The problems of rural communities don't get as much media attention as urban areas - except perhaps during outbreaks of foot and mouth disease. But transport for the car-less can be inadequate, the poverty brought by high costs and low incomes very real, services more distant, isolation potentially more profound. It is just all more spreadabout and masked by green not grot.
Yesterday two major funders - the Carnegie UK Trust and Big Lottery Fund - began the public phase of their investigation of how best to support rural communities by asking: how should we spend our money.
The main research takes the form of a Carnegie Commission for Rural Community Development chaired by Lord (David) Steel of Aikwood. They have issued a Prospectus and scoping studies. Later this year the two funders will also launch a £4 million development programme.
Yesterday I was fortunate enough to attend a conference for people in rural community development in the exquisite setting of Dartington Hall. No nonsense about the surroundings matching the subject - an obsession sometimes evident among urban community workers.
The main consultative business of the conference was in two workshop sessions. In one we each contributed an anecdote about rural deprivation in order to spark conversations and from that highlight issues. This real-world story-telling produced a wealth of insights to complement the earlier formal Powerpoint presentations.
In the second round of workshops we each identified personal priorities for action, then paired up to find agreements in a process that eventually led to 14 propositions on posters around the Great Hall. We voted using green, yellow and red dots indicating first second and third preferences.
I'm not sure this process was as effective because time was tight and I think we tended towards "more money for people like us" solutions. Maybe we should have worked on some typical rural scenarios rather than just our own preferences. Anyway, you can see the results in the picture gallery here. Sorry one poster is unreadable - maybe another participant can remember what it was.
I hope my hosts - Carnegie and the Big Lottery Fund - don't see this as premature disclosure, but rather a small example of how these days participants in consultation processes can help move things forward too. I believe the Commission is interested in extending their work through online consultation, so I offer this item as a small thank you for their hospitality.
We can't know at this stage how far our suggestions will influence how the Trust and Fund will spend their money - but it's nice to be asked and entertained as well. The Commission will shortly send its members around the UK and Europe to canvass more opinions, so if you want to have a say get in touch with the Trust.
Comments