Engaging communities in decisions relating to land - guidance: review

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Guidance

29. The Guidance was designed to support and encourage engagement between landowners and those who make decisions about land, and the communities affected by those decisions.

30. As the Guidance does not include any sector-specific guidance, for example guidance specific to a particular area of the economy such as farming or forestry, some sectors have developed their own guidance from the principles and practices set out in the Guidance.

31. In November 2019, the Commission published a Protocol on Community Engagement in Decisions Relating to Land, which sets out practical advice on how landowners, land managers and communities can work together to make decisions about land use. The Protocol was developed as part of a wider set of Protocols to support the practical implementation of the LRRS. To support the Community Engagement Protocol, the Commission have also developed a series of tools including a route map and good practice guide for developing engagement plans.

32. These additional documents are designed to support the aims and implementation of the Guidance and Principle 6 of the LRRS, that there should be greater collaboration and community engagement in decisions about land,^[10] by setting out practical approaches or tailoring the approaches and advice to address the needs of specific sectors.

33. This review focuses on the Guidance produced by the Scottish Government, but has also taken into account the Protocol and other sector-specific guidance when considering the effectiveness of the Guidance.

34. In assessing the effectiveness of the Guidance, we have considered to what extent the Guidance and documents derived from it are used, and the level and quality of engagement between communities and those who make decisions relating to land.

Awareness of the Guidance

35. There is a growing awareness of the need to engage with communities on decisions relating to land where those decisions might affect them. The Commission's Community Engagement Baseline Surveys found that of the respondents, 65% of landowners or land managers had read or used the Scottish Government's Guidance, while a third had read the Commission's Protocol and a further 23% were aware of the Protocol though they had not yet read it.^[11]

36. The Baseline Surveys, carried out in 2019, consisted of a survey for landowners and managers, and another survey for communities, both to establish a baseline awareness and understanding of community engagement in land-based decision-making. There were 64 responses to the survey of landowners and managers, largely from members of SLE or NFUS, and from more rural areas, with a disproportionate number of responses coming from the Highlands. Responses from community landowners were low and there were no responses from private developers, urban land managers or public sector bodies. There were 259 responses to the communities survey, with just over half coming from individuals and 38% from representatives from community bodies. These responses came from urban and rural communities and were geographically widespread, with responses from all but two council areas.

37. In responses to the consultation sent to members of the Good Practice Group, professional membership organisations reported a lower level of awareness of the Guidance amongst their members, but a greater awareness of the related Protocol on engagement. These organisations did not quantify what level of awareness is meant by "low", and so their responses do not necessarily contradict the findings of the Baseline Surveys and could illustrate fluctuations in awareness levels over the twelve month period between the survey results and their responses.

38. The responses to our questionnaire suggest that the level of awareness of the Guidance amongst land owners and managers is lower than the level reported by the survey. The high number of responses to the survey from members of SLE and NFUS, and from those in rural areas, also suggests that overall awareness of the Guidance is lower than the survey response indicates as these groups tend to be more engaged with land reform and aware of resources like the Guidance. Both the survey and the questionnaire responses do however confirm at least some awareness of the Guidance. Both also indicate a significant level of awareness of the related Protocol on community engagement which was developed from the principles set out in the Guidance. The Protocol is a separate document, but promotes the same practices set out in the Guidance and encourages community engagement on the same principles. The significant awareness of the Protocol thus indirectly contributes to the effectiveness of the Guidance.

39. In the Community Engagement Baseline Surveys, 23% of community survey respondents reported awareness of the Guidance and around 28% of community respondents said that they had read or were aware of the Commission's Protocol.^[12] As respondents to surveys run by the Commission are usually highly engaged in land reform matters, the awareness levels of the Guidance and Protocol are likely to be significantly lower in the general population.^[13] This low level of awareness amongst the wider population is borne out by the experiences of groups representing those who own or make decisions about land.

40. The low levels of awareness of the Guidance amongst communities and the wider population limit its effectiveness. The Guidance can support communities' expectations of engagement and encourage them to participate, and so a lack of awareness could negatively impact participation and the effectiveness of the Guidance.

Use of the Guidance

41. As the Guidance sits within a wider landscape of approaches to engagement, including the Protocol and other statutory forms of engagement, it is difficult to identify to what extent the Guidance is used. The Community Engagement Baseline Surveys found that half of the respondents had either produced an engagement plan or were planning to do so.^[14] Many of those without a plan and who did not intend to develop one were smallholdings and farms, who were not planning to make significant changes to land use that they believed would require community engagement.^[15] These approaches suggest some understanding of the principles of the Guidance amongst respondents to the survey, such as planning for and conducting proportionate engagement. It also suggests that the Guidance is in use amongst some groups.

