ThesisPDF Available

The role of community landownership in improving rural health in Scotland

Authors:

Abstract

A long history of economic, social and political inequality in rural Scotland has led to a vastly unequal pattern of rural landownership, contributing to the social and economic fragility of rural communities. Over the past thirty years there have been attempts to mitigate or counter these effects through community landownership (CLO), whereby an elected board of local residents govern the use of land in the interests of the local population, taking decisions on land uses based on their needs. Early evidence of the effects of community landownership suggests that the 'intervention' can act upon determinants of health and reduce social inequalities, empowering individuals and communities to affect change within their circumstances. In recent years, there have been calls for policies governing both health and land reform to be explicitly based around increasing access to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, thereby aligning the strategies and goals of each and implying that furthering land reform could improve rural health. This thesis investigates the connections between community landownership and rural health and considers how, and for whom, this intervention could affect health in rural communities in Scotland. Two substantive pieces of work comprise this thesis. First, a qualitative study of diverse perspectives on community landownership develops a conceptual understanding of the causal pathways through which community landownership could affect rural health. Second, a Q Methodology study assesses perspectives of the residents of a community-owned estate as to the relative role of community landownership in improving health within rural communities. The findings of this study indicate that community landownership alters power relations in rural communities and may act as an antecedent to other health-related interventions, but has little intrinsic health benefit. Health effects, both positive and negative, are dependent on the ongoing management and governance of community-owned estates in line with the needs of local people. These findings can help to inform future development of research, policy and practice within the broad fields of rural health, land reform and community development.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... These islands were selected as part of broader research into the role of community landownership in improving rural health. 26 The South Uist Estate, which covers most of the three islands, has been owned by the resident community since ...
... Estate as part of a broader study of the role of community landownership in improving rural health. 26 Local power structures are reconstituted following a community land-buyout 34 as the estate holds significant influence over social and economic conditions within the community, as well as involvement in service provision. 26 ...
... 26 Local power structures are reconstituted following a community land-buyout 34 as the estate holds significant influence over social and economic conditions within the community, as well as involvement in service provision. 26 ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Rural health outcomes are often worse than their urban counterparts. While rural health theory recognizes the importance of the social determinants of health, there is a lack of insight into public perspectives for improving rural health beyond the provision of health‐care services. Gaining insight into perceived solutions, that include and go beyond health‐ care, can help to inform resource allocation decisions to improve rural health. Objective To identify and describe shared perspectives within a remote‐rural community on how to improve rural health. Method Using Q methodology, a set of 40 statements were developed representing different perceptions of how to improve rural health. Residents of one remote‐rural island community ranked this statement set according to their level of agreement. Card‐sorts were analysed using factor analysis to identify shared points of view and interpreted alongside post‐sort qualitative interviews. Results Sixty‐two respondents participated in the study. Four shared perspectives were identified, labelled: Local economic activity; Protect and care for the community; Redistribution of resources; and Investing in people. Factors converged on the need to relieve poverty and ensure access to amenities and services. Discussion and conclusions Factors represent different elements of a multifaceted theory of rural health, indicating that ‘lay’ respondents are capable of comprehending various approaches to health improvement and perspectives are not homogenous within rural communities. Respondents diverged on the role of individuals, the public sector and ‘empowered’ community‐based organizations in delivering these solutions, with implications for policy and practice. Public Contribution Members of the public were involved in the development and piloting of the statement set.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Concern about who owns Scotland, and how much of it they own, has been central to the land reform debate for decades. While many people are utterly convinced that landownership is a key determinant of rural development outcomes, others insist it is irrelevant, and what is important is how land is managed. The Scottish Government wants to create a more diverse pattern of land ownership and asked the Scottish Land Commission to investigate the issues associated with large scale and concentrated land ownership. In early 2018 the Commission did this by inviting people with experience of living and working in such areas to share their experiences.
Technical Report
Full-text available
This report reviews the effectiveness of community ownership mechanisms and options for simplifying or improving these mechanisms to enable and support the expansion of community ownership in Scotland. This included reviewing processes relating to negotiated sales or transfers of land and/or assets to communities, as well as legislative mechanisms including the Community Right to Buy (CRtB), Crofting Community Right to Buy, the Transfer of Crofting Estates (Scotland) Act 1997 and Asset Transfer measures under the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.
