Community Wealth Building (Scotland) Bill: child rights and wellbeing impact assessment (CRWIA)

Annex C

Participation of people with experience of poverty in the development of Scottish Government’s Community Wealth Building Legislation

Executive Summary

July 2023

The Scottish Government have committed to the Community Wealth Building (CWB) approach to economic development as a means of achieving their wellbeing economy objectives. As part of the consultation on CWB legislation, the Poverty Alliance were commissioned to recruit, support and facilitate a citizen’s panel of people with experience of poverty to share their views on CWB, and their priorities for action.

During the process, the majority of participants moved from having little to no understanding of CWB, to being supportive advocates for the approach. Participants latterly demonstrated a clear understanding that CWB was about economic transformation and system change, and they recognised the potential of this model in tackling poverty and inequality. The process was developmental for all involved.

What we did

12 people with experience of poverty were recruited from across Scotland to take part in discussions to help shape the new CWB legislation. The process was primarily focused on how CWB could best address poverty.

The four sessions covered an introduction to the concept of CWB; issues of ownership in our communities and how CWB could tackle this; the actions needed to ensure CWB addresses poverty; and the language we use to talk about CWB. The final session was utilised to finalise participant’s key messages for the Scottish Government.

We then held a session with community organisations and representatives from the third sector, focused on testing the key messages developed during the citizen’s panel. This session covered the seven key messages, outlined below, and provided an opportunity for organisations to provide feedback and relevant context to the key messages.

Who took part

12 participants were recruited and engaged with the process throughout. Participants included eight women and four men; nine were white and three were Black and minority ethnic; nine lived in urban areas and three lived in rural areas; and four identified as disabled.

10 organisations participated in the community organisations session. There was a focus on recruiting representatives from membership organisations to increase the reach of our engagement. The organisations represented at this session were: Volunteer Scotland; Fife Gingerbread; Community Enterprise in Scotland; Scottish Communities Alliance; Engender; The Ayrshire Community Trust; Ayrshire Rural and Islands Ambition Fund; SURF – Scotland’s Regeneration Forum; Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations and Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations' Council.

Key messages from our citizen’s panel

Seven key recommendations emerged from our citizen’s panel, focused on how the Scottish Government can ensure CWB tackles poverty and inequality; empowers communities; and promotes positive change in people’s lives. The key messages were:

1. Participants are positive about the idea of CWB, and sought reassurance that the accompanying resources and support means it will work in practice

People were initially positive about CWB and became increasingly positive about the concept as they learned more about it. However, there were some reservations around how CWB will work in practice. People are clear that CWB must tackle, rather than entrench, inequality.

2. How we speak about CWB matters

As a relatively new and innovative concept, CWB could be seen as complex. People felt that it needs to be brought to life via tangible examples and real-life case studies. Scottish Government and other public bodies need to make it clear how CWB relates to people’s lives. This requires consideration of our message; the messenger; and innovative means of communication.

3. What do we mean by ‘community’ in CWB?

There are multiple definitions of community, and this word means different things to different people. We need to have a clear collective understanding about what ‘community’ we are referring to in CWB, including considering how this is reflected in the legislation. Our definition of community must be suitable for both rural and urban areas and be based on the principle of collaboration.

4. Our communities need to be involved in the earliest stages of CWB

People have questions about who in the community will be supported to become involved in CWB, and how they will receive this support. People living on low incomes are reliant on people in a position of power to set up new ways of working, which requires public bodies and anchor organisations to know the communities they are engaging with; to be proactive; and approachable. There cannot be any gatekeeping of the process.

5. Capacity building for both communities and anchor organisations is critical

Capacity building on economic development is critical to enabling people in communities and community organisations to take part in CWB. However, capacity building activities should not be solely focused on communities themselves. Capacity building should be a two-way street, with activities also designed to improve the understanding of decision makers on the needs and preferences of their community, alongside best practice engagement processes. This is critical, as CWB should be focused on anchor organisations giving preference to the type of economy the community wants.

6. CWB legislation cannot also fall victim to the implementation gap

It was perceived by some participants that pieces of existing legislation that will support CWB, including the Community Empowerment Act and community land buy outs, have not had the transformational impact that was intended. We need to reassess the effectiveness of these foundational pieces of legislation for CWB to be effective. Legislative changes should ensure communities are given preference in CWB processes.

7. Legislation needs to be combined with resources if we are to make CWB work for everyone

Helping communities and community organisations to become more involved in economic development requires them to have access to sustainable support and resources. It also requires economic development professionals to work harder to engage communities. This must involve embedding the structures that work for communities, rather than asking communities to change to fit pre-existing structures.

Key messages from community organisations session

• Equalities considerations must be explicit and embedded in CWB legislation

Attendees highlighted that discussion on equalities within policy design is often too high level, with equalities incorporated as a headline, rather than considering the specific needs of particular groups. Within the context of CWB, and to ensure the approach tackles inequalities, there must be explicit reference to specific seldom heard groups and those who experience economic inequality.

• Community organisations will need support to access the resources to implement CWB

CWB cannot work in a system where power is centralised, and there should be action to devolve more power to offset this. Part of this is ensuring that community organisations are supported to access resources such as finance, staffing and advice. These resources are critical to facilitating meaningful engagement and action to create and sustain alternative service models that work for the local community.

• The adopted CWB model must be shaped by lived experience.

It was noted amongst attendees that CWB was not designed by people with experience of poverty and thus the model itself should be carefully analysed to ensure it is fit for purpose and able to alleviate poverty. For example, attendees questioned why the five pillars (ownership, workforce, procurement, land, finance) had been chosen, noting the absence of pillars related to wellbeing, social capital and cultural heritage.

• We need accountability for all organisations involved to ensure that CWB is implemented meaningfully.

There were concerns that any gap in accountability could lead to CWB becoming another tick-box exercise, rather than a tool for structural change. Attendees highlighted that there is a need to embed accountability into legislation to ensure CWB happens in a way that actively tackles poverty and disadvantage. This should include transparency from local authorities, anchor organisations and businesses through mechanisms such as audits.