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

4. Scottish Rural Action review

4.1. Introduction to Scottish Rural Action

Scottish Rural Action^[48] is an independently constituted charity (SCO48086) and company limited by guarantee (SC461352). It was established in 2013 with the purpose of developing a stronger, more coherent voice for rural and island Scotland. In 2014 Scottish Rural Action delivered the first Scottish Rural Parliament (following a 2011 Scottish National Party manifesto commitment) and it has subsequently worked to develop a “rural movement” in Scotland (delivering a commitment in the 2019-20 Programme for Government)^[49].

In addition to running biennial Scottish Rural and Island Parliaments in 2014, 2016, 2018, 2021 and 2023 and the European Rural Parliament in 2025, Scottish Rural Action’s work has included a range of events and gathering evidence to build a rural movement and to inform Scottish Government and UK Government policies (further details of the organisation’s activities are in Section 4.2). Scottish Rural Action has a cross-sectoral and cross-geographic remit, working across Scotland. It is an independent organisation with a growing scope of work and funders.

Key organisational aims for Scottish Rural Action^[50] are to:

• Build a grassroots-led rural movement in Scotland that connects rural communities with each other, politicians and decision-makers
• Provide platforms for the rural movement, including the Scottish Rural and Islands Parliament and the Scottish Rural and Islands Youth Parliament
• Collaborate with seldom-heard groups to create platforms that better enable their participation in the rural movement
• Build the capacity of sectoral and geographic networks, upskilling organisations and individuals to enable them to participate in the rural movement more effectively
• Develop a cross-sectoral, locally-informed understanding of rural Scotland's economy, society and culture that shapes local practice and national policy
• Connect Scotland’s rural movement with UK, EU and international partners

The Theory of Change produced in Stage one of this research project describes key inputs, activities and outcomes for Scottish Rural Action (see Appendix A). Key long-term impacts were identified as: evidence-based policy making that addresses structural barriers to rural and island development, and that rural and island Scotland is recognised, valued and resourced appropriately. The vision underpinning this was identified as: “capacity building and enabling rural and island communities to have control over their future in shaping the work of Scottish Rural Action”. The Theory of Change evidences a strong call to move beyond a narrative of "’doing for’ rural communities and instead focusing on empowering them to set and lead on their own priorities.”

Scottish Rural Action engages with European rural policy in a range of ways, including delivering the European Rural Parliament in Scotland in October 2025. However, it does not have a legislative function inherited from EU membership as is the case for Scottish Rural Network and Community Led Local Development.

4.2. Summary of Scottish Rural Action activities and Scottish Government funding 2020-2025

Scottish Rural Action’s work has been delivered from 2020 to 2025 by a staff team of 2.8 FTEs (on average) overseen by a volunteer board of directors. Key activities during the period of the review are set out below, organised according to organisational aims (in bold):

Rural movement and platforms

• Two Scottish Rural and Island Parliaments (2021 and 2023)
• The first Scottish Rural and Islands Youth Parliament in 2023
• The European Rural Parliament delivered in Autumn 2025
• New networking spaces for the rural movement, including a Community Showcase at the Royal Highland Show (2024, 2025)
• Established a village halls programme - networking and “Village Halls Week”
• Active social media channels, newsletters and website

Collaboration with seldom heard groups, building capacity of networks

• Supported the development of a new network for rural youth in partnership with Youth Scotland (RYAN)
• Developed a self-sustaining platform for the Community Led Local Development Youth Local Action Groups, and for young people involved in the Rural Parliament
• Supported two new practitioner networks (community-led tourism and rural & islands transport)
• Various in-person and online learning exchanges

Shaping local practice and national policy

• Secretariat for the Cross Party Group in the Scottish Parliament on Islands (with the Scottish Islands Federation)
• Delivered an Islands Economy Showcase (2025)
• Led on multiple original research programmes and campaigns on topics identified by members
• Developed policy and practice tools including the Last Dance Framework, and a Rural and Islands Place Standard Tool

