Rural Deprivation in 21st Century Britain

Rural deprivation continues to be manifest in our communities across the Peak District. It is not always obvious because of the local environment, with wealthier neighbours living side by side with families in real poverty and because of close knit communities where speaking out about deprivation is difficult. Studies carried out over the last twenty years, have consistently found that about a quarter of the rural population live in poverty. The latest research carried out by the Commission for Rural Communities (2006), with contributions from PDRDF, highlights the continuing problem of identifying and then challenging rural deprivation.

Challenging official statistics

The early work of PDRDF and the Peak Park Trust (in 1980s and 90s) identified a consistent problem in discussions about rural need. Official statistics seemed to point to relative prosperity in the Peak District whilst local evidence was more mixed. The smaller pockets of deprivation and the different dimensions of need were simply not being picked up by traditional surveys.

This initial research and publications work carried out by PDRDF produced evidence to highlight rural deprivation, how it is manifest and how resources should be targeted to meet the needs of isolated, marginalised rural communities. The promotional work to raise the profile of rural deprivation as an issue to be addressed by policy and decision makers, at a local, regional and national level, was a critical part of our early work.

Over the past decade, this work has been successful in that rural deprivation is now an accepted fact amongst policy makers and the statutory sector. There is a developing understanding of its impact and how to address it.

So have we done our job?

PDRDF consider that there is still more to be done. Based on our recent practical and partnership working, we can see that rural deprivation now registers in the minds of policy and decision makers, however it is still not being fully integrated into policy development. In particular, it is not integrated into the implementation of those policies on the ground.

To quote a recent ippr north publication (A new Rural Agenda; 2006): “…despite improvements in recent years and assumptions in some quarters that there are few social and economic problems in the countryside, we have much to do to achieve a progressive, fair and equal society in Britain’s rural areas. Levels of pensioner poverty remain stubbornly high, a lack of access to public services can have disastrous consequences on the most vulnerable, and local communities have little power to address social problems in their midst. Major progress is necessary.”

Anecdotally, at this stage, it appears that the policy focus still remains urban with rural tacked on. For example, with the County-level local management of statutory services, through the Local Area Agreement, hidden rural deprivation is competing against highly-visible, deprived urban areas. Rural communities are being seen as an ‘issue’ that warrants additional resources as opposed to being at the heart of all policy-making and implementation, alongside our urban neighbours. .

Research, Indices of Deprivation and Policy

From its inception the Forum has focused on gathering facts, figures, qualitative and quantitative evidence of rural deprivation. In 2000 we published a report following a MORI survey on the indices of deprivation and how they are relevant to rural areas. This vital work has led to a re think of the way in which indices are calculated and the effect the current system has on rural communities.

Despite this, the indices still largely favour urban areas of deprivation, to quote: "While sophisticated indices of multiple deprivation have been developed over recent years, most of these are based on concentrations of problems in particular places. This means that they tend to direct attention towards metropolitan spaces and away from rural areas where the poor and non-poor are less strongly segregated". (Paul Milbourne, Poverty, social exclusion and welfare in rural Britain, 2006).

Importance of local participation Without local participation, the connection between practice and policy will remain at a distance, leading to ill-informed policies and frustration at community level at being misunderstood by those in power. The voice of the most disadvantaged is rarely heard in crucial decision making circles, while lip service is often made to reports writing up their experiences. Through the Forum’s working groups we provide an avenue for local people to work alongside professionals and decision makers, to both influence policy and seek practical solutions. Key to this work is strategic partnership working, which keeps rural deprivation on the agenda of leading decision makers. PDRDF continues to develop strategic partners’ understanding of rural deprivation and how decisions impact on rural communities.

There is, therefore a job to do to demonstrate through evidence-based research the true picture of deprivation in the area, and building a framework for measuring indicators of local rural poverty. The Peak District Rural Deprivation Forum aims to continue its work alongside those experiencing deprivation to get voices heard and change on the ground in our rural communities across the Peak District. .