A new report reveals a disconnect between the work Development Trusts are doing and the recognition they receive for it

Development Trusts across Scotland are quietly delivering Community Learning and Development (CLD) work—they don’t always realise it. The findings from the research done by the Development Trusts Association Scotland (DTAS) and CLD Standards Council Scotland, which surveyed 59 DTAS members to understand how they engage with CLD.

The Numbers Tell a Story

The findings reveal both the scale of unrecognised work and the desire for change:

• 52% of Development Trusts are already running CLD activities, even without labelling them as such
• 92% feel their CLD work doesn’t get the recognition it deserves
• 78% hadn’t heard of the CLD Standards Council before this survey
• Just 5% have staff registered with the CLD Standards Council
• No DTAS members currently hold the CLD Standard Mark

When projected across DTAS’s full membership, this suggests around 52% Development Trusts are delivering CLD work, with roughly 93% wanting better recognition for their efforts.

What’s Actually Happening on the Ground

The disconnect isn’t about a lack of activity—it’s about recognition and connection. Development Trusts are running digital skills workshops, youth volunteering programmes, community-led planning initiatives, and managing local assets for public benefit. These activities align with CLD’s three core areas: adult learning, youth work, and community development.

For example, The Langholm Initiative’s Tarras Valley project, which focuses on outdoor youth education through leadership and confidence-building programmes, is clearly labelled as youth work and is recognised as such. Or Appin Community Development Trust, which operates community transport and care services that support adult learning and community development, though they don’t currently classify these as CLD activities.

The Third Sector Recognition Gap

Perhaps most telling is that 92% of respondents believe their CLD work should be better recognised. As one Trust put it: “Development Trusts are filling the void left by shrinking local authority CLD services. That contribution should be visible.”

This isn’t just about validation—it’s about ensuring the third sector gets proper recognition for its role in delivering CLD across Scotland. When community organisations can’t articulate their CLD impact, this can lead to challenges with:

• Securing funding
• Policy development
• Partnership opportunities
• Professional development

How Development Trusts Can Start Getting Recognition

Step 1: Look at Your Work Through a CLD Lens

Many Development Trusts are already delivering CLD without realising it:

• Digital literacy programmes
• Employability training
• Youth development activities
• Community capacity building
• Asset-based community development
• Family learning initiatives

Step 2: Learn the Language

Start using Community Learning and Development terminology when describing your work. This helps funders and partners recognise your contribution to Scotland’s CLD landscape.

Step 3: Connect with CLD Professionals

Reach out to your local authority CLD team and the CLD Standards Council. These should be natural partners in strengthening community learning across your local area.

Step 4: Document Your Impact

Begin measuring learning outcomes, not just activities:

• How many people gained new skills?
• What confidence changes occurred?
• Which community assets were strengthened?

Step 5: Explore Formal Recognition

Consider CLD Standards Council membership for relevant staff and investigate the CLD Standards Mark for your organisation. This formal recognition opens doors to new opportunities for individuals, but also for your local community.

What Others Could Do

For Funders and Policymakers:

• Include third sector organisations in CLD mapping and planning
• Ensure funding criteria acknowledge the full range of CLD providers
• Support professional development for community sector practitioners

For CLD Professionals:

• Reach out to Development Trusts in your area
• Share resources and expertise to strengthen community-led CLD work
• Advocate for third sector inclusion in formal CLD networks

Voices from the Sector

The research captured reflections from Trust representatives about the current situation:

“Most Trusts deliver CLD work without labelling it as such. DTAS could help by identifying these efforts and promoting them collectively.”

“The sector lacks cohesion. Many Trusts don’t view CLD as part of their mission, and the gap between statutory and community-led CLD leads to inefficiency. We need better alignment.”

One CLD-qualified Trust manager noted: “I’m working to help our staff recognise the CLD aspects of their work, though it’s an ongoing process.”

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: How do I know if my Development Trust is doing CLD work?

If you’re running skills training, youth programmes, or community development activities that help people learn and grow, you’re likely doing CLD work. The three core areas are adult learning, youth work, and community development.

Q: What are the benefits of formal CLD recognition?

Access to new funding streams, professional development opportunities, stronger partnerships with statutory providers, and increased credibility with funders and policymakers.

Q: Do we need CLD qualifications to do this work?

Not necessarily, but formal qualifications help with recognition and can improve practice. Many excellent CLD practitioners develop expertise through experience and professional development.

