and dynamic schools, especially at secondary school
level, that create their own particular ethos and distinct educational provision, and even compete with
each other to attract pupils. Within some schools there is a strong tradition of partnership; we have
already cited the example of the forestry classroom at Dalbeattie High School funded by a large local
forestry machinery suppliers and engineers. The Education and Learning Directorate at D&G Council
is also very supportive of parental choice, for example with many parents sending their children to
schools outwith their catchment areas and exercising their rights to flexi-schooling.
In addition, implementing the vision would also contribute to other themes at the core of the D&G
Council Plan for 2023-28: the economy; health and wellbeing; and travel, connectivity and
infrastructure, as well as the first principle of “securing our future” through “addressing the climate
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 36
emergency” and “protecting our natural capital”. With a skewed demographic across rural D&G,
recruiting people to deliver health and social care will remain critical.
The emerging vision for an educational hub within the Glenkens clearly fits very well within the
Council’s overall framework of ambition and delivery for the area. The educational hub would also fit
well into wider regional and national policy. This includes SOSE’s strategy to support the South of
Scotland's communities, environment and economy. SOSE has already invested in the Carsphairn
Community Wood, for example, which is now developing the Rural Skills Training Centre.
Obviously, more work is required on the vision and a huge amount of detail would need to be worked
through among all the relevant partners. This will require discussion and negotiation among partners
over time, perhaps with some facilitation, or even appointing a Development Officer, to develop the
vision and implementation strategy in greater detail.
It is likely to be unrealistic, in the current financial climate, to attract large funding all at once to create
the educational hub or campus envisaged in the vision. Instead it will have to develop on the basis of
incremental and organic growth over many years.
A note on housing
Developing educational provision, and opportunities for local employment cannot be delivered
effectively in isolation. Affordable housing must be a critical part of the mix.
This is deeply relevant to the Glenkens. Recently two families with pupils at Dalry have had to move
out of their existing homes and have been unable to find alternative homes in the catchment area.
The community also knows that existing housing has been bought up by wind and power generation
companies when they develop new infrastructure, removing such housing from the market. And there
are individuals and families who are living in temporary accommodation and caravans for long periods.
Even though this review has focused on rural education, it cannot ignore the challenge of available and
affordable housing, especially when housing is lost to developers, incoming retirees and holiday
homes. The lack of housing is deeply undermining potential school rolls and also, of course, the ability
of young people and families to take up work opportunities in the local labour market.
Much of the vision and the educational strategies that are reflected in this report cannot be realised
unless the local housing crisis is also addressed. A strong action plan relating to housing needs to be
taken up within the Glenkens and District Community Action Plan to complement the development of
high-quality local educational provision.
Reflections on options for education in the Glenkens
Key decisions about secondary school provision in Dalry will be taking place in the next couple of years
and these will deeply affect the viability of the community vision that is emerging. So some next steps
for Dalry may be critical at this moment in time.
The Glenkens Education Forum, under the Glenkens & District Community Action Plan Steering Group,
and with the support of GCAT, will need to reflect on the emerging vision and decide how to take
developing the vision and strategy forward. Critical to these community discussions will be bringing
the various public and private sector organsiations on board, to see the opportunity for an education
centre of excellence that includes a specialist focus on land-based and renewable energy skills.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 37
While decisions about the continuation of Dalry Secondary School or not will have very little immediate
impacts on D&G’s overall education budget (the total cost of the school represents only just over 1%
of the total educational budget), they will have very serious consequences for educational provision in
local communities throughout the Glenkens. The closure of Dalry Secondary is likely to undermine the
positive vision and opportunity that has emerged during this research.
A few participants at the community sessions proposed the idea of establishing an independent school
in Dalry in partnership with the private sector alone. We believe it is unrealistic for local communities
within the Glenkens to deliver on this. Communities in the Glenkens are already highly active in many
different activities across the area; and, to be successful, huge energy and resources would have to be
invested in developing an independent school, detracting from those other initiatives. We have also
spoken to an independent school with a specialist eductional focus. Even with Government finance
for places, the school still has to raise very significant additional funding every year to be able to deliver
their educational offering; an independent school in Dalry would face similar challenges on an annual
basis. Finally, the vision for an educational hub in the Glenkens in fact goes beyond what a small
independent school could offer.
The decision has been taken not to mothball the school this year, and a new Head Teacher for Castle
Douglas and Dalry is working energetically to ensure good educational provision at Dalry Secondary
School. For example, he is working hard on curriculum offering, additional opportunities such as Duke
of Edinburgh awards, and establishing local partnerships. Also helpful in the short term would be to
introduce one or two new courses aligned with local employability oppoprtunities, and the HT is
already looking at such opportunities. This could illustrate the direction of travel and test demand from
within the Glenkens community.
