Scottish Rural Communities Policy Review: Scottish Rural Network, Scottish Rural Action and Community Led Local Development review report

3. Scottish Rural Network review

3.1. Introduction to Scottish Rural Network

The Scottish Rural Network was established in 2007 as Scotland’s National Rural Network, forming part of the ‘infrastructure’ required to support the delivery of ‘Pillar 2’ of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. This was made up of several agriculture, environment and wider rural development support schemes brought together under the Scotland Rural Development Programme. The Network has continued to exist beyond the UK’s exit from the European Union. The Network was - and still is today - managed through the Network Support Unit led by a designated Network Manager^[40].

The Network works with rural and island stakeholders, communities, delivery organisations and a range of Scottish Government policy areas to strengthen Scotland’s rural and island communities to support and empower them to become more sustainable, resilient and vibrant places to live, work and study. The current aims of the Network are to:

• Support and facilitate people from rural and island communities, businesses and the wider public to take part in policy developments that affect them. This has included supporting input to the development and delivery of the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill, Rural Support Plan, Land Use and Agriculture Just Transition Plan and National Islands Plan Refresh
• Help improve the development and delivery of the Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP), its replacement and wider agricultural and forestry schemes e.g. the National Test Programme and the Agricultural Reform Programme, Community Led Local Development and the Just Transition Plan
• Inform farmers, rural businesses and communities about wider policy and funding opportunities relevant to rural and island communities
• Encourage innovation in agriculture, food production, forestry and rural and island areas and communities

The Theory of Change for Scottish Rural Network sets out the Network’s inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and (short-, medium- and long-term) impacts. This reflects the breadth of activities of the Network, and its evolving role since EU exit as new (UK and Scottish) policy and legislative frameworks have emerged. How the Network has delivered against its aims since 2021, how different stakeholders experience and understand its activities, and the impacts of those activities, are explored in the following Sections.

It is worth noting that the Scottish Government’s Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division carried out an evaluation of Scottish Rural Network in 2019-20^[41], which provides more information about the Network’s activities from 2014 to 2020. These activities included: organising events, workshops and meetings; maintaining the Network website and newsletter (which shared information about the Scotland Rural Development Programme, funding opportunities, case studies, and international learning); helping support the delivery of various Scotland Rural Development Programme activities, including LEADER and the Rural Innovation Support Service ; supporting policy development and delivery in other areas of Scottish Government including circulating information about consultations and holding events relating to cross-cutting policy areas; and supporting the Scottish Government’s response to the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, including by providing information such as the locations of testing sites through its website and social media channels^[42].

3.2. The evolving role and resources of the Scottish Rural Network

The Scottish Rural Network’s position has evolved over the last 10-15 years, including moving staff from outside the Scottish Government (for example located in the Rural Team of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations) to being located in-house.

On 1st January 2025, The Rural Development (Continuation of Operation) (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 came into force. These Regulations make amendments for securing the continued operation of assimilated law governing rural development in Scotland by adjusting operational end dates in relevant provisions. This maintains Scottish Rural Network as a legislative requirement under Assimilated Law, which enables “the continued operation of current CAP schemes and policies” as laid down in Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013. The Network is therefore required under this legislation until 2030, unless Scottish Ministers decide to take forward new legislation to end this requirement before then.

Participants in this research reported a shift in the Network’s main focus from broad agricultural, environmental and rural community focused schemes in the Scotland Rural Development Programme, to its new focus on rural and island communities. This was a deliberate shift, cognisant of both the Farm Advisory Service, Knowledge Transfer Innovation Fund and wider Agriculture Knowledge Innovation System (AKIS) in Scotland, and the extent of work ongoing in the Agricultural Reform Programme. This change contrasts with the evolving role of the Welsh Rural Network for example, which has re-focused itself on the agriculture sector^[43].