Connections with UK, EU, International Partners

• The European Rural Parliament in Autumn 2025

Scottish Rural Action’s funding from Scottish Government includes direct annual grants for specified work, as well as funding from Scottish Rural Network for events, projects and other collaborations. This is summarised in Table 1, Section 1.6. Table 1 illustrates that Scottish Rural Action’s funding from the Scottish Government has varied year to year, but increased overall during the years of the review. The annual variations are due in particular to the significant Scottish Government funding for the delivery of Rural and Island Parliament events. Directly commissioned Scottish Government work, and indirect work through Scottish Rural Network, are both significant areas of financial income for the organisation. The nature of this work is described in more detail in the following Sections.

4.3. Scottish Rural Action’s relationship with Scottish Government

While the Scottish Government has a long history of supporting Scottish Rural Action and has provided most of its funding, the organisation is independent (in the same way as any other charity). A Board of Directors provides appropriate oversight for Scottish Rural Action in line with the legal obligations of charities.

The Scottish Government’s relationship with Scottish Rural Action has evolved over time, from initial support provided for the establishment of an organisation to deliver the first Rural Parliament and to develop a rural movement as a governmental priority. There is a tension in how prescriptive Scottish Government can be for an independent organisation, regardless of the history of collaboration and the close alignment of aims. Participants felt there was some strain between Scottish Government directing the work of this independent organisation, and the organisation developing and implementing its own processes of strategic development and prioritisation and being governed by its Board.

There was evidence that over the years of the review, the nature of Scottish Government collaboration with Scottish Rural Action had evolved. The general sense from participants was that Government involvement has decreased over time and there is less involvement in 2025 compared to the time of the 2019 Review of the organisation^[51]. One participant noted:

“Whilst [Scottish Government was] dealing with the pandemic… I think it's been helpful to step back from influencing SRA and to let it evolve into whatever it feels it needs to be.” (National stakeholder, interview)

The Scottish Government specify work objectives and Key Performance Indicators as part of Scottish Rural Action’s annual funding, as set out in Table 5.

Table 5 illustrates that there has been consistent Scottish Government support for Scottish Rural Action to deliver the strengthening of the rural movement over the years of the review. However, there has been some variability in other objectives, such as a focus on engagement with Community Led Local Development and Scottish Rural Network after 2022 and intermittent funding for organisational development. There was evidence that changing annual funding requirements, and a need to deliver a high number of events and other resource intensive activities, has led to more focus on short- or medium-term outputs, rather than long term strategic work. This shift may also be a result of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, which saw a need for Scottish Rural Action to deliver short-term work related to the challenges of the pandemic.

Some of the annual objectives during this time were provided by the Scottish Government with specific implementation approaches dictated, and it was not clear to the research team if collaboration with Scottish Rural Action informed these approaches. For example, in one year, there was an aim to implement a rural movement strategic action plan signed by 40 strategic stakeholders, as part of organisational development. Some participants questioned the appropriateness of imposing prescriptive plans on an independent organisation’s strategic development. Others noted that closer collaboration with Scottish Government would be beneficial. This imposition of a specific approach to the rural movement ‘from the top’ raises questions regarding the balance of top-down and bottom-up organisational direction, and Scottish Rural Action’s position in ‘managing’ these different (and potentially difficult) relationships. If the aim of all stakeholders is for Scottish Rural Action to be a truly grassroots movement, then collaborative and strategic approaches to working together are likely to be most productive.

4.4. A grassroots-led rural movement

Much of Scottish Rural Action’s work is based on the concept of a “rural movement”. Research carried out in 2022 considered 10 rural movements in different international contexts^[52] and established that rural movements are an “organised approach to providing a network and voice for rural areas, their people and those working to support rural development.” This work highlighted that rural movements frequently have an advocacy role to shape local, regional and national policy, as well as an enabling role through sharing learning and knowledge exchange. Internationally, the character of rural movements reflects and responds to different national contexts, including systems of administration and culture.

