R100 Interim Evaluation

9 Conclusions

9.1 Overview

9.1.1 This chapter provides a summary of the findings from the research. It includes:

• A summary of the findings in the context of the R100 Investment Objectives
• Consideration of the extent to which R100 has contributed to the Scottish Government’s Programme for Government 2025-2026 Priority Areas
• A summary of equality risks and considerations along with a series of recommendations from an equality perspective

9.1.2 Each of the above are discussed in turn.

9.2 R100 Investment Objectives

9.2.1 The primary aim of this research was to evaluate the R100 Programme against its investment objectives which were established as follows:

• Improve business performance in Scotland by facilitating increased productivity, innovation, and access to new markets.
• Improve wellbeing of people across Scotland.
• Reduce the negative impact of the digital divide, through a) addressing regional disparities in provision and b) increased availability amongst groups disproportionately represented in these areas.
• Strengthen communities, including in rural areas, by offering enhanced opportunities to work, trade, and deliver public services, helping to address depopulation.
• Aid the transition to net zero by reducing travel requirements that result from ability to work or engage with others remotely.
• Increase Scotland's capacity to maintain business productivity, activities important for wellbeing, and access to essential services in the face of communication disruption, especially for those rural and island communities.

9.2.2 The sections below provide a summary of the findings from the research in the context of the above investment objectives, with each objective considered in turn.

Improve business performance in Scotland by facilitating increased productivity, innovation, and access to new markets

9.2.3 While the business survey sample sizes were small and therefore it is difficult to draw firm conclusions, the results of the research suggest that the delivery of improved connectivity through the R100 programme has resulted in improved business performance for the businesses who have taken up the connection. Focusing specifically on the metrics within this objective:

• 69% (n=20) of Group 1 businesses in the sample reported an overall positive benefit on business performance
• 76% (n=22) reported a positive impact on productivity
• 52% (n=15) reported a positive impact with respect to innovation
• 31% (n=9) reported a positive impact with respect to access to new markets.

9.2.4 The Group 1 businesses in the sample also reported positive benefits with respect to turnover (41%, n=12), the number of customers / visitors to their business premises (38%, n=11), the range of products / services provided (35%, n=10), and the cost of supplies (34%, n=10).

9.2.5 A range of positive impacts with respect to business activities were also identified, with the results providing an indication of the key mechanisms through which the improvement in connectivity results in improved business performance. The business activities on which the improved connectivity had the largest positive impacts were:

• Accounting and financing activities - 66% (n=19) of Group 1 businesses in the sample identified a positive impact
• Accessing online networks and storage - 66% (n=19) identified a positive impact
• Selling products or services, including online bookings / tickets - 59% (n=17) identified a positive impact
• Promotional activities, including via social media – 52% (n=15) identified a positive impact

9.2.6 A high proportion of Group 2 and Group 3 businesses in the sample identified their current broadband connectivity as a key constraint on business performance. Overall:

• 59% (n=19) of Group 2 and Group 3 businesses in the sample strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity impedes the performance of their business / organisation
• 60% (n=18) strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity contributes to lower levels of productivity
• 58% (n=18) strongly agreed or agreed that their current connectivity limits innovation
• 36% (n=11) strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity limits their access to new markets

9.2.7 The above issues were also highlighted in the open text responses to the survey and in the one-to-one interviews with businesses in Group 1 highlighting the significant efficiency gains and those in Group 2 and 3 reporting reduced productivity, higher operational costs and missed market opportunities.

