Submitted by Bill Fernie
28th October 2026
Land reform in Scotland can sound like an argument from another age. It conjures up images of Highland estates, wealthy landowners, crofting communities and the historic struggle over who controls the land. But the issue is much more relevant to everyday life than many people realise.
Who owns the land can influence whether a community can build affordable homes, whether a small business can expand, where renewable energy projects are developed, how much local people benefit from tourism and whether a village has the opportunity to grow.
It is therefore worth asking a simple question: should ordinary people take a greater interest in who owns Scotland and how its land is used?
The answer matters particularly now, as the Scottish Government consults on how new land reform legislation should work in practice.
A country where ownership matters
Scotland has a long and complicated history of land ownership. Although land reform has been pursued since devolution, ownership remains highly concentrated in parts of the countryside.
A Scottish Parliament briefing published in October 2026 reports that 408 landowners own half of Scotland's privately owned rural land. Community ownership has grown, but still accounts for only around 2.7% of Scotland's total land area.
These figures help explain why land reform remains controversial. Supporters argue that concentrated ownership can leave communities dependent on decisions made by a small number of owners. Critics point to the contribution estates make through employment, tourism, agriculture, conservation and the maintenance of rural landscapes. They also warn that additional regulation could discourage investment or make viable rural businesses more difficult to run.
Both sets of concerns deserve consideration. The important question is not simply whether large estates should exist, but whether Scotland's system of ownership and land management provides sufficient opportunities for communities, businesses and individuals.
The connection with housing
Housing is one of the clearest examples of why land matters.
A community may have people who want to build homes, a shortage of affordable housing and employers struggling to recruit staff. Yet suitable land may be unavailable, too expensive or held by an owner who has no immediate plans to release it.
The problem is not always the landowner. Planning permission, construction costs, infrastructure, access to roads, water and electricity, and the availability of finance can all prevent development. Land reform alone will not solve Scotland's housing shortage.
Nevertheless, the availability and price of land can make a significant difference to whether a housing project is viable.
In Caithness and Sutherland, where communities need to attract younger families and retain workers, it is reasonable to ask whether public bodies, community organisations and private owners could work together more effectively to bring suitable land forward for housing.
Could councils make better use of land they already own? Could land be made available for community-led housing or self-build projects? Could landowners be encouraged to release sites where there is a demonstrable local need?
These are practical questions, not simply ideological arguments about property rights.
Renewable energy and the local economy
Land is also central to Scotland's energy transition.
Wind farms, electricity infrastructure, battery storage, pumped-storage hydro schemes and other developments require access to land. Such projects can generate income for owners and contribute to national energy targets, but the benefits experienced by neighbouring communities may vary considerably.
Land reform raises questions about how local people are involved in decisions, whether communities receive lasting benefits and whether opportunities exist for local businesses to participate.
The same questions apply to tourism, woodland creation, nature restoration and food production. Land can generate several different kinds of value, and those interests do not always fit neatly together.
A woodland project may deliver environmental benefits but change the availability of land for farming. A renewable energy development may support the electricity system but affect views, roads and local infrastructure. A tourism development may create jobs while adding pressure to housing and services.
The challenge is to make decisions that recognise these competing interests rather than assuming that one use of land should always take priority.
What is changing in Scotland?
The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2025 has already been passed. It provides for new obligations affecting large landholdings, including land management plans, community engagement and requirements to consider reasonable requests from community bodies to lease land or establish crofts in relevant circumstances. Some provisions still require detailed regulations before they can operate.
The current consultation, published on 20 October 2026, is about how these obligations should work in practice. It asks questions about who should be involved in consultations, what meaningful engagement should involve, and how landowners should demonstrate that they have considered community views.
The consultation closes on 26 January 2027.
This is important because consultation can easily become a box-ticking exercise. A public meeting, a document on a website and an invitation to submit comments do not necessarily mean that local people have had a meaningful influence on a decision.