Scottish Rural Action employs a particular definition of the rural movement, which has been summarised as:

“An organised approach to networking rural and island communities and amplifying their diverse voices. Every rural and island resident and organisation can choose to be part of the rural movement and have ownership over it. It is a dynamic movement which organises around many different platforms like the Scottish Rural & Islands Parliament and the Rural Exchange portal and adds capacity to existing networks and partnerships.” (Rural and Island Strategic Stakeholder Workshop 2022)^[53]

Participants in this review had different understandings of what a rural movement is and how it should be delivered. Those involved in Scottish Rural Action in various roles tended to use definitions which emphasised how the rural movement addresses gaps and uses a structure of decentralised ‘platforms’ to amplify voices and deliver a kind of empowerment. For example:

“The role of a rural movement is to be an independent structure which enables both horizontal and vertical networking between rural people on the ground and people at different levels that can assist rural communities in developing themselves.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

“Providing the platform not only creates awareness by bringing people together, but creates the knowledge beyond that. When people speak collectively, they achieve a shared mental model [which] means that when they step out of the room, or the forum, … they have an alignment that takes them to action. And they feel empowered.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

“There's a huge amount of soft power that SRA don't wield. The Rural Parliament wields it, and SRA just create a space for it. That's the rural movement.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

This decentralised approach of supporting evolving rural and island priorities and ‘voicing’ these priorities to the Scottish Government positions Scottish Rural Action uniquely within the community development sector.

The third sector has a range of organisations including specialist national organisations (such as for development trusts or regeneration), and organisations focused on specific aspects of rural and island life (e.g. rural transport, or islands). There can be a degree of collaboration, duplication, and/or overlap of roles between Scottish Rural Action’s work and these different organisations within the third sector. Overlaps are not necessarily always duplication, and can actually represent alignment between different organisations conducting similar but different work. Indeed, collaborative working between organisations is fundamental to building networks and movements. Scottish Rural Action provides a national rural and island perspective within the sector, based around the concept of the rural movement.

Some participants could be more critical of the rural movement, evidencing resistance or lack of buy-in to this ambitious conceptual policy aim. However, this critique was frequently underpinned by support for the component pieces of the rural movement, such as amplifying rural voices, working towards a long-term community-led vision, or for specific events like the Rural and Island Parliaments. For example:

“I always felt rather sceptical about [the rural movement] and wondered if there was something I wasn't getting. Having said that; in a way, having a point in the horizon that you're steering towards, which is the emergence of a rural movement [is good]. I think the direction of travel you then have for the kind of activities that you're doing can have a lot of effect and good things can be done. But I was never quite clear what the destination would actually look like.” (Stakeholder, interview)

This variability in the definitions and understandings of a rural movement could be considered both a strength and a weakness. On one hand, agreeing on a single definition for a rural movement may help build momentum and encourage shared responsibility and buy-in. On the other hand, having different definitions of the rural movement can positively contribute to enhancing its flexibility and ambition, encouraging a sense of the inclusivity within the movement, regardless of individual definitions. To a degree, a rural movement is always evolving – a quest for a perfectly formed movement which means the same to everyone may be impossible, or at least unrealistic. These considerations point to the challenges of implementing an abstract and ambitious policy aim such as a rural movement.

In general, participants in this review were strong advocates of the need for rural voices to be articulated more strongly and to be heard, and for greater rural empowerment. Participants in the place-based case studies (discussed in more detail in Section 4.8) had consistent support for concepts underpinning the rural movement such as developing a rural voice, or grassroots-led development, even though they were rarely familiar with Scottish Rural Action itself. Participants with knowledge of the community development sector noted the need for rural experiences to have targeted rural and island support and policy work and viewed Scottish Rural Action’s work to strengthen the rural movement over the last few years very positively.

Some participants supported rural voices but stressed the role of decision makers or policy makers in listening to and acting on what is said by rural voices. As one participant noted:

“What's happening is that the [rural] voice isn't being listened to often and it's how we get the voice better listened to, that we're trying to do” (Stakeholder, interview).

