Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Land reform – ‘Is there really a public appetite for land ownership?’

Land reform – ‘Is there really a public appetite for land ownership?’

What is land for? Who should own it? And how should it be looked after?

They sound like simple enough questions, but the far from straightforward answers will be at the heart of a timely debate taking place in the East Neuk of Fife.

Professor Roger Crofts, convener of the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s (RSE) response group set up to consider the Scottish Government’s land reform proposals, will host the public gathering in Pittenweem.

The issue is usually thought of in the context of the Highlands and there have been a series of high profile community buy-outs in the remote north and west of the country. However, Prof Crofts, the former chief executive of Scottish Natural Heritage, says the new proposals brought forward for consultation in June could affect rural communities as far as the Lowlands and result in ramifications for land use and landlord-tenant relations throughout Scotland.

Perhaps the key question should be: “Is there really a public appetite for land ownership?”

The Scottish Government thinks so. When Nicola Sturgeon set out the land reform proposals shortly after becoming First Minister in November of last year, much was made of the sound bite that “432 people own half of Scotland”.

She said at the time that “Scotland’s land must be an asset that benefits the many, not the few”.

But Professor Crofts said he was not convinced it was an issue which troubled much of the population.

“It’s clear to me that whilst the government is debating the issue and how it might impact on the Highlands, there is not an issue in places like the Borders and Dumfries,” he said.

“I do not see communities in Fife and Angus wanting to own great swathes of land.”

The proposed Land Reform Bill would end tax relief for shooting estates and force the sale of land if owners are blocking economic development.

The government says it wants an end to “unfair” tax exemptions and has pledged to use the additional money raised to treble the Scottish Land Fund – which is used to support community buyouts – from £3million this year to £10m a year from 2016.

However, critics have labelled the proposals a “land grab” and landownclaim re-introducing the rates could make some sporting estates unprofitable and force gamekeepers out of work.

In its submission, the RSE has acknowledged land is one of Scotland’s most significant assets, delivering a vast range of goods and services that are crucial to local communities, wider society and the country’s natural heritage.

However, the body is concerned that the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill “fails to place land reform within the wider context of land use.”

It says that until there is a comprehensive picture of the objectives of land use in Scotland and until the levers and policies that shape it align to incentivise responsible stewardship, the impact of reform will be unclear.

Professor Crofts said the Scottish Government seemed ideologically driven in so far as it was trying to redress the balance and “injustice” of the Highland Clearances. And yet the reality was that much of the Highlands at that time could barely sustain the impoverished residents forced to make way for sheep, and is still classed as poor land today.

He said he would kick off the East Neuk debate with three questions.

“The first is what is land for and I will remind people it provides benefits and services, food, timber and clean water. The posh word is it provides ‘eco system services’ and is important in its own right, what we call environmental capital.

“The second question is who should own it? We have such a variety of owners large, small, foreign, local. We can’t point the finger and say one is good or bad. I will give a couple of examples in the Cairngorms.

“The third question is should we not be talking about how land is looked after, what we call stewardship? If we regard land as for the public good, then how should we be looking after it in the long term so that it remains useful and attractive for future generations?”

*East Neuk debates takes place at St John’s, Pittenweem, on Thursday November 12 at 7.30pm. Admission is free but email Christopher@smout.org to secure a ticket for the event.