Brexit presents Britain with an unprecedented opportunity to review the way the rural economy is managed, writes Christabel Edwards in response to IPPR North’s report into the rural economy
Helping somebody to fill in a blue-badge application form the other day, I came across a question relating to whether the applicant could reasonably access public transport. He looked puzzled. He was certainly able to get on a bus, and sit quite comfortably for the duration of the journey, so should he answer ‘yes?’ Typically though, it did not consider the possibility that the nearest bus stop might be three miles away, with one bus each way daily.
Often dealing with such countryside practicalities, and desperate for something positive, I found myself welcoming the IPPR North report into the rural economy post-Brexit. I still think Brexit is a really bad idea, but one silver-lining could be the unprecedented opportunity to review the way we do things. This could be of some benefit to rural Britain.
The official definition of a rural area takes into account three factors: the density of population, the composition of settlements, and proximity of settlements to one another. In population terms, 17 per cent of the United Kingdom population lives in rural areas. That includes small towns, as well as villages, hamlets and farms.
These days it is simplistic to think of the rural economy as a combination of farming and tourism. These traditional areas are still important, but there is forestry too. Then there is the booming agri-tech sector, agri-business, advanced manufacturing, and renewable energy. It may surprise some city folk to know that manufacturing accounts for the same proportion of both the rural, and urban economies. There is also a higher proportion of small-businesses than in urban or semi-urban areas.
Rural communities contributed 16.6 per cent of UK gross-value added in 2015, but suffer challenges due to remoteness, lack of investment, and the broad brush application of policies tailored for urban living. This is compounded by a general lack of understanding of what the countryside does.
Agriculture only contributes two per cent of GVA, whilst using 70 per cent of the land. This is a necessity unlikely to change, with food security becoming a key consideration post-Brexit. However, farming faces the continuing challenges of an ageing workforce, seasonal labour needs, low food prices (exacerbated by supermarket buying policies) and competition for land from housing and leisure.
Food production will always be at the forefront of any rural planning, and over the last forty years this sector has been dominated by the Common Agricultural Policy. The removal of this post-Brexit may provide a fresh opportunity to promote a more holistic view of the countryside
The CAP has been instrumental in shaping rural Britain. It was designed in the fifties to provide a stable, safe and affordable food supply. Over the years it has subsidised farm incomes, whilst latterly incentivising good environmental practice. However many see it as overly bureaucratic.
With any remaining subsidies focussed solely on food production, IPPR North proposes the transfer of existing environmental policies across to communities through ‘rural devolution deals,’ better integrating farming into the wider economy.
The devolved bodies would then be subject to a minimum obligation covering everything from flood management to decarbonisation, which would enable the shaping of a national agricultural strategy linked to local economic need, communities, environmental factors, and labour markets. However, this would have to be accompanied by increased capital spending on infrastructure.
The last is vital. What advantages the countryside enjoys are often negated by a lack of communications. Rural areas cannot shout as loudly as cities, so frequently endure poor public transport, and dangerous roads. Mobile signals can be patchy, and broadband speed lags far behind urban areas. The average across England is 24Mbit/s, but only 8Mbit/s in villages, and less in the most sparsely populated areas. A real problem for rural businesses.
All in all, the report contains much welcome strategic thinking which could benefit many rural areas. The emphasis on economic diversity is refreshing, together with investment in technology, and infrastructure. However, all remains dependent on ensuring post-Brexit Britain is protected from the worst excesses of right-wing ideologues, and this is far from certain.
———————————
Christabel Edwards is a Labour party activist. She tweets @Christabel321
You can read Forgotten opportunities: The dynamic role of the rural economy in post-Brexit Britain by IPPR North here
———————————