What Happens Next

The overwhelming consensus for greater recognition creates a clear need for action. DTAS and the CLD Standards Council have started to develop a roadmap for strengthening engagement with Development Trusts and developing practical guidance for gaining recognition for the work they’re already doing.

The message from the sector is clear: it’s time to bring Development Trusts’ CLD work out of the shadows and give it the recognition and support it deserves.

As one respondent summarised: “Recognising our CLD work might help secure core funding, especially as local authority CLD services decline.”

The research shows that Development Trusts aren’t just willing partners in Scotland’s CLD landscape—they’re already essential players delivering Community Learning and Development across communities nationwide.

Read the full “Community Learning and Development (CLD) in Development Trusts” research report for detailed findings and recommendations.

The Development Trusts Association Scotland is a member of the Scottish Community Coalition on Energy (alongside Community Energy Scotland and Community Land Scotland) which seeks to secure a Fair Energy Deal for Scottish communities.

The group is advocating to maximise the positive impacts of the renewables revolution by creating more opportunities for community-owned energy and putting Community Wealth Building principles at the heart of wider energy policy and economic transformation.

With the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections on the horizon, we are calling on parties to commit to enabling and supporting increased community ownership and shared ownership of new and existing electricity and heat infrastructure, and fair distribution of the wealth that is being generated and consolidated through renewables.

As such, as part of the SCCE, we are publishing our manifesto recommendations which are informed by the needs of our members, to overcome barriers and unlock benefits for the climate, communities and local economies across the country.

Read the full manifesto here: Recommended manifesto policies – Scottish Community Coalition on Energy

The DTAS AGM is taking place on Tuesday 26^th August 2025 at 10am at Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow.

Here are  the AGM papers :

– Agenda: Item 1 – AGM 2025 Agenda

– Minutes of 2024 AGM: Item 3 – 2024 AGM Minutes

– DTAS accounts to 31^st March 2025: Item 4 – DTAS Full Accounts 2024-2025

– Board of Trustees nominations for 2025-26 including trustee profiles: Item 5 – Board nominations 2025-26

The AGM is part of the DTAS conference running from 26^th and 27^th August 2025. Bookings are now closed. If you wish to attend the AGM only, please contact info@dtascot.org.uk.

We want to share a very exciting report that highlights the fantastic projects carried out by some of our members through the Pockets and Prospects Programme between December 2022 and January 2025.

Click here to read the Pockets and Prospects Impact Report 2025.

Funded by the Scottish Government, the programme aimed to mitigate the effects of poverty and build community capacity. The fund supported a community-led approach to addressing issues by providing community anchor organisations the resource to support local groups and/or deliver essential support in partnership.

We are always keen to share the impressive work our members do and this report highlights some of that. The report found that 26 organisations from across Scotland were awarded funding spanning over four key themes: young people and families; health, wellbeing and life skills; community engagement and social inclusion; and food and fuel poverty.

With an average experience rating of 4.96/5, the flexibility of the programme has allowed groups to adapt to emerging needs within their communities and take a holistic approach to meet those needs. The diverse and emotional testimonials included in the report highlight the centrality of the fund to the continued delivery of these essential support services.

Unfortunately, the funding for this programme has now come to its end. Given the extensive impact it has had on some of the most vulnerable households and individuals within recipient communities, its end will be widely felt. Many groups who have used the funding to meet the extraordinary and growing demand for essential support around access to food, civic advice, childcare, employment support and more, may have to reduce the scope of their service provision. With community anchor organisations around the country facing rising costs and cuts to grant funding, flexible funds such as Pockets and Prospects were essential to fund their core services.

It is evident from the case studies, testimonials, and data highlighted in the report that both community anchor organisations and the communities they serve are immensely grateful to be in receipt of a fund like Pockets and Prospects. With its flexibility the fund has allowed communities to use it to meet their changing needs and support the provision of the most essential services within an increasingly challenging economic context.

Click here to read the Pockets and Prospects Impact Report 2025.

Out of a personal passion for sustainability and a desire to improve staff engagement with environmental issues, I took on the responsibility of delivering DTAS’ environmental strategy in Autumn 2024.

In October 2024, I reviewed and updated the environmental strategy to ensure reflection of latest policy and legislative requirements; and expanded upon our key environmental action areas (detailed below).