Scottish Rural Action has developed opportunities (such as events) for rural communities to be ‘heard’; however, sometimes participants said that these voices had not been heard and/or acted on. Put another way, having a voice or even a movement is not the same as effecting change if that voice or movement is not listened to and acted upon.

4.5. Platforms for delivering the rural movement

The events, networks and other activities (called ‘platforms’ by Scottish Rural Action) used to deliver the rural movement provide a flexible structure of engagement. These activities were conducted on different scales and with different time periods, ranging from high profile international multi-day events such as the European Rural Parliament, to annual national events like the ‘village halls week,’ to learning exchanges on specific topics like rural transport or rural tourism, to research reports, social media, and introductions to collaborators or decision makers. Scottish Rural Action organises these activities, or ‘platforms’, which are open to anyone and can be used to highlight evolving rural and island priorities. The organisation also provides ongoing support to those involved. For example:

“If [a rural or island resident] have an issue that they want to bring to Parliament and they don't know where to start, we can connect them... We have that visibility now with some amazing youth groups that we're helping network to each other. Then if they do get stuck then they can come to us and then we can show them a path forward over there, and then they take it back, share it with each other group.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

Some participants noted that Scottish Rural Action had successfully created and strengthened relationships amongst stakeholder organisations (for example at the stakeholder event in Birnam in late 2022^[54]) and brought rural and island community voices to the attention of the Scottish Parliament, and at key events like the Royal Highland Show.

Specific content for activities included areas of focus pre-agreed with the Scottish Government, as well as with other funders and collaborators. Activities also developed in response to priorities raised by members and individuals engaging with Scottish Rural Action, some of which went beyond original workplans (e.g. veterans affairs and abattoir work). Though no specific work on these topics was planned in advance, they were considered to represent a ‘grassroots priority and were therefore amplified through the rural movement ‘platforms’ in flexible ways.

Some participants stressed the challenges of measuring the longer term and less tangible impacts arising from these wide-ranging activities, including their role in contributing towards further actions (which may only emerge sometime after the specific event, and/or be outwith the control of Scottish Rural Action). One involved participant reflected:

“[SRA] have an established vehicle [referring to the Rural and Island Parliaments] which seems to be respected both by the government and by the people that participate in it as a way of raising issues and debating them… we have had to work out how you then influence both policy and other forms of action. And that would be the difficult bit.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

This quote highlights the difference between raising issues, debating issues, and producing outcomes.

4.6. Collaboration with seldom heard groups and building the capacity of networks

Scottish Rural Action is a membership organisation but provides support to anyone, not just its members, and focuses on an inclusive, responsive approach. This was explained by some involved:

“We are literally grassroots, whether you're an individual or an organisation, there's a place for you and to be heard.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

Participants across the strategic interviews, place-based case studies, and surveys highlighted Scottish Rural Action’s youth work as a particular success in ensuring hard-to-reach voices are heard more effectively. For example:

“Scottish Rural Action have been vital in the momentum, organisation and development of the [name removed] Youth Local Action Group. Without their input, knowledge, wisdom and drive, I don't think the Youth Local Action Group could have had the success it has.” (Scottish Rural Action participant, survey)

“The young farmers being in the room listening to young islanders saying ‘we really care about housing’ and nodding along… That is so much more impactful, not just for the decision makers in the room, but also for the young people themselves to recognise, ok, we share [priorities].” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

Youth Local Action Groups are discussed in detail in Section 5.14. Generally, these quotes illustrate the support provided by Scottish Rural Action for an inclusion-focused organisation (the Youth Local Action Groups). These types of activities could be considered building the ‘capacity’ of individuals and groups to engage and/or deliver on community led development, or indeed to engage in other activities.

There was some confusion amongst participants over the different youth work underway (e.g. between the Youth Local Action Groups and Rural Youth Action Network) with the potential for duplication noted. There were also mixed opinions about whether this should be better aligned or if the different organisations complement one another through their differing priorities.