Scottish Rural Network has also experienced a change in its staff resourcing since EU exit, with the Network Support Unit reducing from a staff of five people in 2021 to one Network Manager plus one Rural Network Operations Officer by 2024. A number of specialist networking and communications staff have been lost. This resource reduction has led to staff undertaking less work ‘in-house’ and instead utilising the Network’s funding allocation to outsource specific thematic work strands to subject matter specialist delivery partners such as the Plunkett Foundation, Scottish Rural Action, CoDEL (Community Development Lens) and the Improvement Service. The Network does not operate an open call for funding. This is discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.

The changing financial approach for Scottish Rural Network during the years of the review is notable. For example, for one participant this has meant that Network has had to “reduce its ambition” (National stakeholder, interview). For some participants, the funding situation has hampered the Network’s ability to undertake strategic work:

“Resource levels have been problematic, and year-on-year funding has prevented longer-term and more strategic initiatives which could have had more impact.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

Scottish Rural Network has delivered a range of activities towards it’s aims over the years of the review, including co-organising (with Scottish Rural Action and others) Scottish Rural and Islands Parliament events, organising Community Led Local Development and other conferences, and maintaining its website – which includes case study information on community level projects – weekly newsletter, and social media presence. Questions relating to its position inside Scottish Government, the transparency of its work and the extent to which it takes a truly strategic approach are key themes emerging from this research.

3.3. The role of Scottish Rural Network as an information and network broker

Many participants in this study placed high value on the information sharing and knowledge brokering role of Scottish Rural Network. They acknowledged the strength of the Network’s existing ‘assets’, in particular its website and newsletter, which were considered critical to its communication function.^[44]

“[Scottish Rural Network has its] finger on the pulse of a themed newsletter that always has something of interest / or you weren’t aware of.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

“There are some amazing ideas and activities going across Scotland, one of SRN’s great roles is to highlight those and to build ways that the different communities and different people can connect and speak to each other, so we're not always trying to reinvent the wheel … It also serves to highlight what the government is supporting.” (Community Led Local Development delivery, place-based case study interview)

Data provided by the Scottish Government to the research team shows that there are currently just over 2,000 subscribers to Network’s weekly newsletter. Analysis of data on engagement by subscribers suggests that the newsletter has a favourable ‘click to open rate’ of approximately 30% compared to an average of 20-25% of newsletters of this type. The most recent data available suggested that between July 2022 and July 2023 there were just over 72,000 website users. The Network has just over 4,000 Facebook followers, just under 7,000 Twitter/X followers and just under 2,200 followers on Instagram.^[45]

However, participants noted that the Network is not present on LinkedIn which is a platform used by most of its stakeholders. One interviewee provided further detail on the worth of this information and knowledge sharing role:

“It’s run by people who live in communities like mine. People who understand the challenges and the rewards of living in rural communities. Because they have lived experience, there’s a shorthand, they don’t need the background explained. They know that communities do not speak with one voice and that while they share commonalities, each community is unique.” (Stakeholder, interview)

One participant commented on the work that the Network does in linking up communities, which they considered to be often unrecognised:

“They are terrific at supporting communities to tackle local problems or grasp local opportunities but because they do it on a small scale it kind of flies under the radar. They offer advice and put groups in touch with one another. They have a real grasp of what’s going on in communities, in groups that maybe aren’t aligned with big national organisations that don’t have the ear of policy makers. The rural network fills that gap.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

The breadth of work and information distributed through Scottish Rural Network was highly valued by participants, as described by this survey participant:

“Their efforts to amplify good news stories have helped build connections and shared understanding across diverse rural areas. We’ve particularly appreciated the convening of events that have deepened our insight into the challenges and opportunities facing these communities. The funding search tool has also been a practical resource … [Working with] the SRN team … has been a consistently positive and productive experience. Their commissioning of case studies on community groups…has enabled us to revisit previously supported groups and help them share their learning and impact.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

Another survey participant summed up the important (and multiple) brokering roles that the Network plays including in terms of funding support available in rural and island Scotland, but acknowledged that this support is not always as visible as it could be:

“Scottish Rural Network plays a crucial role in connecting what is otherwise a fragmented and often inaccessible landscape of rural support. … SRN provides the clearest single route of entry into rural development support. SRN also provides a platform for learning and exchange that spans across the entirety of rural Scotland … Our direct experience shows that SRN actively commissions support programmes that deliver tangible benefits to communities … though the role of SRN is not always clearly understood by the communities themselves. Greater visibility of these contributions could enhance SRN’s perceived value and effectiveness.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