Since then, we have made significant progress in our carbon reporting by establishing our baseline emissions for 2024, and have begun implementing a detailed environmental action plan for 2025 – 2030.

As an organisation, we are excited to make meaningful strides towards reducing our emissions and use this as an opportunity to improve our internal operations, whilst also focussing on creating an environmentally aware work culture in which staff are encouraged and supported to reduce the environmental impact of their work.

Background

In 2019, the Scottish Government pledged Scotland to reach Net Zero by 2045. This is a legally binding declaration that requires a rapid transformation across all sectors, and it is the responsibility of Development Trusts Association Scotland (DTAS) to help meet this target through emission reductions.

DTAS’ journey to Net Zero

Our own journey to net zero will be made up of understanding our organisational emissions which can be improved through policies and practices, our staff and their behaviour. We will then consider how DTAS can support our membership to move towards net zero, as we feel one of our biggest opportunities comes from our membership network and the work we and they can do to reach communities and take collective action in emission reduction.

Our Environmental Strategy has identified the following key action areas for us to reach net zero:

• Carbon reporting

DTAS commits to develop a full understanding of how to quantify and track our environmental impacts, as well as reviewing our targets and policy regularly to ensure we are on track.

• Procurement

DTAS commits to evaluating our procurement process and take forward suppliers that provide products and services which align with our environmental policy, particularly in relation to carbon emissions and minimising waste.

• Staff Behaviour Change

DTAS commits to raise awareness of environmental matters, implement policies and encourage staff to play an active part in addressing them.

• Membership Support

DTAS recognises many of our members have knowledge and experience of carbon saving measures and we commit to learn from these members and support other members with their net zero journey.

• DTAS Office

DTAS commits to improving the sustainability of the head office, including improving waste management and energy efficiency.

You can read our full DTAS Environmental Strategy here.

Our baseline emissions

Early this year, I calculated DTAS’ baseline emissions for the annual year of 2024, marking a significant step forward in our carbon reporting processes.

You can read more about our baseline emissions, net zero targets and plans to reduce our carbon footprint in our DTAS Carbon Reduction Plan 2025.

We plan to review the progress we have made annually to ensure we remain on track to achieve our net zero targets.

We love to collaborate and share learning. If your organisation is on a similar net zero path and would like to chat, please get in touch (annie@dtascot.org.uk).

The planned exponential growth of renewable energy and associated net zero developments present a huge opportunity for communities to secure financial stability and control within a landscape of reduced and piecemeal public funding. Although many of our members are in receipt of community benefit funds (CBFs), current practices do not place communities at the centre, and many are struggling with inconsistent approaches from developers, a lack of capacity to properly engage in negotiations and exclusion from decision-making processes.  

With this in mind, DTAS welcomed the opportunity to respond on behalf of our members to the Scottish Government’s consultation on Community Benefits from Net Zero Energy Developments. We made sure that our members’ voices were not just included but drove the conversation by conducting a member-wide survey which received over 60 responses and holding a member-only discussion event. 

During these discussions our member’s stressed the need to strengthen the Good Practice Principles for onshore wind and extend that to offshore renewables and other forms of net zero technologies, consider a national distribution of community benefits, and increase the amount of shared and community ownership of renewable energy.  

What Our Members Shared 

In our December 2024 survey and March 2025 consultation event, members spoke clearly and with purpose.  Here’s what we heard: 

• CBFs are essential: Almost a quarter of our members already receive CBFs and use it to support everything from housing to youth work to local climate action. Those that do not receive such vital funding noted that it would make a monumental difference to the services they can provide for their communities.  

• The system isn’t working for everyone: Members highlighted inconsistent developer practice and limited capacity to engage in complex negotiations within some communities. Meaning that they often lose out on opportunities or struggle to secure the best deal.  

• Local democratic control.  Communities are best placed to decide how funds are spent; however, this is not always the case, and many members voiced challenges they have with developer-imposed conditions on the use of CBFs. Communities must also be properly supported and recognised as equal partners to participate in decision-making. 

• Full and Shared community ownership of renewable developments has strong support, but barriers such as finance, legal complexity and a lack of early engagement make it out of reach for most.  

What DTAS Is Calling For 

Grounded in member voices and feedback, we’re advocating for a more transparent, consistent and community-led system, involving: 

• Mandatory CBFs for all technologies—onshore, offshore, and beyond: with mandatory reporting, and audit by the SG to check that developers are complying with GPPs and that communities can realise their priorities. 

