Mapping the Third Sector in Rural Scotland: An Initial Review of the Literature

5 Comparing the urban and rural third sector in Scotland

5.1 This chapter identifies how far current research suggests there is a distinct character to the rural third sector more generally, before examining how far direct comparisons between urban and rural areas have been made within Scotland specifically.

The rural third sector in the UK

5.2 Grieve (2007) outlines how “although rural communities share many of the same needs as people living in urban areas, there are also times when, because of their location, needs are different or different approaches are needed”. The principle differences she outlines are summarised below (figure 5.1):

• Rural populations are spread over larger areas than in towns and cities, which can result in greater time and travel costs for people and the organisations that serve them.
• People may have to travel to towns to access public and private services as these services have increasingly left villages.
• Those without access to private transport may be marginalised because public transport infrastructure is often weak.
• Deprivation does exist in rural areas, but because of its dispersed nature it is often hidden and may not be recognised by urban deprivation measures. It can be hard to tackle because many people do not seek support, as demonstrated by the low take-up of fuel poverty grants in rural areas. It has been suggested that this may be caused by a range of factors including the traditional ‘self-sufficiency’ of rural communities, the fear of stigmatisation associated with accepting help and problems of confidentiality.
• Rural communities often have a different demographic make-up to urban areas, for example with higher proportions of older people.
• Rural areas are diverse, ranging from ‘chocolate box’ villages to former industrial communities. It will be important to consider the particular characteristics of the rural areas you serve and how these affect the impact of your work.
• The smaller populations mean that there are fewer people available to volunteer and the ageing volunteer base raises sustainability concerns.
• Due to their small size, limited resources and rural factors such as the difficulties of reaching dispersed communities, rural VCOs may need more time and resources to build into local networks and partnerships. They are less likely to be in contact with VCS infrastructure bodies, which can mean that their support needs are unmet.
• Rural VCOs may work closely with their parish council, especially because cross-membership between parish councils and local VCOs is common.

Figure 5.1: Voluntary and Community Organisations in rural England. (summarised from Grieve 2007: 3-4).

5.3 DEFRA (2003: 4-5) extend this to suggest that “…community capacity building and volunteering are disproportionately important in rural areas, both in their own right and as a significant underpinning to service delivery”, highlighting that in their opinion “rural is different” with particular characteristics including: geographical dispersion, high costs of infrastructure, fewer potential volunteers, the differing nature of service delivery due to the more dispersed nature of social exclusion. This, they suggest, leads to higher levels of self-help/community delivery of services being required/expected – for historical reasons and in order to make services viable. In addition, they suggest that communities have particular needs with reference to networking, support and training as well as requiring more appropriate methods of service delivery.

5.4 Grieve et al. (2007: 5) argue that “the decline in the delivery of some basic services has led to the [voluntary] sector taking on a range of roles more traditionally associated with the public and private sectors” and NCVO (2003: 4) claim that “in many cases the role adopted by the sector in rural areas is that of bridging the access gap for those members of the community who are unable to access mainstream services”. Qualitative focus groups and case study exemplars identified by NCVO in English rural areas suggest that the voluntary and community sector is “characterised by a high number of smaller organisations, with very low incomes, highly reliant on a small number of volunteers”.

5.5 NCVO (2002) recognised that “very little information is currently available about the sector in rural areas” (echoed by de Lima 2009) and in undertaking case study research found that there appear to be a greater number of voluntary or community organisations per head in both the more remote rural area (eleven organisations per 1,000 of the population) and the less remote rural area (six organisations per 1,000 of the population) compared to the national average at the time (three organisations per 1,000 of the population) whilst rates of volunteering (measured as number of unpaid workers per 1,000 of the population) are also found to be higher in these areas compared to the national average.

5.6 Therefore, literature suggests that there are distinct characteristics of rural areas which may influence the nature, roles and extent of the third sector. This therefore suggests that there may be a particular set of opportunities and challenges for seeking further participation from the third sector and communities in the delivery of public services.

The Scottish rural third sector: national urban/rural comparisons

5.7 This section will examine how far existing research has directly compared the Scottish urban and rural third sectors. SCVO (2003a) state that “Research into the voluntary sector’s rural dimension… is particularly weak”. Data is therefore fragmented and collected by a variety of different actors at a variety of different scales.

5.8 On the basis of the ‘Scottish Voluntary Sector Database’ 40% of ‘regulated voluntary sector organisations³¹’ lie in rural areas. Shetland, Orkney, Highland and the Western Isles have a higher number of organisations per 1,000 of the population than the City of Edinburgh, which has just under 8 organisations per 1,000 of the population (SCVO 2003a). The report makes several qualifications³², however also observes that the high levels of registered organisations in rural areas may in part be the result of population distribution, “where more organisations are needed for… fewer people in order to provide adequate access”. Conversely, it is also suggested the figures could under- represent the true number of registered organisations, potentially owing to the high number of national organisations in large cities, whereas rural areas may hold a larger number of branches and a smaller set of separately constituted organisations than non-rural areas. The pattern is similar with reference to more recent OSCR data of charities per 10,000 of population (figure 5.2).

Figure 5.2: Number of charities in Scotland per 10 000 of population by local authority - cross border charities included (OSCR 2008: 14 )- reproduced with OSCR’s permission.

5.9 Social enterprises in Scotland may be more likely to engage in trading with rural areas, however this must be understood in the context of i) the self- definition of rurality and ii) the greater rural component of the Scottish landmass more generally, in comparison with England. The 2009 survey of a sample of Social Enterprise Coalition (SEC) members³³ found that in Scotland 77% of the sample traded in or with rural areas. This places Scotland third behind only Northern Ireland and the South West of England, ahead of eight English regions (Leahy and Villeneuve-Smith 2009: 29)³⁴.

5.10 In addition, across the UK 40% of those social enterprises with a turnover of less than £10,000 worked rurally, whereas 50 – 60% of those in all other bands did so, suggesting that smaller operations may tend to function less in or with those in rural areas (ibid: 28). Resource constraints may therefore influence the nature of enterprising third sector activity in rural areas.

5.11 Overall there appears to be support for there being a particularly high number of registered charities (a large constituent part of the third sector) per head in rural areas of Scotland. It is challenging, however, to link this high number of charities to rurality causally.

Summary

5.12 The distinct social, economic and spatial characteristics of rural areas may influence the role of the third sector in these areas.

5.13 In Scotland, there appear higher numbers of charities per head in a number of rural LAs compared to urban LAs.

5.14 Data regarding the potentially distinct activities of these organisations in rural areas is profoundly lacking however.

5.15 Evidence therefore suggests the third sector in rural areas may have a significant role in providing services, and in Scotland is particularly large in terms of the number of organisations per head. However the lack of analysis of the functions of these charities makes it difficult to identify whether these charities provide a substitutional service or an additional function.

5.16 Chapter six examines smaller scale studies to identify key areas in which the rural third sector may contribute.