Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill - Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment

Stage 2 – Evidence

The second stage involves working closely with analysts, making use of relevant data and commissioning other evidence to inform options for improvement. This stage is likely to involve a number of discussions between teams:

• to understand the inequalities of outcomes associated with the programme/policy/decision,
• to scope out how the programme/policy/decision could be strengthened to reduce the inequalities further, based on evidence,
• where necessary, to commission new data collections, for example from community consultation/participation, or new secondary analysis of existing data.

The Scottish Government has access to a wide range of relevant data, both quantitative and qualitative. This includes administrative data, and data about local neighbourhoods (for example the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation).

New experimental statistics on combined low income and material deprivation (now available at a local level), and health, education and employment data. Analytical teams will be able to advise on the evidence is most useful.

Evidence can also be sought from communities and groups directly, particularly when there are evidence gaps – for example, where a significant new policy is being developed. Engagement processes should reflect the principles of the National Standards for Community Engagement.

Another source – particularly in terms of integrating equality and socio-economic considerations – is the Scottish Government Equality Evidence Finder.This is an updated web resource providing equality evidence by subject and protected characteristic.

We intend to expand this over the next year to include socio-economic disadvantage as a new category, including child poverty considerations. You may also find the data sources in the Fairer Scotland Duty Guidance useful.

What does the evidence suggest about possible impacts of the policy/programme/decision, as planned, on those inequalities of outcome?

The Bill includes climate and nature as purposes of support. Policies falling under this – for example under the Climate Change Plan and Biodiversity Strategy, are not specifically designed to reduce inequalities or impact in relation to people on low income, people in deprived areas, low wealth, debt, material deprivation or social classes, but are to help the agriculture sector reduce its GHG emissions, restore nature and to ensure farming in Scotland can continue reducing its emissions and continue to produce our food more sustainably and ensure the land is managed more sustainably. Any inequality impact broader on Scotland will be as result of it being indirect as result of the policies.

The Bill includes enabling powers to allow the Scottish Government to continue supporting rural development, including for example supporting rural communities and rural networking. There is potential for continued delivery of this support to help reduce inequalities, although any such positive impact will come from future policy decisions relating to which activity to support, and we judge that there will be no direct impact resulting from the enabling powers set out in the Bill.

The Bill includes enabling powers in respect of skills, knowledge, and innovation. This will help provide courses of training and personal development and other forms of learning and sharing information as well as the provision and obtaining of advice and the provision for continuing professional development (CPD) for farmers, crofters, land managers and other persons. There is potential that the skills and knowledge gained from participating in these activities could contribute indirectly to improve their earning capacity and improve their career prospects.

Is there evidence that suggests alternative approaches to the policy/programme/decision? For example, evidence from the UK or international evidence?

There are a wide range of farm support policies internationally, from very low levels of support as in New Zealand, through to very high rates as in Switzerland and Norway. However, these are tied up in wider trade deals and agricultural policies more widely. It is not clear what the aggregate impact is of these options and whether they would lead to greater equality.

A framework approach is very flexible, and will enable Ministers to adapt support in response to new information. The UK Government followed a similar enabling approach in their Agriculture Act 2020.

What gaps are there in key evidence? Is it possible to collect new evidence quickly in other areas? For example, through consultation meetings, focus groups or surveys?

The evidence gaps are primarily around scheme impacts, so it doesn't make sense to look at them at this stage. Where secondary legislation is introduced in terms of the bill, there will be an opportunity depending on the SSI proposals to prepare EQIA and FSD statements, and so then detail will be given on both what is known about impacts and what could reasonably be added.

How could you involve communities of interest (including those with lived experience of poverty and disadvantage) in this process? The voices of people and communities are likely to be important for identifying potential improvements to the programme/policy/decision.

The Bill itself is based on a public consultation which was held in 2022. It is the intention of the Scottish Government to engage further with stakeholders during the development of secondary legislation in terms of the bill, and so there will be the opportunity to involve communities of interest at this stage (where appropriate).