• A meaningful benchmark value: We propose a minimum of 5% of gross revenue per year for offshore wind. For onshore technologies we recommend a common method for calculating CB, as a proportion of revenue and including a CB floor with a guarantee of £X MW per year (this should be above the current £5,000 MW amount). These benchmarks should be index-linked and increase every year in line with inflation. 

• Balancing local impact and national need: while member opinions were divided on the issue of national distribution, through discussions many recognised the inequities within the current system and the benefit of a mechanism for regional and national distribution if it retained local control and did not reduce funding for directly impacted communities. 

• Stronger Good Practice Principles, with local communities in the lead.  

• Greater support and finance for full and shared ownership opportunities and introducing a requirement for developers to offer credible shared ownership to communities.  

• Local authority involvement: members were wary of allowing local authorities to manage funds and had mixed views of other intermediaries managing or distributing CBFs. The core principle was that well-resourced and funded community anchor organisations would be best places to represent their communities. 

• We’re also backing a Scottish Community Wealth Fund that could help communities across the country to invest in long-term assets and support a just, equitable transition. With the caveat that communities must be included in this decision, and local impact is still prioritised. 

At the heart of our members’ work is local democracy in action, which is why our response emphasises the need to strengthening local democracy through local democratic reforms.  

Development trusts are accountable to their communities. They listen, plan, deliver—and they know what works. Our consultation responses make it clear: funding decisions must be rooted in community-led governance, not imposed externally by developers or local authorities. 

To deliver on this community-led governance development trusts must be properly resourced and staffed, with long-term secure and sustainable funding. By investing in community capacity, we will deliver better outcomes and strengthen the foundations of local democracy and achieve community wealth building goals across Scotland.  

Ultimately, DTAS is of the view that community or shared ownership of on and offshore renewables is the best option to benefit communities the most.  Private developers’ primary responsibility is to increase profit for their shareholders, not to our communities. Local people stand to benefit the most if we own our energy infrastructure, but we also recognise and will lobby for improvements in the current CBF models.  We will continue to push for an approach that matches our members’ ambition, with the structures, resources, and trust to ensure that renewables deliver not just clean energy, but lasting community benefit.  

We hope that the points we have put forth in this consultation response will lead to significant progress towards our vision of a fairer, greener, energy system that puts power in the hands of people.  

Read our full response here:

DTAS Consultation Response – CBFs from Net Zero Energy Developments

Read the summaries from our member survey and event here: 

DTAS CBF and Shared Ownership Survey 2024 Findings Full Report

DTAS CBF Consultation Event Summary 2025

We also support this information that is included within this consultation response from Strathclyde Institute for Sustainable Studies – Enhancing Community Benefit from Community CBFs

– Pauline Smith
Chief Executive, Development Trusts Association Scotland 

Last month, DTAS Debates welcomed members to discuss the undertaking of housing projects. Amid a national housing crisis, what is the role of Development Trusts in addressing the housing crisis in their communities?

With the colossal rises in property prices, short term lets and the huge increases in second home ownership across the country, communities are dealing firsthand with the harsh consequences of the shortage of affordable houses. DTAS members are listening to the concerns of their residents and are increasingly delivering solutions to alleviate these challenges.

The debate brought together a panel of DTAS members and academics: Dr Gareth James (the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing), Ewen Mclachlan (Assynt Development Trust), David Campbell (Shapinsay Development Trust) and Margaret Whitelaw (Lenzie Community Development Trust). This created a varied discussion, with the current Scottish Government housing policy explained with rural, urban and island case studies of community led housing initiatives. Each participant brought together a unique perspective, illustrating how the housing crisis has affected their communities and demographics.

Housing Emergencies and National Policy Dr. Gareth James gave background information to CaCHE, their areas of research and involvement as Cross-Party Group Secretariat for Housing. Gavin highlighted how a staggering 13 of 32 local authorities have declared housing emergencies in Scotland. He spelled out
that the rising pressure on homeless services, a dwindling supply on affordable housing and rent rises have all contributed to regional housing crises. In terms of current policy, the Housing Scotland Bill (at Stage 1 in Parliament) focuses on rent control and tenant rights.

Meanwhile, doubts linger over whether the Affordable Housing Supply Programme will meet its target of 110,000 new affordable homes between 2021-2032.