These multiple roles were also acknowledged by another participant, who noted the Network’s additional policy function as well:

“SRN is the connecting pin for much of rural work in Scotland and connects the work plus integrates it with feeding into central policy.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

However, the evidence also demonstrates that some participants felt that the Network could have been more proactive in sharing information to inform policy-making, acknowledging the diversity of circumstances across rural Scotland, in terms of rural communities, but also more specifically between Community Led Local Development Local Action Groups:

“In [years] of involvement at a reasonably senior level in the sector, I have to say the profile of SRN for me is extremely low. I have little idea of their role or objectives, their work and their areas of potential support. [SRN] has not been proactive in its engagement with the sector and has had poor or ineffective communications. SRN has in my opinion had little or no impact in supporting participation in policy development.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

Due to the Network being a function within the Scottish Government, several participants commented that it should be well placed to share information about the latest policy developments relevant to rural and island communities with policy makers and with communities, and also to represent the rural voice - or voices - across the Scottish Government. This role is perhaps less clear now than it was when the Network was sharing information specifically relating to the Common Agricultural Policy as the policy landscape has evolved, but certainly participants in this research noted the continued value of the Network’s role in providing up-to-date information from within Scottish Government to external stakeholders on policy changes, for example, relating to the Rural Support Plan. One survey participant said:

“Leaving the EU … removed the financial and legislative support for the rural network. It is weaker now than it was but still punching well above its weight. It needs the support to come from SG.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

However, participants commented that information on policy developments was not being provided consistently or proactively enough to stakeholders at present. They also questioned the role of the Network in feeding intelligence from stakeholders (including communities) into policy discussions, both in terms of whether this is happening regularly enough, and indeed whether this should be a role for the Network, or perhaps instead for Scottish Rural Action.

Participants’ opinions were mixed regarding the advantages or disadvantages of Scottish Rural Network being delivered from within the Scottish Government. Some participants regarded the Network as a “direct point of contact” or “route toward decision makers” (interviews) within Scottish Government, while others noted that being within government was potentially a disadvantage and a barrier for engaging at grassroots level. This quote demonstrates both sides of the argument:

“They are an arm of Scottish Government which has the value of being a channel for priorities. Conversely, they are 'The Government'.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

By being delivered from within the Scottish Government and engaging proactively in policy discussions, participants said the Network can ensure the voices of rural communities are heard by policy makers:

“SRN is an informed voice within [Scottish Government] that understands rural, that can bridge the significant gap between rural communities and [Scottish Government] officials.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

However, another participant focused on the challenge of the Network’s relationships with external stakeholders and with other policy teams within the Scottish Government:

“No 'joining of dots' using, for example, the Rural Stakeholder Group or, previously, the Rural Skills Action Group. Lack of clarity on how SRN relates to Rural Directorate and other parts of government. Too little focus on economic development.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

Other participants also referred to the overlapping of roles between the Network and other bodies including local authorities and National Parks, resulting in “a very confused landscape”.

3.4. Event organisation and external funding provider

In addition to its networking and information-sharing functions, Scottish Rural Network has engaged in a range of other activities, including (co)organising events, perhaps most notably supporting Scottish Rural Action in organising and running Scottish Rural and Island Parliaments, as well as many other examples. Scottish Rural Network has also supported Community Led Local Development activities across Scotland in various ways over the last few years. For example, the Network played an important role in facilitating the Community Led Local Development Programme Managers Group from approximately 2017 to 2020, and it has organised numerous Community Led Local Development events, and it hosts Community Led Local Development-related information, including case studies, on its website. The following quote is an example from a participant who acknowledged the important and long-standing relationship between Scottish Rural Network and Community Led Local Development in Scotland:

“I think it's probably better in Scotland than other places because we have an established LAG network. … There will be folk that will always be anti-SRN and government in the LAG community network. But I think by and large, we have a history and a good relationship.” (National stakeholder, interview).

As outlined above, the Network has experienced a reduction in staffing in recent years. As a result, more of its activities and associated outputs have been undertaken in partnership with external organisations^[46]. Some of this partnership working has been enabled through funding to organisations to deliver an agreed programme of activities, for example:

• Plunkett UK – regular online workshops as part of the Scottish Rural and Island Community Pub Network
• Improvement Service – online workshops and webinars targeted at rural and island community councils to build capacity, knowledge and share good practice
• Scottish Rural Action – a wide range of face-to-face and online thematic events to develop policy input, for example running the Scottish Government marquee at the Royal Highland Show and hosting an online village hall conference

Table 4 shows the total amount of funding that Scottish Rural Network has allocated since 2021 and summarises the key topics and activities.

Table 4 illustrates the funding dispersed by the Network over the years of the review to projects which align with its aims. As can be seen in the column describing the topics funded, the priorities are wide ranging.

Scottish Rural Network also provides funding to Scottish Rural Action and to Community Led Local Development, illustrating close working and collaboration between them. For example, since 2022-2023, Scottish Rural Network has spent between 20% to 30% of its total budget on Scottish Rural Action collaborations/projects. Funding figures are set out in Table 1 in Section 1.6.

3.5. Clarity and transparency in Scottish Rural Network’s activities

Participants raised concerns relating to a lack of clarity about the Network’s position within Scottish Government, and also a lack of transparency regarding how funding decisions are made.

Some participants in this review were unaware that the Network is delivered by a team (the Network Support Unit) within the Scottish Government. Confusion arose regarding its role/s and ways of working with respect to other rural policy teams and policy teams across government more broadly. For others, confusion related to the balance of its work in relation to rural or agricultural matters:

“I'm still not really sure what SRN does, but I presume it's providing information to various organisations in the rural sector.” (Stakeholder, interview)

There was also a lack of clarity around its target stakeholders with participants questioning whether its information-sharing was primarily aimed at grassroots communities and/or policy-makers, or both. Participants reflected that, when the UK was in the EU there was perhaps greater clarity over the role of the Network. Since its been operating outside of that EU policy and legislative framework, some participants felt that the aims, remit and governance of Scottish Rural Network are less clear.

Some participants observed that the Network has shifted to focus more on rural and island community issues rather than agriculture and that this was helpful in reducing the potential for duplication with the Farm Advisory Service and the existing Agriculture and Knowledge Innovation System in Scotland. However, others suggested that Scottish Rural Network could play a key role in bringing together agricultural and wider rural and island information and policy developments which would be useful given these are often seen as separate. Participants commented that the Network could help to ensure that wider rural community voices are heard in agricultural policy making for example, and also help to raise awareness of agricultural policy developments (and other policy domains) for wider rural stakeholders.

For other participants, however, the Network’s role is clear and has been impactful:

“Ultimately, without [Scottish Rural Network] we would have poorer decision-making to the detriment of all Scotland but specifically to rural and remote rural communities.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

There was confusion for some participants who said the roles of Scottish Rural Network and Scottish Rural Action were not clearly delineated – participants highlighted that this confusion was not helped by the similar acronyms for the two organisations:

“We get mixed up with [Scottish Rural Network] externally a lot and I assume they get mixed up with us [Scottish Rural Action] a lot.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

However, this stance was not unanimous as some participants saw the two organisations working together effectively:

“I think we're complementary. I don't think there's overlap because they [Scottish Rural Action] are neutrals in terms of being non-governmental. So, they are representing the voice of rural and island communities and stakeholders, and we [Scottish Rural Network] are facilitating that opportunity, shall we say, and we'll work hand in hand with them.” (Scottish Rural Network delivery, interview)

Some participants attempted to differentiate the two by referring to Scottish Rural Action as having a more relational and aspirational role, while Scottish Rural Network has traditionally performed a more functional or operational role. However, it was acknowledged that these roles may have become more blurred over time. Participants noted a good collaborative working relationship between the two organisations on specific issues and events. To some externally this may be perceived as duplication but for many this represented “well-established and effective collaboration” (Scottish Rural Network delivery, interview).

Participants commented on the significant amounts of funding that the Network has distributed in recent years, reflecting positively on the process of applying for this funding, which is more straightforward than many other funders, with Network staff available to advise applicants. The impacts of that funding were demonstrated by one participant who said how helpful they had found this collaboration:

“We have received funding for several years from SRN which has enabled an extremely successful community ownership programme to continue and grow. SRN has been very helpful in working with us to publicise our services and work.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

For other participants, the mechanisms and decision-making relating to this funding lacked transparency. While generally recognising the value of the organisations and activities receiving funding, participants reported a lack of openness in relation to several aspects of the funding process. These were: how and by whom priority areas for funding are identified; why and how organisations are approached to apply; the decision-making process for who is funded; how and by whom funded activities are evaluated; and how those evaluations inform future funding decision-making.

Participants were not clear on the process of allocating funding and had a sense that decisions around which activities and organisations to fund each year are made based on what has been previously funded and evolving Ministerial priorities. One survey respondent commented:

“Only very recently has it come to my attention that there are funding and support opportunities, and that arose through Scottish Government direction rather than from the SRN's own activities.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

More broadly, it was noted that Scottish Rural Network’s governance and reporting requirements had been in a state of flux since EU exit. Some participants noted opportunities for Scottish Rural Network to “shift and become more confident in itself as a strategic funder” (Stakeholder, interview), moving away from delivering events, to having a stronger role in sharing rural voices with policy makers across Scottish Government. This would ensure a clearer division of responsibilities between the Network and Scottish Rural Action. These themes are illustrated in the following quotes from participants who highlighted these concerns:

“I think SRN could be more, but it is under pressure from the [agriculture] sector particularly with the [Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act], so we need to make sure that doesn’t get hijacked by that sector.” (Stakeholder, interview)

“It's never really clear whether [the Network] was an integral part of the Rural Economies and Communities teams, or whether it … sat outside the system. So, their regular visibility is through their weekly newsletter … it can provide useful bits of information or events are happening, but it doesn't seem particularly holistic in terms of giving a real sense of what's going on. … It was quite late in the day when I found out the SRN did have its own budget and that you could actually apply to do some stuff…. And then I realised this happened every year...” (Stakeholder, interview)

3.6. Evidence about Scottish Rural Network from the place-based case studies

In the six place-based case studies, participants had a variable but generally low level of knowledge of Scottish Rural Network. However, it should be noted that it is not an explicit aim of the Network to achieve name recognition, and that it is a national network staffed by a small number of people.

The most frequently highlighted Network activity by those interviewed in the place-based community case studies was information sharing and promotion, with the newsletter, funding opportunity sharing and case studies most consistently mentioned. There was a deeper level of knowledge of the Network amongst those more involved in the community sector (for example, amongst the Community Led Local Development coordinators interviewed). Those who were involved in the Network’s activities, such as by providing information for a case study, were generally positive. The Network’s provision of opportunities for networking was also highlighted as a strength.

For some respondents, the Network website had provided a valuable opportunity to showcase work happening in their region. This represented an indirect benefit of the work undertaken by the Network to share learning:

“One of our youth groups last year was featured by SRN in… their videos. There's another youth group they want to work for. … So, for us it’s the promotional side of SRN. And obviously on SRA side and SRN the links to Rural Parliament etc. and bringing people together across Scotland.” (Community Led Local Development delivery, place-based case study interview)

Another participant in the Scottish Borders case study spoke about not engaging directly to a great extent with the Network but did recall attending events run by the organisation. The participant commented:

“It should be actually a reminder for us to work better together. And I think sometimes we get so bogged down in the delivery that we don’t make the time to make some strategic connections that way.” (Stakeholder, place-based case study interview)

Other participants expressed support for clearer means of engaging with the Scottish Government, such as through the Rural Network. This was frequently linked to a perceived lack of understanding of Scottish Government operations or ‘siloing’ of policy. For example:

“For me, it’s transparency… How do you know where to go in the Scottish Government? What team is doing what? ... Government works in silos, but I find them deeply frustrating... I don't understand in a country as small as this.” (Community Led Local Development applicant, place-based case study interview)

“It's a maze because of where things are laid in Parliament … but [Scottish Rural Network are] very good at breaking that down to try and make it a bit more understandable.” (Community Led Local Development delivery, place-based case study interview)

Participants who took part in the case studies and who had been involved in community development for decades as a volunteer, or who were employed in the sector, did identify Scottish Rural Network as part of Scottish Government. Some participants reflected on the relative balance of public body involvement in the Network, as well as in Scottish Rural Action and Community Led Local Development, as opposed to them being independent organisations. For example, one participant involved in Community Led Local Development noted that the Network and Community Led Local Development local authority Accountable Bodies provided public sector enabling, with Scottish Rural Action and independent Community Led Local Development Accountable Bodies representing the charity sector as independent organisations. Community Led Local Development applicants could represent both the third sector and private sector, and Scottish Rural Action supports both charities and individual residents. Some participants acknowledged that the three elements under review work well together. There were also suggestions for how they could work together even better in the future.

3.7. The future of the Scottish Rural Network

The evidence revealed a diversity of views about the role, resourcing and impact of Scottish Rural Network, with suggestions made about how it should evolve in future:

“What we need most is a rural network that has influence and voice within the Scottish Government, that can foster the recognition of rural assets and rural communities, support innovation and creativity within rural communities who know the answers far better than policy-makers and experts, and model genuine partnership working.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

One survey participant had clear ideas as to what should be done to improve the profile of the Network:

“Proactive, targeted communications to be clear with key stakeholder groups what the purpose and role of SRN is; what its objectives are and how those overlap with and complement other stakeholders; and more proactive delivery through hosted workshops / conferences / project activities seems essential to me. Or the work is placed elsewhere in the sector. For example, what is the difference between SRN and SRA? I have never come across any proactive efforts to present the work of these bodies to the sector and stakeholders.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

For the same respondent, a positive future would be:

“A re-energised, proactive, high-profile SRN which establishes a clear role and purpose within the sector alongside other actors.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

There was considerable support from participants for the continuation of the Network; this quote is from a participant who said that rural areas would suffer without a network in place:

“Our own specialism is working with rural communities, and it is hard to imagine a non-rural focused organisation understanding to the same extent what the outcomes are of what we do. The challenges and needs of rural communities are very different to urban communities.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

Another survey participant reflected on the lack of awareness about the Network across rural and island communities and suggested:

“The strategic function of the Network could be more clear, and the difference between these various Scottish Government-funded support organisations could be more distinct.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

The potential role of the Network in overcoming silos and scaling up solutions from one community or locality to the national level was mentioned by other participants with one suggesting the need for a locally edited page within the Network’s website for individuals to share local information with others more proactively. Another participant suggested the Network’s role in building partnerships at a national level could be expanded.

One participant said the Network played an important but somewhat hidden role in facilitating diverse rural voices to be heard by policy makers, noting that losing this would be detrimental to Scotland’s rural communities:

“The EU recognised the importance of having a network to share ideas and provide informal support. If that was lost I believe that policy making would be poorer for not having the diversity of lived experiences of distinct rural voices. Rural voices need to be amplified and the network does that. It does it in an unobtrusive way so that the voices of the communities are amplified but the network is the facilitator not the focus.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)

For several other survey participants, the Network has an important role in future in keeping Scotland linked in with rural policy developments in Europe. One survey participant mentioned the usefulness of the Rural Pact^[47] in serving as a voice and in enabling exchange and partnership working across rural territories in Europe. In this way, this participant said the Network’s future role should be as:

“A voice that understands rural, championing rural Scotland within the Scottish Government. The improvement I most imagine is a much strengthened and better resourced SRN performing these roles, but also working really hard with rural communities to develop greater capacity within SRN and the wider Scottish Government at partnering on a basis of genuine equality with rural communities… SRN should play a critical enabling role for rural communities, rather than a directing role.” (Scottish Rural Network participant, survey)