Overall this report provides evidence and examples that can assist all involved to determine a positive
path forward for local education to benefit the Glenkens communities in the longer term. To fully
utilise the evidence and examples, people need to have time to digest and consider them and to
discuss in detail what can realistically be achieved and delivered. In view of the long-term implications
of closing a school, we would encourage all involved to take the time to look at options and to debate
and discuss them in an open and respectful way before taking such a major step. This process will take
time, but premature decisions to close the school without a full assessment of the implications,
opportunites and possible mitigation measures will severely hamper the longer term sustainability of
all the communities in the Glenkens.
Concluding remarks
Looking at the national and local policy context, at the focus on mitigating the risks of rural
depopulation and at the passion for education and community development within the Glenkens,
there is an opportunity, by working together across the public, private and community sectors, to
develop rural education provision in the area that is innovative and transformational.
Such place-based education could directly address rural depopulation and climate challenges, and
meet the needs of the local economy and of local communities in the present, and for the future. It
could build on local assets and strengths, experience and knowledge, to create resilient rural
communities, individuals and enteprises, able to adapt rapidly to the many changing circumstances
that rural Scotland will increasingly face in the future.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 38
It could “help deliver a just transition to net-zero” in the Glenkens, “by ensuring the learning system
equips people with the skills and knowledge both they and the Sector require” (Commission for the
land-based learning review, Scottish Government, 2023:1). In this way it could serve as a valuable
model for other communities across Dumfries and Galloway and further afield in Scotland.
With the distinct mix of a highly active local community, many local employers and enterprises,
including in the land-based and renewables sectors, and a local Council aspiring to find positive and
sustainable solutions, we believe there can be few better rural areas than the Glenkens to develop and
demonstrate such an educational strategy.
The strategy needs to be developed through an innovative partnership, rooted in the Glenkens as a
place, that demonstrates best practice in responding to the challenges of rural depopulation, the
climate emergency and thriving local economies and communities, enabling it to attract attention and
funding for its ambitions.
As the Executive Manager of the Glenkens Community and Arts Trust put it at the event on education
and learning in the Glenkens in July 2024,
We are looking for a creative solution based on a vision of thriving rural communities where current
and future economic development is underpinned by innovative educational provision, working in
strategic partnership with businesses, communities and the Council and where all parties are
valued for their expertise.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Glenkens and District Trust, who commissioned this review, and for the
diverse inputs and support from the members of the Steering Group, Fiona Smith, Richard Middleton,
Sarah Ade and Stephen Connelly, as well as Emma Hutchison at Foundation Scotland.
We thank all those who gave of their time to share with us about rural education, including Abi Mordin
(Propagate), Alison Macleod (Carsphairn Community Woodland), Anna Karlsdóttir (University of
Iceland), Dougie Woodrow (Breadalbane Academy), Gillian Brydson (Dumfries and Galloway Council),
Helen Keron (GCAT), Iain Stewart (Comhairle nan Eilean Siar), Joan MacKay, Nicola Crawford and
Stephen Bullock (Education Scotland), Kenneth Taylor (St. Mary’s Music School, Edinburgh), Lesley
Atkins (Galloway Food Hub), McNabb Laurie (Dumfries & Galloway Woodlands), Melissa Ade (Bairn
Banter, Carsphairn), Paul Thomson (Baltasound Junior High School, Shetland), Rosie Alexander
(Scottish Islands Research Network) and Tomás Mac Pháidín (Galway and Roscommon Education and
Training Board, Ireland).
In particular we want to thank all the participants at the two community sessions in Balmaclellan in
September: current and former pupils, parents and teachers, and the new Head Teacher for Dalry,
Stephen Foster. These sessions were deeply informative and inspiring.