Barriers to Housing in Remote Scotland

Ewen McLachlan highlighted the acute housing issues in remote areas such as Assynt in the Northwest. With this region of Scotland suffering a severe depopulation crisis, Ewen presented the opportunity of building 1000 new homes across the Northwest Sutherland and Coigach in strengthening communities and stimulating local economies. At present, holiday rentals and Airbnbs price out locals of homes and local government housing investment is scarce compared to urban areas of the local authority. He argued, “We need government action to free up land, stop applying urban planning conditions to remote rural and island community led housing developments and allow our communities to thrive.”

Island Solutions and Successes

Davie focused on the benefits of community-led housing on the island of Shapinsay in Orkney. He put down a lot of the successes of housing on existing resources. The delivered projects have included renovation of homes, building of new homes and repurposing derelict properties for those who need it.

Having strong connections with farmers has allowed the Development Trust to use small plots of private land for developments. Similarly, working closely with contractors from mainland Orkney has allowed projects to go ahead smoothly.

Davie did acknowledge the benefits of having a supportive local authority: with allocated monies from second home taxes, the development trust is given extra resources to deliver projects. In turn, there are effective mechanisms in place from the council to ensure homes are allocated equitably among families, elderly residents and key workers. Whilst this is not the case for many local authority areas, it shows the power of effective partnerships possible with statutory powers. Davie stressed the need for successful relationship building, engaging the community and being proactive in identifying opportunities for home ownership and rental.

Urban Innovation to Housing Crises

Finally, Margaret presented Lenzie’s challenges with housing from an urban perspective, illustrating how higher land values and private developers are pricing residents out of the market. Especially with many older residents living alone, this has broken up residents’ ability to easily socialise and connect with their community.

She explained that Lenzie CDT are exploring Cohousing to address isolation, improve social care and help ease the area’s housing market. Cohousing communities are intentional communities, created and run by their residents.

Residents come together to manage their community, share activities, and regularly eat together. The development trust is currently in the process of acquiring an old school building for a project but is finding severe barriers to progress.

Strict housing regulations and a lack of available funding has meant Lenzie CDT has struggled to push through this innovative approach to housing. Scotland is an outlier in the UK, with just one cohousing project with England having over thirty successful projects.

Questions from the participants included the restraints of GDPR in Development Trusts identifying empty homes in their areas, the structural issues in pushing forward solutions to housing and the state of Scotland’s housing agencies with the closure of Rural Housing Scotland. Community benefit funding inequality was mentioned too in relation to the communities who have the capacity to deliver housing projects.

Closing Remarks

Davie called for a global toolbox approach to housing, drawing on shared learning and successful models from local, regional, and international contexts. He also highlighted the importance of partnership working, encouraging Development Trusts to link up with relevant organisations and sectors to combine resources and expertise.

Ewen emphasised the state’s capacity to rebuild housing stock, calling for sustained pressure on national and local governments to make meaningful investments.

Gareth argued for an emergency response to match the declared housing emergency, arguing that Scotland excels at creating policy but struggles with effective delivery. Additionally, he suggested that while there have been calls for a national housing body, it is essential to balance centralised resources with local autonomy, empowering grassroots communities to lead housing initiatives effectively.

Margaret urged councillors and decision-makers to adapt regulations and planning frameworks to accommodate innovative housing solutions. She also pointed out that while individuals within systems often recognise the benefits of novel approaches, structural barriers and rigid policies prevent progress.

If you would like to come along to our next DTAS Debate, on Wednesday the 19th of February, we will be discussing Community Engagement,

Representation and Inclusion in Development Trusts! You can sign up for this member-only event on our Eventbrite page now.

DTAS delivers a diverse range of events which are accessed by full, associate, provisional and aspiring members; as well as intermediary organisations, local authorities and clients of the Democratic Finance programme and Community Ownership Support Service.

In line with DTAS’ 3-Year Strategy and Membership Benefits, our event programme strives to provide those working and volunteering in the community sector with:

• Networking opportunities
• Improved organisational capacity
• Opportunity to influence policy
• Knowledge sharing
• Tailored advice and support
• Learning and skills improvement

DTAS delivered 68 events between January and December in 2024, and were attended by 1484 people.

View our PDF DTAS Event Report 2024.pdf for a deeper dive into our event statistics, a timeline of all events delivered and feature pieces on particular programmes of events.

