Family-owned estates are contributing to the rural economy, but they could be doing more if policy, funding and red-tape issues are resolved, a report reveals today.
The study by rural college SRUC involved 23 estates across Scotland, including nine in the Highlands and two in the north-east.
Researchers probed what the estates did, how they did it and the changes that could be made to assist estate owners develop their businesses. Concerns were expressed at the uncertainty and lack of clarity on agricultural policy and funding for it and rural development, bureaucracy, the perception that outsiders have of estates and the practical support that estate owners need for community engagement.
Estate owners said greater certainty on Cap reforms had to be delivered as the lack of clarity made strategic planning difficult for them as they often took a long-term view.
The research also found out that estates were postponing decisions on some issues because of the referendum on Scottish independence and the government’s land reform review.
Author Mike Woolvin said: “Both the 2014 referendum and the process and outcome of the land reform review are leading, from some interviewees’ point of view, to a climate of uncertainty.
“Within this, key decisions being postponed by some interviewees include the purchase, sale or letting of land, property and assets; and the on-going investment in existing land, property and/or assets.”
Red tape was another problem area. Planning legislation was seen as a particular issue as it was focusing more on urban issues rather than those surrounding rural areas.
Respondents renewed calls for changes to VAT regulations. The report added: “The charging of VAT on renovations of existing buildings, compared to the absence of VAT on newly-built properties, is a significant barrier to the renovation of existing estate buildings, particularly when many are listed.”
The estates responding to the survey said perception was still an issue. While they wanted to be seen as rural businesses undertaking a diverse range of activities they were still being given a landowner tag.
The research is the second part of a three-stage study. The first phase, already published, was on estates owned and managed by the communities, while the next phase will look at those run by charities.
Mr Woolvin said the latest study found examples of positive and production interaction between family-owned estates and the communities in which they are based. The main activities of 23 studied were farming, forestry, sporting and let housing. But they also included quarrying, tourist accommodation and renewable energy.
Evidence gathered showed they were providing affordable housing, supporting local employment and local services and investing locally. The report also found instances where estates were targeting the letting of homes to families with children or gifting land to local communities for recreational use.
The report said that many estate owners viewed this kind of engagement as part of the long-term support for the communities they were in rather than being paternalistic.