NPPP 2022 SEA Scoping Report: Topic 8 Population and Human Health

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan, SEA scop­ing Baseline inform­a­tion Top­ic 8 — Pop­u­la­tion and human health

Con­tents

Ques­tions for con­sulta­tion author­it­ies 1 Con­text 2 Pop­u­la­tion inform­a­tion to 2018 2 Pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tions 7 House­hold inform­a­tion 8 Eco­nom­ic activ­ity in the pop­u­la­tion 10 Travel to work inform­a­tion 15 Health, hous­ing and depriva­tion inform­a­tion 17 Recre­ation oppor­tun­it­ies 20 Pro­posed SEA object­ives 22

Ques­tions for con­sulta­tion authorities

1. Is there any­thing miss­ing from the Top­ic baseline?
2. Are there any errors in what is presented?
3. Are there any new ini­ti­at­ives, research pro­jects, plans, pro­grammes or strategies or oth­er things that will be report­ing / imple­men­ted over the next 12 – 18 months that are rel­ev­ant to the Top­ic, which may need to be included as the SEA progresses?

Con­text Because data does not tend to be col­lec­ted in a way that coin­cides with the Park bound­ary, pop­u­la­tion stat­ist­ics are cal­cu­lated using an aggreg­ate of data zones that roughly cor­res­pond with its bound­ary. The datazones for the Angus Coun­cil area do not coin­cide with the Park bound­ary and so it is not pos­sible to include data for the Angus area with­in Park in the baseline. For fur­ther details on how the data zones are col­lec­ted, see Annex III of the scop­ing report.

It should be noted that some data­sets are avail­able includ­ing 2018 fig­ures, but not all. The most up-to-date data­sets have been used for the baseline, and will be added to should more data­sets become avail­able dur­ing the pre­par­a­tion of the NPPP and envir­on­ment­al assessment.

Pop­u­la­tion inform­a­tion to 2018 The mid-year estim­ate of the pop­u­la­tion of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park in 2018 was 18,583 people, with around 50% female and 50% male. This is sim­il­ar to the Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion where 49% of the pop­u­la­tion in 2018 are estim­ated to be male and 51% female (fig­ures I and 2).

How­ever, the age pro­file of people liv­ing in the Park is quite dif­fer­ent to the nation­al pop­u­la­tion. Fig­ure 3 shows the pro­por­tions of the pop­u­la­tion made up by each age cohort for Scot­land and the Park. A lar­ger pro­por­tion of the pop­u­la­tion in Park is made up of people with­in the 55 – 89 age cohorts com­pared to the Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion, which is thought to reflect the attract­ive­ness of the Park as some­where to retire to. The Park has with few­er chil­dren of 0 – 9 years old, the reas­on for which is unknown. The Park has a high­er pro­por­tion of males aged 15 – 34 com­pared to the num­ber of females. This may be a reflec­tion of the out­door pur­suits sec­tor, which is typ­ic­ally attracts young­er males.

Fig­ure 3 — age dis­tri­bu­tion by pro­por­tion of the Scot­tish and Park pop­u­la­tions, 2018 mid-year data

Dur­ing the 21^st cen­tury, the Nation­al Park has exper­i­enced a sig­ni­fic­ant net increase in its res­id­ent pop­u­la­tion, rising by approx­im­ately 2,250 per­sons, a growth of around 13.8%. This is well above the over­all Scot­tish rate, which saw an increase of around 7.4% over the same peri­od. How­ever pop­u­la­tion growth in the Park is not spread evenly (table 1), with areas of decline and areas of growth. The over­all Park pop­u­la­tion fig­ures are also skewed by the Aviemore area, which saw a far great­er pop­u­la­tion growth com­pared to oth­er areas of the Park.

