Scotland Rural Development Programme 2014-2020 - Consultation on Stage 1 Proposals : An Analysis of Responses

13 Equalities Impact Assessment (Q29)

13.1 This chapter provides an analysis of responses regarding Section 14 of the consultation document. Public sector organisations are required to assess the impact of proposed policy changes on equalities groups (age, disability, gender, religion and belief, and sexual orientation). The consultation invited respondents to submit views which would help inform an equalities impact assessment (EQIA) for the new SRDP:

Question 29: Please tell us about any potential impacts, either positive or negative, you feel the proposals in this consultation document may have on any of the equalities characteristics listed in paragraph.

13.2 In total, 58 respondents (6 individuals and 52 organisations) provided comment in relation to this question.

13.3 A few respondents indicated that they saw no potential equalities impact, often providing a simple "none" or "no impacts noted" in answer to the question.

13.4 Some respondents commented generally on the potential role for the SRDP in tackling inequalities and social exclusion. While some were positive about this, others expressed concern that disadvantaged groups would do less well out of the proposals. They argued that there was a need for a greater focus on equalities groups (young people, women, ethnic minorities, those with disabilities) in order to address the "older white male" bias in the rural economy, and rural Scotland's demographic and socio-economic profile more generally. The under-representation of particular equalities groups (in terms of visits to the countryside) and the need to monitor the impact of SRDP-funded initiatives on this was also noted. There were calls for:

• Wide consultation with a full range of communities
• More attention to be given to equalities issues in the consultation, as well as in subsequent processes (e.g. it was specifically noted that EQIA should form a part of the LEADER application process)
• Continued monitoring of the impact on equalities groups.

13.5 More specific comments fell into the following themes, not all of which were directly related to the equalities groups identified in the consultation document.

• Age: Respondents commented on the proposals for new entrants and stressed the need to encourage people into farming regardless of age.
• Gender: Respondents commented that the programme, in general, did little to tackle the lower levels of economic activity amongst women in rural areas. In addition, it was thought that women might be particularly disadvantaged, firstly, by age-based rules in relation to new entrants because of the impact that family commitments had on women's economic activity at different ages, and secondly, by the limiting of vocational training to forestry and farming.
• The Gaelic community: The issue of the Gaelic-speaking community, and responding to their needs, was raised.
• IT skills / access to IT: It was pointed out that any largely web-based system (e.g. in relation to provision of information and guidance, on-line application processes, etc.) potentially disadvantaged those without the necessary IT skills or easy access to appropriate hardware and software.
• Programme accessibility: There was a general point made about the need for simple, inclusive processes and appropriate advice and support to ensure accessibility for all, along with a particular concern about the limited access to advice and support for those in more rural and remote areas. Others thought steps needed to be taken to ensure the programme was accessible to small businesses and community groups, with some highlighting barriers presented by cash flow issues, and a perceived need for capacity building and training. Several respondents mentioned the issue of accessibility for those with impaired vision, dyslexia or English as a second language, who may find it difficult to access on-line services in particular.
• Urban / rural issues: A general point was made about the perceived inequalities between urban and rural areas, and a concern that budget pressures on SRDP would exacerbate this. More specifically, a point was made about the importance of supporting rural Scotland for the benefit of all the citizens of Scotland.
• Geography: In relation to crofting in particular, it was argued that the rules of the scheme (i.e. restricting assistance to those in designated crofting areas) represented geographic discrimination.