42. The respondents to these aspects of the survey were, however, predominantly farmers and rural private landowners. As noted earlier, respondents to the Commission's Survey tend to be those more likely to engage with land reform issues or have a greater awareness of them, and more likely to be aware of the Guidance or associated documents and principles for community engagement. It is likely, therefore, that the overall percentages of landowners and those making decisions about land using or developing engagement tools or following the principles of the Guidance is lower.

43. This highlights the varying use of the Guidance across sectors and the nation, which limits the effectiveness of the Guidance. There were insufficient responses in the Baseline surveys from other sectors for any conclusions to be drawn about awareness or use of the Guidance in other contexts, such as in urban or suburban settings, or land in public or community ownership. Since the Guidance has no statutory underpinning, other statutory forms of engagement are likely prioritised above it in circumstances where statutory requirements apply. This suggests that in certain sectors or situations, less importance may be placed on the use of the Guidance and in turn engagement beyond statutory requirements.

44. The higher levels of awareness of the Commission's Protocol suggests that this, rather than the Guidance, could be being used as a guide or reference document when engaging with communities, particularly as it is designed for more practical use. Membership organisations have also noted a growing awareness of the Protocol, supported by workshops around the Protocol to encourage community engagement. The Guidance also encourages sectors to develop their own specific guidance for engaging with communities. The use of these and other associated documents to support and encourage engagement with communities demonstrates the effectiveness of the Guidance, as the Protocol and sector-specific guidance were developed from the Guidance and the LRRS.

45. The research carried out by Ipsos MORI into attitudes towards land reform identified that overall levels of community engagement are low, but there is significant variation in the levels of engagement geographically. Those in remote rural or accessible rural areas are twice as likely to have been involved in decision-making as those in urban areas.^[16] The number of rural landowners surveyed who had produced or intended to produce an engagement plan, and the slightly higher levels of engagement in remote rural or accessible rural areas compared to urban areas, suggests that there is greater awareness of community engagement and use of the Guidance or associated documents in rural settings. It also suggests there is variation in community engagement across different sectors, as certain sectors are more likely to operate in urban settings than rural ones and vice versa.

Level and Quality of Engagement

46. Current levels of community engagement are generally low. Research into public attitudes to land reform found that only 13% of participants had been involved in decision-making around land use, while 85% had not.^[17] Around two-thirds of participants said that they would 'definitely' or 'probably' be interested in being more involved in decision-making around land in the future.^[18] The significant gap between involvement and interest in involvement suggests that involvement in community engagement is not low due to a lack of interest in communities.

47. The lack of participation in engagement may be due to barriers such as not knowing enough about the issues or being unaware of opportunities for engagement, or from engagement not taking place. The low levels of engagement compared to interest in participation indicate that there is an ongoing need to encourage engagement between those who make decisions in relation to land and the communities those decisions affect, and hence that there is still a need for the Guidance.

48. The awareness of land reform issues in Scotland is low, and generally associated with rural environments.^[19] The majority of participants in the Ipsos MORI research were much more interested in land reform issues once they understood more about them and 43% identified having more awareness of local land issues as the most helpful way to encourage engagement.^[20] This supports the hypothesis that not knowing enough about land-related issues is a significant barrier to participating in engagement. This wider issue of lack of awareness and understanding of land-related issues, along with other barriers, will have an impact on the effectiveness of the Guidance.

49. The association of land issues with rural environments compounds this effect, since the majority of Scotland's population reside within an urban environment. If urban communities or those who make decisions relating to non-rural land do not consider land issues as applicable to their circumstances, this will have a significant impact on the use and effectiveness of the Guidance. Lack of awareness of the Guidance does not, of course, mean that decision-makers are not carrying out community engagement or that their actions have negative impacts on communities. But a lack of awareness or use of the Guidance can increase the risk that those making decisions do not engage with the community, or take decisions that have a negative impact on the community.

50. The Guidance is one of many documents within a wider landscape of documents, protocols and statutory requirements encouraging engagement with communities. This makes it very difficult to attribute positive changes in the level and quality of engagement with communities directly to the Guidance.

51. Practical experiences and examples, such as those set out by the Commission as case studies, and the experiences of professional membership organisations, suggest that engagement may be improving. There remain disparities, however, between landowner's views of communities' influence and the effectiveness of their engagement, and the communities' perception of the same issues.

52. Just over half (53%) of the landowners and managers who responded to the

baseline surveys on community engagement stated that community views had a great deal or moderate influence on decisions about significant aspects of the way land or buildings are managed. In contrast, only 30% of community respondents felt the same way.^[21] In the same survey, just under half (49%) of community survey respondents felt that the engagement that did take place was not effective.^[22]

53. The significant difference in the level of opinion as to what extent community views have an influence on decisions, and the high level of perception that engagement was not effective, point to a need for considerable improvement in both the level of engagement and the quality of that engagement.

54. Increasing the quality of engagement as well as the extent can help ensure that communities feel that their needs and views are taken into account when decisions are made. It can also help them to understand why those decisions were made, particularly in instances where decisions are made that do not fully align with the views of the community.