• “Having a faster broadband connection just makes everything easier. From stock management, to bookkeeping and accounting, as well as being able to call customers and suppliers now through Wi-Fi calling or the digital calls.” (Commercial business and SBVS recipient, Aberdeenshire)
• “We would like to make our production systems more efficient, but we cannot because our broadband provision is so hopelessly slow.” (Group 2 survey respondent, commercial business, Aberdeenshire)
• "We cannot reliably fill in any online form. The broadband drops frequently. “Booking anything via internet is unreliable. Safer to go into Stranraer and use library." (Group 3 survey respondent, commercial business, Dumfries and Galloway)
• “Our clients look for fast internet and may choose to go elsewhere if we cannot provide it.” (Group 2 survey respondent, commercial business, Orkney)

Key Point: Overall, the results of the research suggest that the delivery of R100 has led to improved business performance and increased productivity, innovation, and access to new markets for the businesses / organisations who have taken up the connection. A range of mechanisms for this were identified through the research, including improved accounting and financing, being able to access online networks and storage, and the ability to more easily advertise / promote and sell products / services. While considerable benefits for businesses were identified, it should be borne in the mind that achievement of these is contingent on businesses taking up the connection, with those that don’t upgrade at risk of relative declines in productivity and competitiveness. The barriers to take-up and the implications of this are discussed further below.

Improve wellbeing of people across Scotland

9.2.8 To help identify wellbeing impacts, two questions which specifically focused on the topic of wellbeing were included in the resident survey as follows:

• a question asking Group 1 respondents who lived at the property when broadband was installed whether the improvement in broadband had a positive or negative impact on their wellbeing
• a question which replicated the format of the questions on personal wellbeing included in the UK’s APS^[86] whereby respondents are asked one question covering each of the four measures of personal wellbeing (namely life satisfaction, feeling the things done in life are worthwhile, happiness, and anxiety) - this approach to capturing wellbeing impacts is well established in the literature and has been used in previous evaluations of similar schemes although attributing any change identified to the investment being evaluated can be challenging.

9.2.9 In terms of the former, nearly 50% (49%, n=130) of Group 1 respondents in the sample stated that the improvement in connectivity had had a positive impact on their wellbeing.

9.2.10 With respect to the UK APS personal wellbeing question, the results indicate that respondents in Group 1 had higher wellbeing scores than those in Group 2 and Group 3, corroborating the above findings. It is noted however there are a wide range of factors which could influence the APS wellbeing scores and it is therefore difficult to attribute the differences between the groups directly to the R100 Programme.

9.2.11 Beyond the specific questions on wellbeing, Group 1 respondents to the survey also identified a range of positive impacts of the improved connectivity which are likely to contribute to improved wellbeing. For example, a high proportion of Group 1 respondents (proportions shown in brackets) reported positive impacts on:

• Keeping in touch with family and friends (63%, n=165)
• Feeling of connectedness to wider world (62%, n=164)
• Finding out about what is going on in the local area (47%, n=125)
• Feeling of connectedness to the local community (35%, n=94)

9.2.12 The positive benefits with respect to wellbeing were also noted by Group 1 respondents in the open text survey responses and the focus group discussions, with respondents noting that they are now better connected with family and friends and the local community and that this has resulted in reduced isolation and improved mental health:

• “[The] overwhelming benefit is mental health improvement associated with wider connectivity to the outside world in terms of access to services, to information, to financial management etc. - I would stress again, that as a rural dweller, this cannot be under-estimated!” (Group 1 Survey respondent - IVS recipient, Stirling)
• “Reconnecting with folks from all over the world… that has been a great help to my mental well-being, [it] means I'm not just kind of like in my local area. I'm nice and global in a social kind of way” (Focus Group Participant - Group 1 main contracts recipient, Aberdeenshire)

9.2.13 While there were clear wellbeing benefits for Group 1 respondents, it should be recognised that these benefits do not extend to those who have not taken up the connection offered by R100 and in contrast to those in Group 1, those not taking up the connection may be at risk of further marginalisation and reduced levels of wellbeing, particularly where digital connectivity and digital services replace more traditional means of communication without inclusive alternatives.

Key Point: Overall, while it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the results of the specific question on personal wellbeing, the wider research suggests that the delivery of R100 has resulted in improved wellbeing amongst those respondents who have taken up the connection offered via R100. As with businesses, while considerable benefits in terms of wellbeing were identified, it should be borne in the mind that achievement of these is contingent on households taking up the connection, with those that don’t upgrade at risk of further marginalisation / reduced levels of wellbeing, particularly where digital connectivity and digital services replace more traditional means of communication. The barriers to take-up and the implications of this are discussed further below.

Reduce the negative impact of the digital divide, through a) addressing regional disparities in provision and b) increased availability amongst groups disproportionately represented in these areas

9.2.14 As set out in Section 2.4, there is a clear disparity in provision between connectivity levels in urban areas in Scotland and those in more rural locations^[87] and this inequality can have a range of negative impacts which can affect the long-term sustainability of rural areas. R100 aims to address this disparity and thereby reduce the negative impacts of the digital divide through the delivery of broadband services in locations where they would not otherwise be provided by the market.

9.2.15 As set out in Section 2.5, the Scottish Government maintains a database of properties which have either benefited from the R100 programme or are due to benefit over the upcoming period and data from the September 2024 version of this database suggests that 80% of the properties affected by R100 are in rural locations with just 17% located in urban areas. ^[88] The programme therefore appears to be effectively targeting rural areas with the aim of addressing the above disparities in provision.

9.2.16 While the programme is targeting rural locations, it is noted that the research suggests that those provided with connectivity via the main contracts were more satisfied with the speed and reliability of their connection than those provided with connectivity via IVS or SBVS (who are perhaps more likely to be in rural and island communities). . Perhaps unsurprisingly given the need for voucher recipients to more actively engage with the programme / suppliers, voucher recipients also appeared to experience more challenges with respect to communication. There is therefore a risk of uneven outcomes across the programme footprint and an element of continued geographic inequality.

9.2.17 The impact on the availability of broadband amongst groups disproportionately represented in these areas will depend on the ultimate level of take-up amongst these groups. While the specific groups in question are not defined in the objective, the following is of note:

• Rural areas in Scotland tend to have a higher proportion of elderly residents
• The most remote rural locations have higher proportions of those aged 65+ with long-term health problems and / or disabilities
• While the picture in terms of income is more complex, island and rural communities experience higher costs of living which impacts levels of disposable income
• In terms of businesses, microbusinesses and sole traders make up a large share of rural enterprises.

9.2.18 A number of key barriers to take-up were identified in the research, including:

• A lack of awareness of R100
• Cost barriers – including the cost of the connection and the cost of devices
• Process barriers – i.e. the complexity of the voucher application process / changing an existing contract.

9.2.19 These are discussed below.

Lack of Awareness

9.2.20 The research suggests that a lack of awareness of R100 is the primary barrier to up-take, with more than 85% of Group 2 households eligible for the voucher scheme, 50% of Group 2 households eligible via the main contracts, and 81% of Group 2 businesses unaware of R100. Furthermore, for the large majority of households who were unaware, the lack of awareness was the only barrier to take-up with the majority of those in the sample who were unaware (89% of households with a current connection and 74% of those without a current household connection) stating that they intend to apply now that they know about the programme.

9.2.21 A lack of awareness was also raised in the focus groups, with some beneficiaries noting that they only found out they were receiving a connection when engineers appeared and others noting that communication was of a poor quality. A lack of awareness of R100 is a particular challenge with respect to the voucher scheme which requires eligible property owners to take the initial action and progress with an application. From an equality perspective, awareness gaps may disproportionately affect older residents and disabled people, who are more reliant on clear, accessible, and timely information. Unclear communication also risks reinforcing scepticism about public investment initiatives and, in rural areas particularly, may be interpreted as evidence of being lower priority.

Cost and Process Barriers

9.2.22 These barriers are likely to be more acute for:

• Low-income households who are most affected by affordability challenges
• Older adults with lower digital confidence who are less likely to complete voucher applications or switch providers without support
• Disabled people who may encounter additional obstacles in the application processes if accessibility is not built in.
• Small businesses, particularly in agriculture and tourism, who often lack administrative capacity to navigate complex application processes or invest in new technology and who may therefore be at risk of relative declines in productivity and competitiveness.

9.2.23 Where take-up is limited or focused on particular groups, the overall benefits of R100 will be reduced and equality of access will not be achieved. Further, as digital connectivity becomes the norm, excluded groups risk becoming more marginalised. In order to maximise the effectiveness of the programme and achieve broader equality aims, there may therefore be a need for:

• More targeted communication which is delivered in accessible formats and distributed through trusted intermediaries, including schools, GP practices, libraries and community groups.
• Direct support and guidance for groups more likely to be affected by cost and complexity barriers.

Key Point: The R100 programme appears to be effectively targeting rural locations with the aim of addressing the regional disparities in broadband provision. While effectively targeting rural areas and therefore addressing existing disparities, it is worth nothing that satisfaction amongst voucher recipients (who are likely to be concentrated in more remote rural locations) was lower, creating a risk of some level of continuing geographic inequality. The extent to which the R100 results in greater availability of broadband connectivity amongst certain groups in targeted areas will depend on the ultimate level of take up amongst such groups. The emerging findings from this research suggest that the key barriers to take up are a lack of awareness of R100, the cost of upgrading; and the complexity of the voucher application process / changing an existing contract. These barriers are likely to be more acute for certain groups in society. In order to ensure this objective and wider equality aims are achieved, targeted communication and more direct support and guidance for these groups would be beneficial.

Strengthen communities, including in rural areas, by offering enhanced opportunities to work, trade, and deliver public services, helping to address depopulation

9.2.24 The results of the survey and focus groups suggest that the delivery of R100 has provided enhanced opportunities to work for those taking up the connection.

9.2.25 While based on a small sample, 20% (n=54) of Group 1 residents who had lived at the property when broadband was installed said they were able to work from home more frequently as a result of the improved connectivity. Being able to work from home can particularly help strengthen communities in rural areas where the barriers to accessing employment are often higher due to long travel distances, high travel costs, and a lack of transport connectivity. As well as facilitating working from home, there was also some evidence from the survey that R100 had enabled some Group 1 respondents to work more hours (5%, n=12), change job (3%, n=9), or take on an additional job (3%, n=7) although sample sizes were small and therefore it’s difficult to draw firm conclusions on these aspects.

9.2.26 In addition to employment, while sample sizes are small, there was some evidence that the improvement in broadband had enabled access to education, with 9% (n=25) of Group 1 respondents stating that they can now access formal learning opportunities which they previously could not access. A range of courses were identified in the open text responses including degrees, diplomas, postgraduate studies, and professional and work-related training. There was also some evidence that the delivery of broadband had led to a general improvement in digital skills for some, with 33% (n=87) of Group 1 respondents stating that the improvement had had a positive impact on their digital skills and 28% (n=75) stating that it had had a positive impact on their confidence using the internet

9.2.27 In terms of providing enhanced opportunities to trade, while sample sizes were relatively small, there was some evidence from the Group 1 business survey that R100 had had a positive impact on trade with:

• 59% (n=17) of Group 1 businesses stating that the improvement in broadband had had a positive impact on selling products / services
• 38% (n=11) recording a positive impact with respect to the number of customers / visitors to their promises
• 34% (n=10) recording a positive impact with respect to the range of products / services provided
• 34% (n=10) recording a positive impact with respect to the cost of supplies
• 31% (n=9) recording a positive impact with respect to access to new markets

9.2.28 Conversely, those who had not taken up the R100 connection or had not yet been provided with the connection, identified a number of challenges in terms of trade due to their current levels of connectivity. For example:

• 63% (n=19) of Group 2 and 3 respondents strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity limits their ability to sell / provide products and / or services
• 43% (n=13) strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity limits their ability to make bookings
• 40% (n=12) strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity prevents them using lower-cost suppliers
• 36% (n=11) strongly agreed or agreed that their current broadband connectivity limits access to new markets

9.2.29 While the research did not explicitly cover the delivery of public services, there was evidence that respondents from all three groups complete government processes, pay council bills and access virtual GP appointments online, highlighting the importance of internet connectivity for such activities regardless of the level of connectivity. The wider availability of broadband connectivity may contribute to increased use and the greater viability of such services with resultant cost savings for both those using and providing the services.

9.2.30 In terms of strengthening communities, there was also some evidence from the survey that the availability of broadband had had a positive impact on the level of community activities in some areas with 24% (n=63) of Group 1 respondents stating that there had been a positive impact on this aspect. This sentiment was also echoed in the open text responses to the survey:

• “There are a lot more activities / events published / organised at the Village Hall, and which are now also very well attended, because of the wider availability of communication.” (SBVS recipient, Moray)

9.2.31 The findings with respect to the number of shops and other services available locally were more mixed with roughly equal proportions of Group 1 respondents stating that the improvement in broadband had a positive / negative impact on this aspect. The impact on local shops / services may take longer to materialise than the period covered in this research. As touched upon above, where the availability of broadband leads to the closure of local shops and other services, there may be a consequent impact on community cohesion and a disproportionate impact on groups in society who do not use online services, such as older people, low confidence users, or those on lower incomes, who may experience feelings of increased isolation.

9.2.32 Depopulation is a particular challenge in rural locations where more limited employment, education and social opportunities can lead to outmigration, particularly amongst younger cohorts. Enhancing digital connectivity can help to break this cycle as improved connectivity can make activities, including the delivery of education, services, and business activities viable in less central locations. While sample sizes were small and therefore it is difficult to draw firm conclusions, there is some evidence from the survey that the availability of superfast broadband has encouraged some people to move to the areas affected, with 42% (n=13) of Group 1 respondents who had recently moved stating that they would not have done so if superfast broadband (or quicker) had not been available. As with the impact on local shops / services, the impact in terms of depopulation may take longer to materialise than the period covered in this research.

Key Point: Overall, the results suggest that the delivery of R100 has contributed to a strengthening of the communities affected by the programme particularly with respect to opportunities to work and the level of community activities in some areas. While sample sizes are small, there is also some indication that the availability of broadband connectivity has influenced people’s decision to move to the area. The impact of the programme on the number of shops and other service available locally is less clear. The overall balance of benefits / disbenefits in this respect is likely to differ depending on the community in question and may take longer to materialise than the period covered by this research. It is noted though that if digital services replace local provision, such as banking or council services, without inclusive alternatives, there is a risk that older and low-confidence users are further excluded.

Aid the transition to net zero by reducing travel requirements that result from ability to work or engage with others remotely

9.2.33 While sample sizes are small, there is some indication from the survey results that the ability to work and engage with others remotely has resulted in a reduction in travel at the local level. Overall, 12% (n=32) of Group 1 respondents to the survey said that the improved connection had resulted in a change in the level of day-to-day travel made by their household, with almost all of these stating that their household travel had reduced. A range of reasons were provided for this, including being able to work from home more frequently; increased use of online shopping; and accessing government and NHS services online. Several respondents also emphasised the benefit of being able to check public transport options before leaving the house, thereby reducing unnecessary trips.

9.2.34 While the above may lead to a reduction in travel and a consequent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, it is also the case that home working and the delivery of online shopping / services will themselves generate carbon emissions (e.g. through additional domestic energy consumption, more delivery drivers etc) which will in part offset the savings generated. In addition, the research identified evidence of increased community activities as a result of the ability to organise online which may contribute to additional travel albeit potentially more locally based.

Key Point: Overall, the results suggest that the improvement in connectivity has led to a reduction in day-to-day travel for some households due to increased home working, higher levels of online shopping, and use of online government and NHS services. Some of these savings will however be offset by carbon emissions generated via other activities with more detailed analysis required to determine the overall impact.

Increase Scotland's capacity to maintain business productivity, activities important for wellbeing, and access to essential services in the face of communication disruption, especially for those rural and island communities

9.2.35 The research suggests that the delivery of improved broadband connectivity has improved the capacity of businesses and communities during periods of disruption.

9.2.36 In terms of business productivity, evidence from the business survey suggests that Group 1 businesses are now able to undertake a wider range of business activities online, including accounting and financing, accessing online networks and storage, selling products or services, and being able to call customers and suppliers through Wi-Fi. As noted above, there is also evidence of people being able to more frequently work from home because of improved connectivity. In the event of a disruption, there is therefore greater capacity in the system to maintain business productivity.

9.2.37 There is also evidence from the surveys that the availability of broadband has enabled residents to access travel and emergency information more easily during periods of disruption, helping to maintain access to essential and other key services. In total, 37% (n=96) of Group 1 households said that the improvement in broadband had benefitted their household in periods of disruption, with respondents highlighting that they are now able to access up-to-date travel and other emergency information which they were previously unable to access.

Key Point: The research suggests that where businesses and residents have taken up the enhanced broadband connectivity provided by R100 additional opportunities for communication and additional mechanisms by which to deliver business activities have been created and these channels help to maintain business productivity and access to key services during periods of disruption.

9.3 Programme for Government Priority Areas

9.3.1 In addition to considering the R100 Investment Objectives, the below table summarises the findings of the research in the context of the Scottish Government’s Programme for Government 2025-2026 Priority Areas, namely growing the economy, eradicating child poverty, tackling the climate emergency, delivering high quality and sustainable public services.^[89]

9.4 Equality Considerations and Recommendations

Equality Risks and Considerations

9.4.1 Findings presented in the evaluation report present four cross-cutting equality risks:

• Affordability barriers: Continuing costs (tariffs, equipment, assistive technologies) risk excluding low-income and disabled households, even where coverage exists.
• Process barriers: Complexity in application and switching processes disproportionately affects older adults, disabled people with limited support, and small businesses with limited administrative capacity.
• Parity of outcome: Potential differences in speed and reliability between main-contract and voucher-based connections create a risk of some level of continuing geographic inequality which may reinforce perceptions of second-tier provision.
• Digital-only service delivery: The migration of services to online platforms, while beneficial for many, risks excluding older and disabled residents without accessible alternatives.

Recommendations

9.4.2 The R100 programme has so far provided a wide range of benefits for those who have taken up the connection, including improved business performance, enhanced wellbeing and strengthened, more robust communities. The programme is effectively targeting existing regional disparities in provision and has significant potential to narrow connectivity gaps and deliver inclusive growth across Scotland. It is also expected that the outputs, outcomes and impacts of R100 will continue to develop over time. The evaluation findings demonstrate, however, that infrastructure improvements alone are insufficient to deliver equality of outcome. Affordability, digital skills, confidence and service reliability remain key challenges, particularly for older adults, disabled people, low-income households, children and young people, and those in rural and island communities.

9.4.3 To ensure that equality is central to delivery and that the programme delivers not only on connectivity targets but also on Scotland’s broader commitments to equality and social justice, the following measures should be considered:

• Targeted communications: Deliver awareness campaigns in accessible formats and through trusted intermediaries, including schools, GP practices, libraries and community groups, particularly in rural and island areas.
• Application and switching support: Provide dedicated support to residents and microbusinesses in navigating voucher applications and provider switching, ensuring older adults and those with limited digital literacy are not excluded.
• Affordability measures: Strengthen promotion of social tariffs, explore targeted subsidies or device loans for low-income and disabled households, and consider funding for assistive technologies.
• Parity of outcome assurance: Introduce clear quality standards for voucher-based solutions, supported by monitoring of service reliability and consumer satisfaction across geographic areas.
• Support for children and young people: Work with schools and youth services to combine connectivity improvements with access to devices, skills development and safe online environments.
• Inclusive service design: Ensure that digital public services retain telephone or face-to-face options, particularly for older adults and disabled people in rural communities.
• Ongoing equality monitoring: Track awareness, take-up and satisfaction by age, disability, income and geography. Regular reporting can identify emerging gaps and inform responsive action.