Table I — pro­por­tion of pop­u­la­tion growth between 2001 and 2018 by Loc­al Author­ity area com­pared to the Aviemore datazone areas

Area	Pop­u­la­tion change between 2001 and 2018
Aviemore datazones	49.6%
Moray	22.1%
High­land	19.4%
Perth and Kinross*	-3.5%
Aber­deen­shire	-3.7%

• For com­plete­ness, fig­ures between 2001 and 2009 include people liv­ing in the area of Perth and Kinross, although it did not become part of the Nation­al Park until 2010

Although some pop­u­la­tions have grown, mid-year estim­ates sug­gest a plat­eau­ing of the rate of growth over the time peri­od for all areas except the Aviemore and High­land datazones (fig­ures 4 and 5 — High­land has been sep­ar­ated due to the lar­ger pop­u­la­tion num­bers, to allow the trends to show).

Fig­ure 4 — mid-year pop­u­la­tion estim­ate trends by year for Aber­deen­shire, Moray, Perth and Kinross Loc­al Author­ity and Aviemore datazone areas in the Park, 2001 – 2018

Fig­ure 5 — mid-year pop­u­la­tion estim­ate trends by year for the High­land datazone areas in the Park, 2001 – 2018

The com­pon­ents of pop­u­la­tion change in the Nation­al Park can be cal­cu­lated for the years 2002-

1. Dur­ing this peri­od, deaths have exceeded births every year of this peri­od, indic­at­ing that the pop­u­la­tion growth of the Park is driv­en by migra­tion of people into the Park (fig­ure 5).

Fig­ure 6 — nat­ur­al change (births and deaths), migra­tion and over­all pop­u­la­tion change for the Park

Over the peri­od 2002 – 2018, the pop­u­la­tion grew by around 13.8%, but would have fallen by around 5.2% had no migra­tion taken place. The nature of change has not been even through­out the Nation­al Park. The Aviemore area saw births exceed­ing deaths and a high level of migra­tion, while oth­er areas saw deaths exceed­ing births with migra­tion main­tain­ing the pop­u­la­tion (table 2). The area with the greatest num­ber of people migrat­ing into it was the High­land area with­in the Park. This is unsur­pris­ing as this includes the more pop­u­lated Badenoch and Strath­spey area.

Table 2 — nat­ur­al change and migra­tion in the Park 2001 — 2017

Datazone area	Births	Deaths	Nat­ur­al change	Pop­u­la­tion change	Migra­tion
High­land, exclud­ing Aviemore	456	938	-482	967	1449
High­land, Aviemore only	1416	1378	38	1222	1184
Aber­deen­shire	374	739	-365	-60	305
Moray	85	114	-29	152	181
Perth and Kinross	121	137	-16	-9	7

Since 2001, the Park pop­u­la­tion has been shift­ing to have a great­er pro­por­tion of people in the 45 — 74 age cohorts, with few­er chil­dren and young adults in the 0 – 19 age cohorts (fig­ures 6 and 7). While the age dis­tri­bu­tion of the Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion has also shif­ted between 2001 and 2018 (fig­ures 8 and 9), the pop­u­la­tion is more evenly spread across the age ranges up to 74.

Fig­ure 6 — Park pop­u­la­tion pro­por­tions 2001

Fig­ure 7 — Park pop­u­la­tion pro­por­tions 2018

Fig­ure 8 — Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion pro­por­tions 2001

Fig­ure 9- Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion pro­por­tions 2018

Pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tions Pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tions are cal­cu­la­tions show­ing what hap­pens under cer­tain assump­tions about future fer­til­ity, mor­tal­ity and migra­tion. House­hold pro­jec­tions also incor­por­ate inform­a­tion on trends of house­hold form­a­tion. Nation­al Records of Scot­land (NRS) provide pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tions for Scotland.

The assump­tions in pro­jec­tions by NRS are that the past trends of birth rates, mor­tal­ity, migra­tion and house­hold form­a­tion con­tin­ue into the future. They do not take account of any future changes that may occur as a res­ult of policy ini­ti­at­ives, social or eco­nom­ic change. They will reflect past policy changes and trends in house build­ing, but they do not incor­por­ate inform­a­tion on planned future policy changes or house build­ing. For example, an area may have had a high level of house build­ing over the last few years, which is now com­ing to an end, but the pro­jec­tions would show a con­tinu­ation of the past trends. Although pro­jec­tions can be unre­li­able, they are the best avail­able inform­a­tion for the Park so are included in the baseline for completeness.