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 39
References
Berry, Wendell (1997), The unsettling of America: Culture & agriculture, Sierra Club Books
CoDeL (2024), Casetudies on “Community Action in Uist and the Glenkens”, including on Bairn Banter, the
Galloway Food Hub and the Glenkens, http://codel.scot/community-actions-in-uist-and-glenkens
Corbett, Michael (2020), Learning to leave: The irony of schooling in a coastal community, West Virginia
University Press
Corbett, Michael (2021), “Re-Placing Rural Education: AERA Special Interest Group on Rural Education
Career Achievement Award Lecture”, Journal of Research in Rural Education 37(3): 1-14
Corbett, M., and Forsey, M (2017), “Rural youth out-migration and education: challenges to aspirations
discourse in mobile modernity”, Discourse studies in cultural politics of education 38(3): 429-444
Cowes Enterprise College (2022), “Case Study: Cowes Enterprise College Maritime Futures careers
curriculum”, https://cowesec.org/curriculum/maritime-futures
Cowes Enterprise College (2022), “How to Guide: How to design a careers driven and local context
curriculum”, https://issuu.com/cowesec/docs/how_to_guide?fr=sYjY4NDMzMzc5Mjk
Cuervo, H., Corbett, M., and White, S. (2019), “Disrupting rural futures and teachers’ work: Problematising
aspirations and belonging in young people’s lives”, in S. Pinto, B. Walker-Gibbs, S. Hannigan, and E. Charlton
(eds.), Unsettling space and place (pp. 87–100), Springer
Currie, Wallace (2024), “Barony Lecturer Raises Awareness of Why We Need Rural Education in Our
Schools”, Dumfries and Galloway! What’s Going On? (Nov 11, 2024), https://www.dgwgo.com/ruralfarming-news/barony-lecturer-raises-awareness-of-why-we-need-rural-education-in-our-schools/
Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan for 2023-28, https://www.dumgal.gov.uk/article/24295/
e-Sgoil (2024), Evidence of Impact Report 2024, https://e-sgoil.com/media/kljl4rf2/impact-report-2024.pdf
Fargas-Malet, M and Bagley, C (2022), “Is small beautiful? A scoping review of 21st-century research on
small rural schools in Europe”, European Educational Research Journal 21(5): 822–844
Foster, K, Bollman, R and Main, H (2021), “How important is a school? Examining the impact of remoteness
from a school on Canadian communities’ attraction and retention of school-age children”, International
Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies 12(2): 12–34
Galloway Glens Landscape Partnership, Dumfries and Galloway Council and National Lottery Heritage Fund
Scotland (2023), Galloway Glens Intern Programme: Overview + Findings
Glenkens and District Community Action
groups/community-action-plan-steering-group
Plan
(2020),
https://glenkens.scot/community-
Glenkens and District Community Action Plan Steering Group and Glenkens Community and Arts Trust
(2024), “Education and Learning in the Glenkens” (11th July 2024), https://glenkens.scot/reportsresources-archive/education-and-learning-in-the-glenkens-event
Glenkens Community and Arts Trust (2023), “A Vision for Land Use”, https://glenkens.scot/reportsresources-archive/a-vision-for-land-use-in-the-glenkens
Government of Ireland, Department of Education (2022), The 2nd National Strategy on Education for
Sustainable Development – ESD to 2030, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/8c8bb-esd-to-2030-secondnational-strategy-on-education-for-sustainable-development/
A review of rural education in the Glenkens, Page 40
Gulløv, J and Gulløv, E (2020), “Mobility and belonging – A case from provincial Denmark”, Journal of
Pedagogy 11 (1): 107–126
IPBES, The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (2022), The
assessment report on the diverse values and valuation of nature: Summary for policymakers,
https://www.ipbes.net/the-values-assessment
Karlsdottir, A, Cuadrado, A, Gaini, F, Jungsberg, L and Ormstrup Vestergård, L (2019), Enabling vulnerable
youth in rural areas: not in education, employment or training, Nordregio Report 2019:8
Lehtonen, O (2021), “Primary school closures and population development – is school vitality an investment
in the attractiveness of the (rural) communities or not?” Journal of Rural Studies 82: 138–147
Nordregio (2023), “The Nordic Rural Youth Panel’s Recommendations”, https://pub.nordregio.org/r-202313-from-fields-to-futures-40-action-points-for-rural-revitalisation/the-nordic-rural-youth-panelsrecommendations.html
Roberts, P and Guenther, J (2021), “Framing Rural and Remote: Key Issues, Debates, Definitions, and
Positions in Constructing Rural and Remote Disadvantage”, Chapter 2 (pp.13-27) in Roberts, P and Fuqua,
M (eds), Ruraling Education Research: Connections Between Rurality and the Disciplines of Educational
Research, Springer
Scottish Government and COSLA (2013), Commission on the Delivery of Rural Education,
https://www.gov.scot/publications/commission-delivery-rural-education-report/documents/
Scottish Government (2023:1), Commission for the land-based learning review: report to Scottish Ministers,
https://www.gov.scot/publications/commission-land-based-learning-review-report-scottishministers/documents/
Scottish Government (2023:2), “Target 2030”: A movement for people, planet and prosperity: Scotland’s
Learning for Sustainability Action Plan 2023-2030, https://www.gov.scot/publications/target-2030movement-people-planet-prosperity/documents/
Scottish
Government
(2024),
Action
Plan
to
Address
Depopultion,
https://www.gov.scot/publications/supporting-enabling-sustainable-communities-action-plan-addressdepopulation/
Sørensen, J, Svendsen, G, Jensen, P and Schmidt, T (2021), “Do rural school closures lead to local population
decline?”, Journal of Rural Studies 87: 226–235
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A review of rural education in the Glenkens
Description
An account of the resource
This report reviews the links between education and the sustainability of rural communities, and focuses on opportunities and challenges for educational provision in the Glenkens, a dynamic and engaged rural community.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CAP_25
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
GCAT
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Glenkens & District Trust
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2024
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
CoDeL
CAP Theme 3
education