The latest DTAS Debates session delved into a complex and timely issue: how Development Trusts can harness natural capital markets to benefit their communities.

As natural capital markets continue to grow, DTs find themselves at a crossroads, balancing opportunities for financial and ecological gain with the potential risks of corporate exploitation, inequity, and greenwashing.

The event brought together a panel of practitioners and academics: Professor Mark Reed (Huntly Development Trust and SRUC), Dr. Josh Doble (Community Land Scotland), Rowan Aitchison (Tayvallich Initiative), and Ewen Mclachlan (Assynt Development Trusts). The discussion highlighted both the transformative potential of natural capital projects and the challenges that communities must navigate to ensure that benefits are truly equitable and sustainable.

Several panellists shared practical case studies of community engagement with natural capital markets, specifically spotlighted was Assynt DT’s participation in the North-west 2045 Rural Land Use Partnership. The trust’s natural capital audit revealed that the carbon stored in their land was worth an estimated £17 billion in social value, providing a powerful tool for community empowerment. Their efforts to engage youth, collaborate with landowners, and build local capacity show how natural capital projects can provide real social and environmental benefits when communities maintain control.

Key Themes and Challenges

Uncertainty and Regulation

• One of the primary concerns raised was the infancy of natural capital markets. Panellists noted that these markets are still developing, with significant uncertainty on the long-term social and environmental impacts.
• Speculative carbon credit sales, referred to as pending issuances units, were specifically mentioned as particularly risky initiatives in such a new market.
• There is a pressing need for clear standards and regulations to ensure transparency and trustworthiness in these markets, with the British Standards Institution (BSI) aiming to provide accreditation from 2025.

Ethical Concerns and Greenwashing

• Panellists repeatedly emphasised the ethical dilemmas inherent in carbon credit trading. The risk of companies using carbon credits as a “license to pollute”, while failing to make meaningful reductions in their own emissions was mentioned several times.
• Panellists also questioned the theoretical underpinnings of such a market, positing the question of if capitalist mechanisms can effectively address environmental problems created by capitalism.

Community Control and Land Ownership

• Legislative levers that guarantee community decision-making and ownership were called for, ensuring that communities can retain control over projects.
• Having final control regarding the sale of carbon credits, to avoid selling to companies with questionable social and environmental practices was specifically mentioned.
• Natural capital markets have already begun to affect land prices, with “Green Lairds” driving up costs and complicating community land ownership.
• Panellists emphasised that for natural capital to benefit communities equitably, it must be rooted in land reform and community ownership of land.
• While landowning communities are currently better positioned to take advantage of these markets, non-landowning communities can still benefit through the development of community benefit frameworks.

What Needs to Happen Next?

The panellists left no doubt that, while the potential benefits of natural capital markets are significant, much work remains to ensure these benefits are shared equitably.

• Strengthen Regulations and Standards: Governments must establish regulations that prevent greenwashing and ensure community control over natural capital resources. These regulations should also clarify environmental and social outcomes, allowing communities to assess the true long-term impact of projects.
• Build Community Capacity: Communities need knowledge and resources to engage with natural capital markets meaningfully. This includes training, access to expert advice, and the development of internal governance structures that can handle the complexity of these projects.
• Foster Collaboration: Successful natural capital projects will require partnerships between DTs, landowners, environmental NGOs, and access to patient capital (i.e. philanthropists and pension funds).
• Ensure Community Control: Legislation that protects community rights over who can purchase carbon credits is essential. Communities must have a say in how their resources are used and who benefits from them, ensuring that local social and environmental rights are respected.

Conclusion: Towards a Just and Sustainable Future

The DTAS Debates on natural capital revealed both the promise and the peril of this emerging market. While the potential for regenerating communities on a wider scale as exemplified by Assynt’s case is considerable, so too are the risks. By advocating for stronger regulations, building internal capacity in DTs, and ensuring that communities retain control over their natural resources, we can navigate these challenges.

The message is clear: natural capital markets must be approached with care, thoughtfulness, and a commitment to community-led solutions. As Ewen McLachlan aptly put it, “Nothing about us without us is for us.”

For DTs, the path forward lies in collaboration, control, and capacity-building—ensuring that communities, not external interests, remain at the heart of this new green economy.

