Islands Resilience Fund: child rights and wellbeing impact assessment (CRWIA)

Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment Template

1. Brief Summary

Type of proposal:

• Decision of a strategic nature relating to the rights and wellbeing of children

Name the proposal, and describe its overall aims and intended purpose.

Islands Resilience Fund

The Islands Resilience Fund (IRF) is a first 100 days of Government commitment made by the First Minister to support the resilience and sustainability of Scotland's island communities. Phase 1 of the Fund comprises a £3 million package of targeted support for island businesses and organisations disproportionately affected by sustained ferry disruption during 2026-27.

The need for intervention arises from the continued disruption experienced across Scotland's ferry network as a result of vessel shortages, breakdowns, repairs, reduced capacity and delays to replacement vessels. Whilst reliability has improved on some routes, ferry disruption continues to have significant economic and social consequences for many island communities, affecting business operations, visitor confidence, supply chains, workforce availability and access to essential services.

Phase 1 builds on the Islands Business Resilience Fund (IBRF), launched in 2025. An independent evaluation found that the Fund improved business resilience, helped businesses maintain operations and safeguarded employment. However, it also concluded that many of the challenges facing island communities are structural and longer-term in nature, including transport connectivity, workforce recruitment and retention, community capacity and supply chain resilience.

The primary objective of the Fund is to provide targeted financial support to island businesses and organisations experiencing the greatest impacts from sustained ferry disruption. The Fund aims to:

• Increase business and community resilience.
• Support the continuation of trading activity and service delivery.
• Protect island-based employment.
• Improve confidence amongst island businesses and organisations.
• Support the sustainability of island communities by maintaining key economic and community activity.

The 2026-27 Fund has also been informed by lessons learned from previous funding rounds and stakeholder engagement. Changes to eligibility criteria are intended to better reflect the realities of island economies for example, by recognising portfolio livelihoods, clarifying eligibility for fish catching and aquaculture businesses, extending support to hauliers and improving access for smaller volunteer-led organisations.

The anticipated impacts of the Fund are expected to be positive for eligible island communities. These include helping organisations manage the immediate financial consequences of ferry disruption, protecting jobs and local economic activity, supporting community services and strengthening resilience within some of Scotland's most remote and ferry-dependent communities. The Fund is also expected to contribute to wider community sustainability by helping maintain local supply chains, supporting population retention and reinforcing confidence in the viability of island communities.

Start date of proposal’s development: 8 April 2026

Start date of CRWIA process: 01 June 2026

2. With reference given to the requirements of the UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024, which aspects of the proposal are relevant to/impact upon children’s rights?

The Fund will have limited direct impact on children’s rights beyond secondary benefits to island economies. It is worth noting however that these secondary benefits may be extensive as support to organisations or businesses will directly support families living in these communities in many cases.

The Fund is expected to have indirect positive impacts on island communities through supporting employment, maintaining local services, strengthening local supply chains and contributing to wider community resilience. Stakeholder engagement highlighted that island businesses, community organisations and residents are highly interconnected, meaning support provided to organisations can generate benefits across the wider community.

The effects of the Fund will not be uniform across all island communities. Some islands and organisations will remain ineligible because available evidence indicates that the impacts of ferry disruption have been more severe or sustained in some communities than others. The Fund therefore adopts a targeted approach in order to maximise the impact of available funding and direct support towards those island communities experiencing the greatest adverse effects.

The Scottish Government's Islands Resilience Fund has a generally positive, though largely indirect, impact on children's rights under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

The most significant connection is to Article 27 (Adequate Standard of Living). By helping businesses remain viable and protecting local employment, the fund indirectly contributes to family income stability and supports children's access to housing, food, clothing, and other essentials required for an adequate standard of living.

The Fund also supports Article 6 (Life, Survival and Development) by helping to maintain sustainable island communities where children and young people can grow, develop, and access the services and opportunities they need. Strong local economies and resilient communities create conditions that support children's long-term wellbeing and development.

There is also a positive link to Article 2 (Non-discrimination). Children living in island communities can face disadvantages due to geographic isolation and transport challenges. By targeting support to communities disproportionately affected by ferry disruption, the fund helps reduce inequalities between island and mainland populations.

In addition, the Fund contributes to Article 3 (Best Interests of the Child) by supporting family stability and community sustainability. Although children are not the direct beneficiaries of the fund, measures that help maintain local jobs, services, and economic resilience are likely to promote outcomes that are in children's best interests.

The Fund may also indirectly support Article 26 (Social Security) by reducing financial pressures on families and communities through the protection of livelihoods and economic activity. This can help prevent hardship and contribute to household financial security.

Overall, the strongest UNCRC links for the Islands Resilience Fund are Articles 2, 6, and 27, as the fund's primary purpose is to address the disproportionate challenges faced by some island communities most impacted, support livelihoods, and strengthen community resilience, all of which have positive knock-on effects for children and young people living in those communities.

The Fund has been designed to focus support on businesses and livelihoods experiencing the greatest effects of sustained disruption. Therefore the indirect benefits on children and young people will be linked to these areas of focus. In the first instance by supporting those whose livelihoods are directly linked to one of these organisations and in the second by more widely supporting the local economies of the areas targeted.