The most recent pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tion for the Nation­al Park was based on 2016 data, and was pub­lished in March 2018. The NRS prin­ciple pro­jec­tion is that between 2016 and 2041, the pop­u­la­tion of Park will drop by around 4% (fig­ure 10). This is in con­trast to the level of growth exper­i­enced pre­vi­ously and the NRS 2012 data based pro­jec­tion, which pro­jec­ted a growth in the pop­u­la­tion of around 1%.

Fig­ure 10-pro­jec­ted pop­u­la­tion of the Nation­al Park 2016 – 2041

The pop­u­la­tion of the Nation­al Park is pro­jec­ted to decrease des­pite pos­it­ive pro­jec­ted net migra­tion of 1,505 people over the pro­jec­tion peri­od. This is because the num­ber of deaths is pro­jec­ted to con­tin­ue to exceed the num­ber of births, caus­ing nat­ur­al change (1,914) that exceeds migra­tion. This is largely due to the age struc­ture of the Park population.

NRS also give an indic­a­tion of how the age struc­ture of the pop­u­la­tion might change. Accord­ing to the prin­cip­al migra­tion scen­ario, the num­ber of chil­dren aged under 16 is pro­jec­ted to decrease by 20% over the pro­jec­tion peri­od from 2,933 in 2016 to 2,362 in 2041. The num­ber of people of work­ing age is also pro­jec­ted to decrease from 11,612 in 2016 to 10,710 in 2041, a decrease of 8%. The pop­u­la­tion of pen­sion­able age is pro­jec­ted to rise by 18% from 4,461 in 2016 to 5,260 in 2041. The num­ber of people aged 75 and over is also pro­jec­ted to rise from 1,794 in 2016 to 3,242 in 2041, an increase of 81%. So by 2041 the pop­u­la­tion is pro­jec­ted to be more heav­ily dis­trib­uted at older ages.

House­hold inform­a­tion Nation­al Records of Scot­land (NRS) provide house­hold inform­a­tion and pro­jec­tions for Scot­land. For house­hold pro­jec­tions, the same issues arise as with the pop­u­la­tion pro­jec­tions. Although pro­jec­tions can be unre­li­able, they are the best avail­able inform­a­tion for the Park so are included in the baseline for completeness.

Since 2008, the num­ber of dwell­ings in the Nation­al Park grew from 9,272 to 10,255 (an increase of around 11%), with occu­pa­tion levels vary­ing from a low point of around 78% in 2010 to a high point around 84% in 2016, 2017 and 2018. The num­ber of known second homes has declined slightly from 1245 in 2008 to 1125 in 2018, although the pro­por­tion has remained stable at around 12.1%. The num­ber of vacant prop­er­ties rose slightly from 359 (around 3.9%) to 421 (around 4.1%) since 2008 (fig­ure 11).

Fig­ure 11 — changes in occu­pa­tion of prop­er­ties in the Park from 2008 to 2018

The num­ber of house­holds claim­ing Single Adult Dis­count increased from 2,866 in 2008 to 3,006 in 2018. (Single Adult Dis­count can be claimed by house­holds where there is just one adult res­id­ent eli­gible to pay coun­cil tax.) This rep­res­ents an increase of around 6%, which is con­sist­ent with the increase in over­all house­holds. This also means that the pro­por­tion of house­holds claim­ing the dis­count has remained rel­at­ively con­stant at between 31 and 29% respectively.

How­ever there is a vari­ation between the dif­fer­ent Loc­al Author­ity areas of the Park (table 3). Perth and Kinross has exper­i­enced the greatest dif­fer­ence between the increase in the num­ber of house­holds and the increase in the num­ber of house­holds claim­ing Single Adult Dis­count, with High­land exper­i­en­cing the opposite.