Overall there was strong evidence of the effective inclusion work carried out by Scottish Rural Action with young people. There was less evidence of engagement by other ‘seldom heard groups’; however, some participants suggested that Scottish Rural Action’s role as an independent charity aided collaboration with those less likely to engage with official government representatives.

Those involved in networks and events supported by Scottish Rural Action noted that these opportunities would have been challenging for them to access alone, evidencing the provision of more inclusive access by the organisation. For example:

“It gives us capacity because it would be hard as we're just one member of staff. It would be hard to do these things on our own.” (Stakeholder, interview)

Some participants stressed the need for resources to support inclusive engagement by individuals and community organisations in Scottish Rural Action’s work. For example:

“Going down further to the grassroots (this is constant and it comes up every single meeting we have, regardless of the policy topic): communities themselves are doing the stuff. If they had the paid resource, like community development officers that weren't having to look for funding every year, then, if that capacity was there, it would unlock a lot of things in terms of development, but also in terms of having a voice. Because to have a voice, you need the resource to be able to feed in. It's hard, it's not that we don't have a voice. It's actually the time for somebody to be able to get that voice to the right people. And also for those people to actually listen.” (Scottish Rural Action delivery, interview)

Resource challenges were also highlighted for Scottish Rural Action’s delivery. Some participants (both those associated with Scottish Rural Action and those in the wider rural community sector) indicated that the organisation’s funding and staff resource levels may be making collaboration and inclusion harder to achieve. Resource limitations were also reported to impact on monitoring and evaluation for inclusion and capacity building work. In-house work by Scottish Rural Action on monitoring outcomes was focused on events and annual reporting to funders with less resource available for wider inclusion monitoring or strategic planning. Some external stakeholders noted that measuring outcomes from more abstract policy concepts like the rural movement or ‘building community capacity’ could be challenging, and while progress on these topics can be measured through mixed methods indicators, such work requires resource to develop and implement.

Those involved in delivery explained that in recent years growing Scottish Rural Action’s membership was not an organisational priority; rather project delivery and an inclusive approach of responding to all enquiries regardless of membership status were prioritised. As expressed by one participant, individuals or groups hesitant to engage may be put off by an organisation focused on serving only their members. However, this approach has had implications for Scottish Rural Action’s resourcing as there is no limitation on who can be helped; demand was reported to be beyond resources.

The inclusive and open approach used also has implications for building membership numbers for Scottish Rural Action, which some participants conceptually linked to establishing a support remit for the organisation. Following this logic, high membership numbers would reflect higher profile advocacy. Some participants identified the growth of membership as a priority for the organisation; a more extreme view was:

“SRA is not impressive, actually, when you look at that in terms of representativeness. You know, as a strong voice, not impressive. And I think that's what SRA absolutely has always needed to tackle: How do you get this voice up that that people will really say, wow, we can't ignore that voice.” (Stakeholder, interview)

A decision to focus on membership growth is a matter for Scottish Rural Action’s Board of Directors. Specific funding to support membership growth or to develop a strategic plan to increase membership, may be an important consideration in such a decision.

Participants also expressed varying views on what inclusion achieves, and could achieve, for a united and coherent rural movement. Some expressed that a united rural, or indeed rural and islands, voice would in principle have more weight, especially considering the strength of the agricultural voice (which is perceived as being more unified). Others stressed the importance of including a wide range of rural and island views in the rural movement, and the negative potential for excluding diverse views in the drive for a more singular rural or rural and islands voice. Recognising the diversity of rural and island communities, there were those who expressed differing views or “voices” for islands and for rural areas. These didn’t necessarily conflict but could intersect in complex ways particularly given the co-existence of islands-specific legislation and impact assessment in Scotland (and separate rural and islands policy teams in Scottish Government), alongside Scottish Rural Network, Scottish Rural Action and Community Led Local Development (which include both rural and island communities in their remit). On balance, participants believed that Scottish Rural Action is already effectively allowing for the presentation of diverse rural voices, but that this role could be strengthened to provide greater nuance and convey the breadth of issues and perspectives in rural and island Scotland. In this way, Scottish Rural Action has a key role to play in presenting the complexity of rural and island issues to inform policymaking. This role will also rely on the organisation being able to draw all relevant stakeholders into the rural movement, including those that have typically not engaged (such as land-based interests, including agriculture and forestry).