Article
Full-text available
This paper explains the integration of the human rights-based approach to land governance within The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016. It demonstrates a new approach to using land to effectively support economic, social and cultural rights, embodied in the work of the newly established Scottish Land Commission. It illustrates how human rights law can be integrated in land governance to address redevelopment of vacant and derelict land; increase diversity of land ownership; improve community engagement in land use decision making; and improving relationships between agricultural landlords and tenants.
Article
Full-text available
Background Health inequalities in the UK have proved to be stubborn, and health gaps between best and worst-off are widening. While there is growing understanding of how the main causes of poor health are perceived among different stakeholders, similar insight is lacking regarding what solutions should be prioritised. Furthermore, we do not know the relationship between perceived causes and solutions to health inequalities, whether there is agreement between professional stakeholders and people living in low-income communities or agreement within these groups. Methods Q methodology was used to identify and describe the shared perspectives (‘subjectivities’) that exist on i) why health is worse in low-income communities (’Causes’) and ii) the ways that health could be improved in these same communities (‘Solutions’). Purposively selected individuals (n=53) from low-income communities (n=25) and professional stakeholder groups (n=28) ranked ordered sets of statements – 34 ‘Causes’ and 39 ‘Solutions’ – onto quasi-normal shaped grids according to their point of view. Factor analysis was used to identify shared points of view. ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’ were analysed independently, before examining correlations between perspectives on causes and perspectives on solutions. Results Analysis produced three factor solutions for both the ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’. Broadly summarised these accounts for ‘Causes’ are: i) ‘Unfair Society’, ii) ‘Dependent, workless and lazy’, iii) ‘Intergenerational hardships’ and for ‘Solutions’: i) ‘Empower communities’, ii) ‘Paternalism’, iii) ‘Redistribution’. No professionals defined (i.e. had a significant association with one factor only) the ‘Causes’ factor ‘Dependent, workless and lazy’ and the ‘Solutions’ factor ‘Paternalism’. No community participants defined the ‘Solutions’ factor ‘Redistribution’. The direction of correlations between the two sets of factor solutions – ‘Causes’ and ‘Solutions’ – appear to be intuitive, given the accounts identified. Conclusions Despite the plurality of views there was broad agreement across accounts about issues relating to money. This is important as it points a way forward for tackling health inequalities, highlighting areas for policy and future research to focus on.
Article
Full-text available
An emerging stream of literature has focused on the ways in which social enterprises might act on the social determinants of health. However, this previous work has not taken a sufficiently broad account of the wide range of stakeholders involved in social enterprises and has also tended to reduce and simplify a complex and het- erogeneous set of organisations to a relatively homogenous social enterprise concept. In an attempt to address these gaps, we conducted an empirical investigation between August 2014 and October 2015 consisting of qualitative case studies involving in-depth semi-structured interviews and a focus group with a wide variety of stakeholders from three social enterprises in different regions of Scotland. We found that different forms of social enterprise impact on different dimensions of health in different ways, including through: engendering a feeling of ownership and control; improving environmental conditions (both physical and social); and providing or facilitating meaningful employment. In conclusion, we highlight areas for future research.
Article
Full-text available
Social enterprises–businesses that work for social benefit rather than for the maximization of financial returns to shareholders or owners–could potentially prove to be an innovative and sustainable way of tackling 'upstream' social determinants of health. However, empirical work focusing upon how, and to what extent, social enterprise-led activity may impact upon health and well-being is still relatively scarce. This study examines how social enterprises portray their impact, and how such impacts may be considered in health and well-being terms. Through analysing evaluative reports of the work of social enterprises in Scotland (n = 17) utilizing a 'process coding' method, we investigate both the self-reported impacts of the work of social enterprises and the mechanisms by which these are said to be derived. Revisiting previous conceptualizations in the extant literature, this work allows us to present an 'empirically-informed' conceptual model of the health and well-being impacts of social enterprise-led activity, and thus presents a significant advance on previous hypothetical, theoretically-based conceptualizations. It is considered that these findings further improve our overall knowledge of ways in which social enterprise and other parts of the third sector could be considered as potentially valuable 'non-obvious' public health actors.
Conference Paper
This paper supports the view that human rights can be utilised as a progressive force in land reform in Scotland. Due to unprecedented levels of inequality in Scotland, the Scottish Government is obliged to take action to address the present situation of poor human rights for many in Scotland. Understanding land as a national asset is key to progress in this respect. Obligations to support human rights for all through land reform emerge from both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. Key recommendations to strengthen the Land Reform Bill in compatibility with international human rights standards are presented.