There is potential for this engagement to be used to test out schemes which would have a positive impact on inequalities and socio-economic disadvantage, but further consideration and engagement will be required to determine what form this might take, hence little detail about this is being released into the public domain at the moment.

Further evidence

The Bill is a framework Bill. It provides for a suite of powers which will enable Scottish Ministers to give assistance for specified purposes. One of these purposes is forestry. These powers will enable Scottish Ministers to, in the short term, provide continuity to operate the current Forestry Grant Scheme. In order to apply for forestry grants under the current scheme you must first either own a woodland or land that could be planted into a new woodland (afforestation).

The land ownership patterns in Scotland mean that 68% of Scotland's forests and woodlands are under private ownership^[1]. Carbon offsetting has been of particular interest to companies willing to invest large amounts of money into woodland creation schemes. This has increased demand and competition, particularly with agriculture, for private land suitable for afforestation and therefore has resulted in increased land prices. High land prices limit the number of people who can afford to buy land, favour those who own land and provide an incentive for them to continue to hold on to their land, reducing the supply to market^[2].

The majority of new woodland creation is taking place in rural areas, where incomes tend to be lower: (1 in 8 individuals) living in rural Scotland are living in income poverty^[3]. Therefore, inflated land prices may exacerbate the issue of exclusive land ownership by wealthy individuals or businesses and may have implications for tenants where landlords could increase rents or sell to others.

This issue is largely driven by forces outside of the control of this policy area, such the interests of the investment market, but changes to the Woodland Carbon Code (WCC) additionality rules^[4] have already gone some way to reducing the financial attractiveness of afforestation in some cases, although it is too early to determine the long-term effect this will have on demand for land. Most recently other macroeconomic factors, such as high interest rates and low timber prices, have also led to lower forestry land prices and less forestry land being sold^[5].

Forestry grants are not limited to afforestation, but also focus on the improvement of existing woodlands ('Woodland Improvement Grants') which, among other things, provides grant funding toward improving Woodlands In and Around Towns (WIAT).

Research suggests that, across Europe, social inequality can determine access to green spaces, with green spaces tending to be more accessible in affluent areas^[6], so by investing forestry grant support in WIAT in deprived areas, increasing their accessibility, creates more, equal opportunities to access green spaces.

There is also evidence to suggest that improving woodland condition and access to woodlands in deprived areas has a positive effect on people's perceptions of the environment, their activity levels, and their quality of life^[7].

A study has also highlighted the beneficial role of greenness and access to green spaces in reducing socioeconomic-related inequalities in mental health^[8]. The powers in this Bill will allow for a continuation of financial support and enable continued investment in WIAT.

The current Forestry Grant Scheme (FGS) was co-designed with industry stakeholders and has been purposefully created to meet the needs and demands of forestry in a Scottish context. During the current scheme's lifetime some grant options have been reviewed and updated in line with changes to policy or best practice from across Scotland, the UK or internationally, where applicable. The FGS has been a successful delivery mechanism for forestry grants, seeing some of the highest tree planting rates in decades. It is therefore deemed broadly fit for purpose and is desired to continue in its current form, so far as possible.

The specifics of the FGS have been developed in the context of Scottish regulatory frameworks and to move away from the principles of co-design and Scottish-centricity would risk creating forestry grants that are not fit-for-purpose and may hinder the delivery of Scotland's Forestry Strategy and the Climate Change Plan. However further assessment of alternative approaches to forestry support will be undertaken when developing secondary legislation.

As the Bill is a framework Bill, providing a suite of powers for Ministers to provide support for various purposes, once secondary legislation is developed, there will be sufficient detail to make a robust assessment. Each set of regulations will be assessed and independent impact assessments carried out at that time.

Additionally, we are committed to introducing Land Reform legislation to further improve transparency of land ownership, help ensure large scale land holdings deliver in the public interest, and empower communities by providing more opportunities to own land and have more say in how land in their area is used.

Agricultural holdings proposals, which had originally been identified for the Agriculture Bill, will now be included in the Bill along with proposals for a Land Use Tenancy and small landholdings.