Equally, community engagement cannot mean that every individual receives everything they want. Landowners have legitimate interests, and decisions may involve conflicting local priorities. What matters is that people have access to relevant information, an opportunity to express their views and a clear explanation of how those views were considered.
Why should ordinary people care?
Land reform can sound remote until a particular issue affects a town or village.
A community might discover that land is available for a housing development, but nobody knows who controls it. A local organisation might want to lease a building or a piece of ground but find the process complicated. A village might want to establish a woodland, community growing project or recreation area but struggle to secure suitable land.
These are circumstances in which knowledge of ownership and the rights of communities can make a difference.
There is also a wider democratic issue. Local councils make planning decisions, but ownership and the control of land can determine which proposals are realistic in the first place. Communities cannot participate effectively if they do not know what land exists, who controls it or what opportunities may be available.
Better information about ownership, land use and land values could therefore help residents, businesses, community councils and elected representatives make more informed decisions.
Reform must work in practice
There are legitimate questions about how far government should intervene in private ownership. Poorly designed rules could create uncertainty, additional costs and delays. Some estates and farms are substantial businesses, and their continued viability matters to the rural economy.
On the other hand, the existence of private property rights does not remove the wider public interest in how land is managed, particularly where ownership decisions have major consequences for a community.
Reform should therefore be judged by its practical results. Does it help make suitable land available for housing? Does it improve opportunities for local enterprise? Does it encourage productive use of vacant or neglected sites? Does it make ownership more transparent and community engagement more meaningful?
And can it achieve these things without imposing unnecessary bureaucracy or undermining worthwhile investment?
These are questions that deserve evidence rather than slogans.
A debate that needs more public attention
The Scottish Land Commission's work has highlighted the desire for wider opportunities to own or use land, stronger local decision-making and better safeguards where ownership is highly concentrated. Its research also recognises that meaningful reform requires coordinated action rather than legislation alone.
For Caithness and Sutherland, the debate should not be confined to historic estates or disputes elsewhere in the Highlands. It should include the land needed for homes, businesses, infrastructure, community facilities and future economic development.
Ordinary people do not need to become experts in land law to take part. They can start by asking what land is available locally, who owns it, how decisions are made and whether communities have a realistic route to securing land for worthwhile projects.
The consultation offers an opportunity to raise those questions.
Land is one of Scotland's most important assets. The debate should be about more than who owns it. It should also be about how it is used, what opportunities it creates and whether the people who live alongside it have a meaningful say in its future.
Andy Wightman - Long Time Wroiter and Campaigner on land issues
One of the people who has done most to bring Scotland's landownership question into public view is researcher Andy Wightman, who runs the Who Owns Scotland database and publishes the Land Matters website.
His latest annual analysis, based on records at the end of 2025, found that 408 owners held half of Scotland's privately owned rural land. Wightman describes the continuing trend as one of “fewer and fewer owners owning more and more of Scotland”.
His argument goes beyond the number of acres held by large estates. He sees land reform as a question of power: who can make decisions about land, who has access to it and how ownership affects the ability of communities and businesses to develop.
That perspective raises questions for rural Scotland that go well beyond the traditional argument between landowners and local campaigners. If a community needs homes, workspace, infrastructure or land for a local project, how easily can it obtain what it needs? And what happens when the person or organisation controlling the land has different priorities?
Wightman's views are those of a long-standing land reform campaigner, and his proposals should be examined alongside the arguments of landowners, farmers, community organisations and independent researchers. But his research provides a valuable starting point for a wider public discussion about how Scotland's land is owned and used.
Land reform in a Net Zero Nation
Who Owns Scotland
Land Matters Andy Wightman blog
---------------------------------------------------
Useful Links
The Business Desk Land reform consultation stirs locals versus lairds debate
Scottish Government current land reform consultation
Scottish Parliament Information Centre Land Reform subject briefing
Scottish Land Commission Next steps for land reform proposals on housing ownership public land and local decision-making