Mapping the Third Sector in Rural Scotland: An Initial Review of the Literature
The report is a review of the literature on the nature and extent of third sector activity and volunteering in rural areas of Scotland.
3 Methodology and definitions
3.1 This chapter first discusses the approach taken to identifying existing literature and research. It then outlines the ways in which ‘third sector’ and ‘rural Scotland’ have been understood in the context of this review.
Review framework
3.2 This review employs: (i) wide-ranging literature review and (ii) the direct contact of a range of key informants across Scotland and the UK more widely.
3.3 Strand (i) includes the review of published literature within the UK, including books, journal articles and grey literature such as government reports and conference proceedings. It also includes research currently being undertaken (see appendix one for full details of academic and non-academic databases consulted). It did not impose restrictions in terms of date of publication.
3.4 Strand (ii) entailed contact with academic and non-academic stakeholders in the Scottish (and UK) third sector in order to better ensure comprehensive and accurate review. Informal interviews and/or email feedback identified further literature, ongoing research or specific case study examples which may be relevant.
3.5 Over fifty responses – via email and telephone – were received across the sector: 25 from academic sectors (including research groups and institutes) and 32 from outwith academia (including umbrella organisations/representative bodies in both England/Wales/Northern Ireland and those working in a specifically Scottish context, at the national, regional and local scales).
3.6 Where possible this review also draws on existing analysis of quantitative data to further enhance our understanding of the third sector in rural Scotland. A recent Economic and Social Data Service (ESDS 2010) report provides a helpful review of the principal national datasets of use to government in Scotland under the broad themes of i) employment and the labour market, ii) health, iii) crime, iv) identity and social capital and v) demography. The Scottish Household Survey and the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) Scottish Charities Database are particularly useful here.
3.7 It is important to note that a review of literature and data available does not necessarily constitute a review of the key roles of the third sector in rural areas, rather it is of those areas about which there appears significant research/data collected. This review may therefore reflect the current priorities of stakeholders, as much as or more than the roles that are most characteristic of the third sector.
3.8 It should also be noted that this review was written as part of a broader internship programme, three months in duration. The review therefore was undertaken within the context of time and resource constraints4.
Defining the third sector
3.9 Definition of the third sector is notoriously challenging5 and a product of particular moments in time. It is also often used “almost interchangeably” with the terms “voluntary sector” and “social economy” (Rutherford nd), making definition of the sector more challenging still.
3.10 The definition employed by Salamon and Anheier (1997) is understood to be “almost a default for academic studies of the third sector” by Dacombe and Bach (2009: 17) and can be summarised as organisations which are: formally organised, nonprofit distributing, constitutionally independent from the state, self-governing and benefiting from some form of voluntarism.
3.11 The Scottish Government place the sector as being distinct from those in public or private spheres: “made up of a rich diversity of organisations with different legal forms and structures leading to some confusion about how the sector should be defined”. (Scottish Executive (2005a: 4). It is understood as “comprising social enterprises, voluntary organisations, co-operatives and mutuals” (Scottish Government 2011g).
3.12 SCVO (2009) state that the third sector is ‘non-profit driven, non-statutory, autonomous and those individuals who run the boards of [these] organisations do not get paid for doing so’. They also go on to diagrammatically represent the diversity of the sector with examples:
Figure 3.1: ‘Diversity of the sector’ (SCVO 2009)-reproduced with SCVO’s permission..
3.13 The place of social enterprises6 in the definition of the third sector is sometimes debated. For the Scottish Government they are central in achieving an ‘enterprising third sector’ (Scottish Government 2008a). However Sepulveda (2009) identifies three broad views regarding the place of social enterprises in relation the sector, 1) as ‘outsiders’ to the sector – conventional profit driven businesses despite social goals, 2) as the ‘missing link’ between traditional organisations and markets, playing a role in the voluntary and third sectors or 3) as ‘potent organisational devices to address social needs and problems’ in a financially sustainable and businesslike way.
3.14 Employing the SCVO definition, the sector is composed of 1.2 million volunteers and 137,000 professional paid staff whilst the sector has an annual income of £4.4 billion (SCVO 2011a). Of the approximately 45,000 voluntary organisations in Scotland (SCVO 2010), a subset of around 23,000 are registered charities (Axiom 2010, reviewing OSCR data), with approximately two thirds of these being grassroots groups with incomes below £25,000 (SCVO 2010: 3).
