Rural Scotland - trajectories of young people and young adults: report

Chapter 5: Key messages

This chapter highlights some of the key messages that have emerged from Chapters 2, 3 and 4.

5.1 Demographics and data

Chapter 2 has highlighted the importance of making separate data on inflow and outflows available by age and gender, and for smaller geographies, to capture the complex interactions between in and out migration among young people and adults. The chapter emphasises the importance of understanding the diverse demographic patterns and trends and their drivers in different rural and island communities in relation to policy development. Contrasts in size and settlement patterns, recent patterns of growth/decline, age profiles, ease of access to services, opportunities for, or restrictions on day-commuting to school or work, and local economies and culture vary significantly and have an impact on patterns of mobilities at all ages in rural and island communities.

The development of recent regional studies focusing on young people’s mobility intentions amongst other issues have included smaller areas in Dumfries and Galloway and the Highlands and Islands (Youth Work Dumfries and Galloway 2023; Highlands and Islands Enterprise, 2018). This development suggests a move towards reflecting the diversity of rural and island geographies with the potential to develop initiatives that can be tailored to particular local needs, but much of the data presented in these studies combine together what we have shown are age groups with very different mobility patterns and prospects, thus making their results difficult to use. Despite clear evidence of male-female differences in aspirations and outcomes, too little of their analyses are also broken down by gender. In general, there is a lack of disaggregated data on age and gender in relation to understanding the life course mobilities of young people and adults, this should be a minimum requirement of research on life course mobilities. Going beyond this starting point, an intersectional lens across the life course would allow for the development of policy interventions that take better note of complex identities (e.g. disability, ethnicity, race, social class and sexuality, etc) that intersect in different ways with varying impacts on young people’s/adults’ mobilities. This could help to inform more targeted and/or more nuanced policies.

5.2 Conflicting policy goals? Facilitating and supporting young people’s/adults’ choices related to staying, leaving, returning decisions for young

There has been a long-standing focus on rural youth outmigration in Scotland. In the context of growing concerns about the sustainability of rural communities associated with population aging and decline, recent policy interest in rural young people and adults has included significant focus on ‘outmigration’ as a problem to be addressed. Despite a policy rhetoric emphasising both ‘retention and attraction’ of young people/adults, retention has tended to dominate in Scottish policy discourses.

This focus on retention conflates young people’s/adults’ priorities and welfare with that of rural communities and contradicts notions of individual freedom. ‘What is good for the community may not be good for the individual’ (Foster and Main, 2028, p.3) and it may well be in the interests of young people/adults to leave. The question is how can the tensions between these two goals be resolved? There also appears to be little or no explicit recognition in policy discourses that in the case of those who leave and return, exposure to different ideas, ways of living and connections made whilst away may benefit the communities and that appropriate policies may help to facilitate this transfer of knowledge.

Over the last decades researchers have highlighted a plethora of possibilities for addressing rural youth mobility issues including: supporting their decisions whether they choose to stay or leave based on realistic options; participation in rural development programmes; funding and supporting youth development and mainstreaming youth issues across policy sectors along the lines of gender mainstreaming (Jentsch, 2006); targeting those who feel they have to leave, (‘reluctant’ migrants) (Jones and Jamieson, 1997) and a clearer and explicit policy on attracting and supporting those with no previous connections/newcomers.

It would make sense to move away from emphasising ‘retention’ in the policy discourse and focus on resourcing and creating the conditions and support mechanisms that would facilitate returners as well new movers (with all their diversities) who may not have the same social connections to move to rural areas. The lack of voice and lack of potential for affecting change has been a recurring theme identified by rural young people/adult respondents in recent Scottish/regional studies as well as in the case of Nordic countries. Current mechanisms for supporting and involving young people and adults in deciding the types of support they would find helpful in their mobility decisions as well as other aspects of their lives need more consideration and action.

5.3 Young people’s and adult mobilities are dynamic, flexible and evolve over their life course

The mobility aspirations, needs and decisions of young people and adults are likely to change as they transition from school to tertiary education/training to household formation or singlehood and beyond, as well as responding to experiences and events over time. Most of the studies reviewed have been one-off studies at particular stages of the life course which focus on current and future aspirations and intentions which may or may not eventually play out as envisaged. Although robust longitudinal studies are expensive, they can be more effective in capturing the dynamic nature of mobility decision-making over the life course as well as being more effective in taking into account the broader context of local, regional, national and international events and trends, in which mobility decisions are made.