3. Please provide a summary of the evidence gathered which will be used to inform your decision-making and the content of the proposal

The Scottish Government has undertaken ongoing engagement with island communities, businesses and stakeholders throughout the development and delivery of support measures addressing the impacts of ferry disruption.

The original Islands Business Resilience Fund (IBRF), launched in 2025, was developed in response to urgent evidence of ferry disruption affecting island communities. Following delivery of the initial Fund, the Scottish Government and Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) undertook further engagement to better understand the ongoing impacts of disruption and to inform future support. This included three online engagement sessions delivered in partnership with the Scottish Islands Federation (SIF) during November 2025, attended by 71 stakeholders from island businesses and communities. Feedback from these sessions informed the expansion of the IBRF and highlighted the wider effects of ferry disruption beyond cancellations, including vessel capacity constraints, impacts on visitor confidence and supply chains, and challenges facing island businesses and communities.

The Scottish Government has continued to build on this evidence base during the development of the Islands Resilience Fund. In July 2026, a further programme of engagement was undertaken in partnership with the Scottish Islands Federation to gather views on the proposed Fund, including eligibility criteria, types of support, delivery arrangements and wider resilience challenges facing island communities.

Four online engagement sessions were held between 16 and 28 July 2026, involving a total of 175 participants:

• 16 July 2026: 41 attendees
• 21 July 2026: 43 attendees
• 22 July 2026: 41 attendees
• 28 July 2026: 50 attendees

Participants included businesses, community organisations (which in some cases will support children and young people), development trusts, representative bodies, transport operators and island residents from across Scotland's island communities. Stakeholders consistently highlighted the continuing impacts of ferry disruption on business viability, employment, supply chains, visitor confidence, access to services and wider community sustainability. Participants also emphasised that ferry disruption affects entire island economies and communities rather than individual sectors alone.

Feedback from both the 2025 and 2026 engagement exercises aligns closely with the findings of the independent evaluation of the Islands Business Resilience Fund, which identified the positive contribution of previous funding rounds whilst recognising the continued impacts of ferry disruption and wider resilience challenges facing island communities.

It is worth noting that no specific impacts on children’s rights were raised throughout this process beyond the secondary benefits to island communities of increased funding. Given the focus of the fund on supporting businesses and organisations, specific engagement with young people and children was not sought although the engagement sessions were open to attendees from these groups.

4. Further to the evidence described at ‘3’ have you identified any 'gaps' in evidence which may prevent determination of impact? If yes, please provide an explanation of how they will be addressed

Not applicable

5. Analysis of Evidence

• No specific impacts on the rights and wellbeing of children and young people were identified though the evidence gathering process. The process did however highlight distinct impacts on island communities of which children and young people are obviously a part.
• The evidence gathered during the development of the Islands Resilience Fund demonstrates that island communities continue to experience impacts arising from ferry disruption which are materially different from those experienced by mainland communities. These impacts are both economic and social in nature and reflect the reliance of many islands on ferry services as essential infrastructure for the movement of people, goods and services.
• The independent evaluation of the Islands Business Resilience Fund found that ferry disruption has resulted in reduced visitor numbers, increased operating costs, supply chain disruption and reduced business confidence across many island communities. It also found that the impacts extend beyond individual businesses and affect wider community resilience, particularly in relation to workforce retention, access to services and the sustainability of local economies.
• Stakeholder engagement undertaken during both 2025 and 2026 reinforced these findings. Participants highlighted the unique challenges faced by island communities where ferry services represent a critical connection to employment, healthcare, education, supply chains and essential services. Stakeholders described circumstances where disruption affected the movement of livestock, food supplies, construction materials, community services, healthcare appointments and access to specialist contractors. Participants also highlighted wider impacts on community sustainability and population retention.
• Unlike many mainland communities, island communities often have limited alternative transport options. Where disruption occurs, individuals, businesses and community organisations may face significantly higher costs, longer delays and fewer alternative routes. A number of stakeholders noted that disruption can have cumulative effects across entire island economies, affecting tourism, fisheries, aquaculture, haulage, agriculture, retail, cultural organisations and community services simultaneously.
• The evidence also demonstrates that impacts differ between island communities themselves. Ferry network disruption has not been experienced uniformly across Scotland's islands. Previous analysis identified differing levels of disruption across routes and islands, with some communities facing sustained cancellation rates, while others experienced significant capacity constraints and reduced service reliability.
• The engagement process also highlighted that island economies are characterised by features which are less common elsewhere in Scotland, including portfolio livelihoods, seasonal employment, reliance on visitor economies, volunteer-led organisations and community-owned enterprises. Stakeholders highlighted that these characteristics can increase vulnerability to transport disruption whilst also making it more difficult for some organisations to access traditional forms of support.
• The evidence gathered also highlighted the impact of disruption on young people and families. Most prominently, it was highlighted that the increased pressures brought by disruption may have a significant impact on the ability of families to remain in island communities through limiting economic prospects and access to services.

6. What changes (if any) have been made to the proposal as a result of this assessment?

Not applicable