3.15 SCVO (2010) report that the largest spheres of activity of the third sector are those of social care and development (44% of organisations); economic development (19%); culture and recreation (16%) and healthcare (6%). In terms of income and in common with the UK more generally (Clark et al 2009: 23) the Scottish third sector has a very unequal distribution with the largest organisations (those with incomes of over £1 million per annum constituting 4% of the sector) receiving 78% of the income, whilst the smallest 65% (under £25 000 income per annum) of regulated voluntary sector organisations in Scotland receive 2% of total income (SCVO 2010: 3).
3.16 Overall, the range of third sector definitions available is overwhelming, and it is not the purpose of this review to contribute further to this diversity. Dachombe and Bach (2009: 18) adopted a definitional approach “not based on a particular, rigid approach” and whilst this report will build on the evidence presented by the authors to examine the rural context of the third sector more deeply, it too will not take a rigid approach to definition.
3.17 This review will remain sensitive to the range of activities which may, according to the definitions reviewed, constitute the ‘third sector’. It will use these criteria to review existing literature and identify those areas of the third sector in rural Scotland around which there appears most information, in discussion with individuals and organisations composing the sector.
Defining volunteering
3.18 In the Volunteering Strategy 2004 - 2009, the Scottish Executive define volunteering as “the giving of time and energy through a third party, which can bring measurable benefits to the volunteer, individual beneficiaries, groups and organisations, communities, the environment and society at large. It is a choice undertaken of one’s own free will, and is not motivated primarily for financial gain, or for a wage or salary” (Scottish Executive 2004c: 7). This definition broadly encompasses ‘formal volunteering’ as opposed to ‘informal volunteering’ which is “unpaid help given as an individual directly to people who are not relatives” (Scottish Government 2011d: 116).
3.19 Volunteer Development Scotland (VDS) also distinguish between ‘formal volunteering’ (“Volunteering undertaken through an organisation, group or club to help others”) and ‘informal volunteering’ (“volunteering undertaken as an individual to help others”) (VDS 2007: 6). Both the definitions of the Scottish Government and VDS draw on the UN definition of volunteering developed as part of the 2001 International Year of Volunteers (United Nations: 2001).
3.20 In Scotland, rates of formal volunteering (at least once in the last 12 months) have been measured by the Scottish Household Survey and have fluctuated between 20% and 26% between 1999 and 2006, before increasing to between 28% and 31% between 2007 and 2010, with the most recent data suggesting the rate is 30%7. Informal volunteering has been measured by VDS in Scotland, using a smaller sample size, between 2003 and 2006. They report that rates declined from 81% in 2003 to 74% in 20068.
3.21 It is important to note that whilst much formal volunteering is undertaken within third sector organisations, these are not the only organisations within and through which formal volunteering can take place. Volunteer Development Scotland (2004b) identify that in 2003 76% of their sample of volunteers in Scotland volunteered through voluntary/charity/community/churches/religious organisations, whilst 25% volunteered in the private sector, 4% through their place of work, and 6% through other means (with some volunteering for more than one organisation, giving an overall percentage greater than 100%).
3.22 In the English context, Ellis Paine et al. (2007) summarise comprehensively the state of research regarding the contribution of volunteering to government policy agendas, finding a wide range of research supporting the personal and societal benefits of voluntary action. These were grouped around “development” (economic and sustainable); “communities” (safer and stronger); “social inclusion” (economic support and social support); “quality of life” (contentment and satisfaction, mental and physical health) and lifelong learning (skills development; achievements for education)9.
3.23 There are therefore well-established benefits to the individual and to wider society of formal voluntary activity, which have been engaged with by policy makers across the UK and within Scotland.
3.24 This review remains sensitive to data collected within the UK exploring both formal and informal volunteering in more rural areas, and whilst volunteering may be particularly characteristic of the third sector, it should be noted that much voluntary activity is undertaken in other sectors.