5.4 Mobility decisions - moving/staying/leaving/returning are more than an individual decision.

Mobility decisions whether to leave, stay or return, have to be understood as embedded in socio-ecological processes encompassing a range of interacting factors. These include social relations involving family, peers/friendship groups; physical, social, economic and cultural environments; emotions; local structural opportunities and constraints. Mobility decisions are influenced by gender, social class/educational background, age, sex, ethnicity and migration history.

It is also important to recognise that not all young people/adults can exercise choice over decisions to stay, leave, return or move. Issues such as caring responsibilities, socio-economic background, lack of job/career progression opportunities, lack of social and emotional support, issues of stigmatisation related to sexuality and mental health, experiences of racism, and preference for particular landscapes amongst other factors have varying impacts on young people’s and adults’ mobilities choices. Quality of life is also important across the board but it tends to be predominant amongst those who choose to move to rural areas (‘newcomers’). There are fewer studies that have explored the experiences, role and contribution of ‘newcomers’ - those without previous connections to place - in sustaining rural communities and more research is needed here.

5.5 No panacea – no single rural youth overarching strategy

Economic factors are not the only drivers of rural young people/adult mobilities. The argument on creating the appropriate conditions to ensure the wellbeing of young people and adults whether they stay/leave/return, rather than focusing on policies emphasising retention and stemming the outmigration of rural youth, has been made consistently. Young people leaving home to move on to post-school education is a feature of life across all parts of Scotland, not just rural areas - as highlighted in Chapter 2.

The outmigration of young people and adults in rural areas is shaped by a constellation of interrelated factors beyond limited educational and employment opportunities. These include exploring the world and new experiences, as well as lack of availability and affordability of housing and public transport, poor access to services and difficulties in accessing culture and leisure activities at different stages of the life course. There can be no panacea or single overarching rural youth strategy; the issues that need to be addressed involve many sectors and policy domains. This is acknowledged in the Scottish Government’s Addressing Depopulation Action Plan (2024) as well as in structures (e.g. the Population Programme Board) established to encourage cohesion across policy areas; see Appendix 1. Furthermore, given fiscal constraints and the emphasis on economies of scale in funding decisions related to provision of social and cultural infrastructures, the question about what is feasible in policy and delivery terms given the diversity of rural areas and groups needs to be clarified. The question of the extent to which young people and adults from diverse rural and island communities with diverse social and cultural interests and backgrounds can or ought to have the same access to the same services as their urban counterparts is something that must be more clearly addressed.

The importance of local bottom-up context-specific policies and strategies is critical in addressing some of the issues highlighted in this report. This needs to be based on the relevant agencies working with young people and adults as active partners to improve their wellbeing as well as that of the whole community. Building on the unique qualities and cultures of places whilst also ensuring the inclusion of the diversities that young people and adults embody will be critical. The recent regional surveys of young people undertaken in Dumfries and Galloway, the Highlands and Islands and the work of organisations such as the Young Islanders and Rural Youth Project are a clear possible starting point in identifying the issues that concern young people.^[33] But the question remains - what next?

5.6 Diversity of experiences

The review of literature, reports, and inclusion of selected views of YIN participants, all support the importance of considering the diverse geographies of rural and island areas to ensure appropriate policy sensitivity to local differences within and between rural areas. Within this context it is also important that the voices of youth from diverse backgrounds (by gender, socio-economic background, LGBTQ+, ethnicity, culture, migration background, etc.) are heard.

Despite an increase in positive perceptions of staying among young people and adults in rural and island areas highlighted by recent reports, the discourse of rural areas as ‘lagging’ behind urban areas and the ‘symbolic capital’ associated with moving to urban areas as places of opportunities appears to persist. Within this context, understanding the roles that rural schools play in influencing young people’s mobility choices seems scarce, an issue that has received much attention in the North American context (Corbett, 2006; Schafft, 2006).

5.7 Young people/adults as active agents – mainstreaming youth issues

One of the major barriers to address in policy making and implementation is the existing power imbalance based on age where the active participation of young people and adults is not mainstreamed across all sectors and layers of governance. Young people and younger adults continue to feel excluded from decisions on issues and policies (e g. education, housing, transport, etc.) that impact on their lives.

The exclusion of children and young people as active agents is also reflected in research on children and young people/adults in rural areas. There is a lack of meaningful and sustained involvement of children and young people in rural areas in the co-design and research of the issues that impact on their lives. These trends reflect not only a lack of recognition of young people/adults as potential allies capable of exercising agency and effecting change across all domains, but it is also a missed opportunity to develop more intergenerational collaboration by drawing on their insights and facilitate opportunities for young people to feel they can make a difference on the issues that impact on their lives in the context of an aging population.