4.7. Shaping local practice and national policy

Participants expressed widespread support for Scottish Rural Action’s policy work, although many noted that more funding would accelerate and/or deepen their work further. There were also a range of suggestions for how the organisation could evolve to implement various aims, including enhancing the rural movement, amplifying and articulating rural voice/s, or better supporting rural communities. One participant provocatively argued that Scottish Rural Action’s policy work could do more and be braver:

“I'd like to see SRA being braver, and be more prepared to stand up there and go: ‘No, we need to raise this issue! We're going to force the government to talk about it.’” (Stakeholder, interview)

Scottish Rural Action’s approach to policy impact was articulated as inclusive and based on the rural movement. In practice this meant that that the organisation provides a way for any rural resident to share their views and priorities. Scottish Rural Action's rural movement-based policy model could be considered flexible and decentralised, delivering efficiently with a low level of resource. It was noted by a number of participants that the organisation’s policy work is cross-sectoral, which makes outcomes hard to achieve due to long-standing disconnects (sometimes called ‘silos’) between stakeholders and policy makers working across relevant issues. In this way, strengthening its policy networks is as important for Scottish Rural Action’s policy work as its strong grassroots networks.

A number of participants noted that a key strength of Scottish Rural Action’s work is that its substantial expertise is grounded in the lived experience of the staff and directors who are themselves residents of rural and island communities. At the same time, participants evidenced that staff are very knowledgeable and well informed about national policy developments of relevance to rural and island Scotland. Participants also regarded the organisation as being flexible and responsive in situations where emerging challenges needed to be quickly brought to the attention of Scottish Government (or indeed other stakeholders). Scottish Rural Action has also been agile and responsive as new policy issues have emerged for example, relating to rural abattoirs.

There was good evidence of Scottish Rural Action’s multi-dimensional impact on Scottish policy – both policies focused on rural and island areas, as well as providing rural and island insight to national policies (somewhat like rural proofing advocacy). Many examples were identified by participants of rural organisations working closely with Scottish Rural Action on various policy themes such as women in the rural economy, and an islands showcase event in Scottish Parliament^[55]. There was also evidence of Scottish Rural Action’s work providing rural perspectives to national charity organisations, as a type of ‘rural lens’ on the wider community and charity sector. This was highly valued by participants. Participants felt the organisation had been proactive in identifying avenues to influence government policy and using these to good effect.

Participants across the sector appreciated Scottish Rural Action’s role in supporting policy work, noting the resource impacts on individuals in engaging with government policy consultations and appreciating support with this:

“It takes a long time to even read a policy consultation, never mind feed in and there's a constant stream of them. People are all doing this with their own free time because it means something to them and it's important but there's only so much you can do.” (Stakeholder, interview)

Participants saw Scottish Rural Action’s approach as providing a conduit between communities and policy makers, often in conjunction with other (rural and non-rural) third sector organisations. This could be considered a ‘messy ecosystem’, and Scottish Rural Action has evolved to fill gaps and embrace opportunities. Scottish Rural Network also exists in the space of networking between communities and policy, with the two different roles not always clear (as discussed earlier in this report, Section 3.5.).

Regarding local-level practice and policy making, participants noted engagement with local authorities was not a priority for Scottish Rural Action, with the organisation tending to focus on national policy makers. At a national and cross-cutting level, some participants raised questions relating to how Scottish Rural Action’s policy work fits in the practicalities of community empowerment in a challenging financial context. For example:

“The crux of the problem is the system that we're working in for finances and the decision-making powers within the country just makes communities worse off. Communities might be doing great stuff and amazing stuff (and more of it!). But actually the reality is it's become so tough for them and we're asking volunteers to do all of this on top of their day jobs… You can't run a country on volunteering.” (Stakeholder, interview)

This point on the role of volunteers in shaping government policies was also reflected in comments on volunteer-led work in relation to Community Led Local Development (see Section 5); the role of volunteers was recurrent research theme. A number of participants, such as in the quote above, argued that the role of volunteers in delivering development, particularly public services, should be considered critically-- and that it was not necessarily always a positive outcome for communities or volunteers to be delivering, particularly on their own.

The impacts of Scottish Rural Action’s policy work are diffuse, with the breadth of activities difficult to document and quantify, and Scottish Rural Action’s specific role difficult to attribute. For example, collaboration by Scottish Rural Action with a national policy organisation on a policy priority may not be easily attributed to Scottish Rural Action, but their insight provided a more informed rural perspective.

Participants also highlighted a need for more joining up of events and other short-term work by Scottish Rural Action into medium to long term policy plans and outcomes. For example, at the end of the Scottish Rural and Islands Parliament in 2023, delegates co-produced a rural lens approach (the ‘Last Dance Framework’) for embedding rural expertise and evidence across all stages of national policy development^[56]. The extent to which this framework, based on the collective expertise of many delegates, may have informed the Scottish Government’s (internal) Rural Assessment Toolkit is not clear. Joining up policy processes strategically, and with greater transparency, is likely to be beneficial. For example:

“For me the impetus sits in between parliaments, on the intention taking forward and policy and priorities that beyond the Parliament.” (Community Led Local Development delivery, place-based case study interview)

Further clarity on this would be helpful to promote a better understanding of how Scottish Rural Action and others can inform national policy decisions.

4.8. Evidence about Scottish Rural Action from the place-based case studies

In the six place-based case studies there was variable but generally low level of awareness of Scottish Rural Action. Although some participants were aware of some of the organisation’s activities, they did not routinely associate this with the organisation itself. This varied according to the experience of each participant. Those involved in the third sector were typically aware of Scottish Rural Action’s work and frequently positive, for example:

“We meet with SRA quite regularly. They've also been excellent at supporting the Youth Local Action Group areas in all kinds of capacity. Organising events, but also just making sure that we have regular meetings and simple things, providing the admin support to organise these meetings and send out agendas and stuff like that. SRA have been absolutely outstanding.” (Community Led Local Development delivery, place-based case study interview)

More often than directly naming Scottish Rural Action’s work, participants reported involvement with an activity delivered by the organisation, such as attending a Rural and Islands Parliament or engaging in the Rural Youth Action Network or in the Village Halls network. For example, one participant acknowledged the important role of Scottish Rural Action in networking village halls but noted that those involved were unlikely to know about the wider programme of work:

“I am not convinced that the village halls generally would be aware that they were connected, that they came from the same kind of programme really.” (Stakeholder, place-based case study interview)

However, there was consistent and often strongly expressed support for the concepts underpinning Scottish Rural Action’s work, such as the rural movement, or amplifying rural and island voices, for example:

“The huge frustration we have is that politicians and civil servants either aren't listening or aren't understanding the realities here.” (Community Led Local Development applicant, place-based case study interview)

“There needs to be more ways that people from [region of rural or island area] generally can feed into these types of policies beyond consultations which can be too bureaucratic.” (Community Led Local Development applicant, place-based case study interview)

This finding highlights the difficulties faced by national organisations such as Scottish Rural Action with a relatively low level of resources (2.8 full-time equivalent staff on average over the years of this review) to be able to build widespread local name recognition, and/or collaborations on local projects.

It is important to note that it is not an aim of Scottish Rural Action to engage with place-based work, and they do not have the resource to do this across rural and island Scotland in a consistent way. However, the evidence of support from the place-based case studies for the principles and aims of Scottish Rural Action’s work on rural movements and rural voices is notable, albeit participants did not always fully recognise or acknowledge the role or name of the organisation in this important work.