Defining rural Scotland
3.25 Blackstock (2008), in reflecting on trends and developments in rural research, notes:
Whether rural is a ‘useful’ scientific category is still debated, and there is a divide between researchers who see rural areas as a container for processes of interest (such as health, economic development) and those who are interested in the discursive construction of rurality itself…. (Blackstock 2008: 4).
3.26 It is outwith the remit of this study to review the construction of ‘rural’: how the experience and understanding of rural spaces and places might vary depending on multiple factors including socio-economic, geographic, demographic and cultural backgrounds. However it is important to recognise the term is contested.
3.27 The Scottish Government ‘Urban-Rural Classification 2009 - 2010 systematically categorises areas at datazone (slightly larger than postcode area) level employing both ‘settlement size’ and ‘accessibility based on drive time’ factors to give an overall urban/rural categorisation. It is produced with both six and eight categories to give a varying degree of sensitivity. The ‘core definition of rurality’ employed by the Scottish Government defines settlements of three thousand people or less as being ‘rural’. This distinguishes in the case of the six fold definition between categories one to four as “urban”, and five to six as “rural” (see appendix two for further information).
3.28 Taking the six fold Local Authority (LA) table (Scottish Government 2010c: 14), collapsing the ‘accessible rural’ and ‘remote rural’ categories into one and re-ranking them by percentage of population allows us to rank LAs in terms of the percentage of their population who can be said to live in a ‘rural’ context. Therefore, it can be said that there are seven Local Authorities with fifty percent or more of their population resident in rural areas (see table 3.1, and for full table see appendix three).
| Rank | LA | Accessible | Remote | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Eilean Siar | 78.9% | 78.9% | |
| 2 | Shetland Islands | 70.9% | 70.9% | |
| 3 | Orkney Islands | 67.2% | 67.2% | |
| 4 | Aberdeenshire | 36.8% | 16% | 52.8% |
| 4 | Argyll and Bute | 7.6% | 45.2% | 52.8% |
| 5 | Highland | 10.5% | 40.6% | 51.1% |
| 6 | Scottish Borders | 39% | 12% | 51% |
Table 3.1: LAs with a greater than 50% Population living in 'accessible rural' and 'remote rural' areas (six fold ranking provided in Scottish Government (2010c: 14))
3.29 The Scottish Government definition of rural is employed both within and outwith the organisation10. This study is framed by the Scottish Government definitions from a pragmatic point of view, but remains sensitive to work that falls outwith these boundaries. This provides a small number of ‘case study’ Local Authorities to act as areas within which to identify research within the confines of this review.
3.30 Whilst LA level urban/rural definition is inevitably very broad, it is also helpful to the current review. The infrastructure to support the third sector in Scotland has altered significantly recently, with third sector interfaces now operating in each local authority area. These interfaces seek to develop a single point of contact within each LA which offers “support to voluntary organisations operating in the area, both local and those national organisations that deliver services at the local level; support to and promotion of volunteering; support and development of social enterprise; [and a] connection between the CPP and the third sector” (Pearson 2009). This brings Volunteer Centres, Councils for Voluntary Service, social enterprise networks and Community Planning Partnerships together11.
3.31 A number of respondents in rural areas felt that this restructuring presented particular challenges to the areas in which they worked, given the issues of transport and accessibility to a single point of contact in large rural LAs.
3.32 To summarise, it is therefore with reference to the Scottish Government urban/rural definition at the LA level that rurality is understood in this review.
Summary
3.33 This review draws on academic and non-academic databases, review of online resources, and the direct contact of key informants and organisations at UK-wide, Scotland-wide, regional and local levels.
3.34 There is no consistent definition of ‘third sector’, with debate over whether such a definition is possible or desirable. In common with the Dachombe and Bach (2009) report on which this review builds, a rigid definition is not employed. Instead a broad review of research is undertaken, with distinctions in definition highlighted where necessary.
3.35 Whilst recognising that ‘rural’ can be contested, this study employs the Scottish Government rural/urban categorisation in identifying those LAs which are home to a particularly large percentage of rural population. There are clear limitations to this approach in that almost all Local Authorities will contain a rural population component however pragmatically, within the constraints of this review, it is employed here.
3.36 A definition based around Local Authority rurality is also helpful given the recent development of Local Authority-wide Third Sector Interfaces.
Contact
Email: Kay Barclay
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback