Scottish Rural Communities Policy Review: stage 2 - England case study

Footnotes

1 This compares to Scotland where rural areas (defined differently at less than 3,000 population) make up 98% of the landmass and 17% of the population (Rural Scotland Data Dashboard: Overview - gov.scot).

2 These Grades refer to excellent, very good and good quality agricultural land. More information on the land classification system in England can be found here: Provisional Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) (England) | Natural England Open Data Geoportal

3 More information about the English National Rural Network can be found online here: England - ENRD (European Network for Rural Development) - European Commission

4 Over their 100 years of evolution, some Rural Community Councils had to merge with other organisations to remain viable (e.g. Councils of Voluntary Service who serve rural and urban areas). Each county’s history is different. Curry (2021) sees this adaptability and diversity as key to Rural Community Councils’ resilience and sustainability.

5 Broadly, the Defra grant goes to the Rural Community Councils, who then pay (at their discretion) a membership fee to support ACRE’s services to them.

6 The most disadvantaged areas included areas designed as Objective 1 and Objective 5b. Objective 1 areas were regarded as the least developed rural regions of the European Union where per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was less than 75% of the member state average (Copus, A. and Crabtree, B. (1992) Mapping Economic Fragility: An Assessment of the Objective 5b boundaries in Scotland, Journal of Rural Studies 8(3), pp. 309-322, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(92)90008-T). Areas were designated as qualifying for Objective 5b funding if they had: below average level of economic development, employment dominated by the agricultural sector, and poor levels of agricultural incomes. Secondary criteria also included: problems of peripherality, depopulation, and a susceptibility to economic pressures in the face of further CAP reforms (Ward, N. and McNicholas, K. (1998) Reconfiguring Rural Development in the UK: Objective 5b and the New Rural Governance, Journal of Rural Studies 14(1), pp. 27-39, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(97)00045-4.

7 For more information, see The Government’s approach to rural funding (2025): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rural-proofing-the-governments-approach-and-priorities/the-governments-approach-to-rural-proofing-2025

8 There is information online (from April 2025) about evaluations of the Shared Prosperity Fund which are in process (including some in rural places), but no findings are provided: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/uk-shared-prosperity-fund-place-based-evaluations

9 Deadweight is a term commonly used in evaluation work which refers to what would have happened anyway in the absence of the intervention being evaluated. An intervention has low deadweight and high additionality if the additional impact of the intervention is significant. More information is available here: Additionality Guide

10 Community energy projects; carbon assessments; energy advice for households; training and skills development; inspiring young people. Climate Action in Rural North East | Promoting Rural Issues | Community Action Northumberland

11 Capital and revenue funding was available for 2007-13 phase, but capital funding only for most of the 2013-19 phase with 70% directed toward job creation (Shucksmith et al 2021).

12 Newcastle University was recently ranked first in the world for rural development research and impact. See: Rural development | Specialty Profiles and Rankings | ScholarGPS.