The Development Trusts Association Scotland’s conference gathered hundreds of representatives from community anchor organizations, local and national government, and other community sector stakeholders to address key issues impacting the development trust movement. On the first day, a widely attended debate on Local Democracy in Scotland featured Tom Sneddon (Carluke Development Trust), Lesley Riddoch (Journalist), Alastair McIntosh (Author), and Ivan McKee (MSP), who all demonstrated a strong commitment to enhancing local democracy through thoughtful devolution, strategic resource allocation, and active community involvement.

Below is a summary of each panellists main points and an overview of the core themes discussed:

Tom Sneddon:

• Emphasized the importance of local democracy that reflects community diversity through deliberative and participative methods.
• Stressed the need for innovative models of local investment and the importance of the Scottish Government seriously resourcing and investing in local powers and Community Anchor Organizations.
• Suggested combining community councils and Development Trusts into a new body called “Development Councils,” which would require statutory powers and per capita funding.
• Highlighted that the National Planning Framework offers opportunities but lacks resources, placing pressure on community organizations and local councils.
• Called for local communities to develop their own financial architecture and solutions.

Lesley Riddoch:

• Questioned what an empowered community looks like and the effectiveness of current structures like community councils.
• Criticized Scotland’s large units of local democracy and called for a more decentralized and practical structure with adequate resources and a clear mandate.
• Advocated for citizens’ assemblies to gather local evidence and guide decision-making processes.
• Brought up the point that we must focus on communities that are being left behind, those without resources.
• Argued for fairer taxation and funding models, drawing on examples from Sweden and Norway, where local engagement and multiple roles within communities lead to better outcomes.
• Highlighted the importance of building trust within communities and enabling structures that support it.
• Highlighted the build local campaign launch.

Ivan McKee:

• Discussed the necessity of balancing regional efficiency with local empowerment, focusing on the role of government support and how far powers should be devolved.
• Recognized the need for a toolkit approach to account for varying community capacities, emphasizing that some communities can move faster than others.
• Acknowledged the Scottish Government’s commitment to moving quickly on local government reform but cautioned that structural changes take longer and cost more than expected.
• Highlighted the need to empower existing community councils, which are often hyper-local but under-resourced.
• Addressed the challenges of implementing decisions made through citizens’ assemblies and the importance of carefully navigating relationships with local authorities.

Alastair McIntosh:

• Stressed that local government reform must be meaningful at the individual level, particularly in small communities.
• Highlighted the Isle of Eigg as an example of successful local governance and individual responsibility.
• Emphasized the importance of community organizers in driving local government reform and the need for communities to support their representatives.
• Discussed the importance of building trust within communities and recognizing the challenges of conflict and burnout among community organizers.
• Advocated for political will, technical and financial support, and community desire to drive successful local governance reforms.

Core themes:

• Devolution of Powers: There was a consensus on the need to devolve powers further down to local levels, ensuring that these powers reflect the diversity and specific needs of communities. This includes considering vertical devolvement (from central to local governments) and horizontal alignment among local entities like the NHS and local authorities.
• Resource Allocation and Investment: Emphasis on the need for serious resourcing and investment in local powers and Community Anchor Organisations. For example, by implementing fairer taxation systems.
• Local Government Reform: There was a call for meaningful local government reform, focusing on individual and community levels. This reform should empower smaller, remote communities and consider models beyond traditional community councils.
• Citizens’ Assemblies: Several speakers and audience members supported the idea of using citizens’ assemblies to gather community input and make decisions. These assemblies could ensure that local voices shape governance structures and policies.
• Building Trust: Trust was highlighted as a critical component in local governance. This includes building trust between communities and elected officials, as well as within communities themselves.
• Youth Involvement: There was a recognition of the need to involve young people in local governance, as seen in examples from Norway, where young councillors are common.
• Addressing Bureaucracy and Accountability: Focus on the need to address the bureaucratic barriers within local authorities and public agencies that hinder local accountability and effective governance.

Following the panel debate participants had the chance to discuss these themes more in depth in a participatory workshop. The round-table workshop re-emphasised the importance of themes such as community engagement, models of community ownership, cooperation with existing public bodies, with specific examples given by development trust officers, volunteers and board members.

Overall, both sessions highlighted the urgent need for systemic reform in local governance, and the ability of Development Trusts to take on responsibilities if properly resourced. With significant political will Democracy Matters 2 can contribute to a pathway toward a more empowered, community-driven model of democracy in Scotland.