Table 3 — dif­fer­ences in house­hold and single adult dis­count fig­ures in the Park, 2008 — 2018

Loc­al Author­ity area with­in the Park	Change in num­ber of house­holds	Change in house­holds claim­ing Single Adult Discount
Perth and Kinross	3%	26%
High­land	14%	4%
Aber­deen­shire	2%	3%
Moray	7%	3%

Look­ing to the future, the NRS prin­ciple house­hold pro­jec­tion done in 2018 (based on data up to 2016) indic­ate that the num­ber of house­holds in the Park are set to increase by 7% (table 4). How­ever the pop­u­la­tion was pro­jec­ted to decrease by 3.5% over the same time period.

Table 4 — house­hold pro­jec­tions for the Park by type of house­hold, 2016 to 2041

House­hold type	2016	Pro­jec­tion 2041	Change 2016 — 2041
I adult	2,879	3,393	+514
2 adults	3,189	3,360	+171
I adult with children	460	593	+133
2+ adults with children	1,521	1,409	-112
3+ adults	566	423	-143
All house­holds	8,615	9,178	+563

In the Park, the aver­age house­hold size is pro­jec­ted by NRS to drop from 2.14 people in 2016 to 1.93 people in 2041. This helps explain why there is a con­tra­dic­tion between the pro­jec­ted increase in the num­ber of house­holds com­pared to the decrease in the pro­jec­ted pop­u­la­tion — it is likely to be due to the trend in more people liv­ing alone or in smal­ler households.

This is backed up by the demo­graph­ic change pro­jec­tions. The Park has a pro­jec­ted increase of 35% in the num­ber of people in older age groups (65+), while chil­dren (aged 0 – 15) and the 16 — 64 pop­u­la­tion are pro­jec­ted to decrease by 19% and 14%, respect­ively. It is likely that a driver of the decreas­ing house­hold size and con­verse increase in the num­ber of house­holds is the age­ing pop­u­la­tion. This is because chil­dren tend to live in house­holds with more people, with older people tend­ing to live in house­holds with few­er people.

Eco­nom­ic activ­ity in the pop­u­la­tion The import­ance of cer­tain employ­ment sec­tors var­ies both between the dif­fer­ent indus­tries and between the dif­fer­ent Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park. In the Park, the pro­por­tion of people employed in agri­cul­ture, forestry and fish­ing, accom­mod­a­tion and food ser­vices, and arts, enter­tain­ment, recre­ation and oth­er forms of work far exceed the Scot­tish fig­ures (fig­ure 12). How­ever oth­er sec­tors, such as min­ing, quar­ry­ing and util­it­ies, whole­sale and retail trade, motor repairs, trans­port and stor­age, inform­a­tion and com­mu­nic­a­tion, fin­an­cial and insur­ance activ­it­ies, are below the Scot­tish levels.

Fig­ure 12 — pro­por­tion of employ­ment by industry from the 2011 Census for the Park and Scotland

When the data is broken down to the dif­fer­ent Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park, region­al dif­fer­ences in the import­ance of dif­fer­ent indus­tries become appar­ent (fig­ure 13). Moray has a dif­fer­ent pro­file to that of the oth­er Loc­al Author­ity areas. The largest dif­fer­ences are seen in the man­u­fac­tur­ing and the accom­mod­a­tion and food ser­vices sec­tors. Man­u­fac­tur­ing is a key sec­tor for Moray, con­trib­ut­ing 18%, com­pared to between 3 and 6% for the oth­er Loc­al Author­ity areas. In con­trast, accom­mod­a­tion and food ser­vices con­trib­ute far less at 8%, com­pared to between 15 and 18% for the oth­er Loc­al Author­ity areas. This could reflect the reli­ance the oth­er areas in the Park have on tour­ism, which influ­ences the accom­mod­a­tion and food ser­vices sec­tor, where­as Moray has tra­di­tion­ally had a dif­fer­ent eco­nom­ic focus.

Fig­ure 13 — pro­por­tion of employ­ment by industry from the 2011 Census for the dif­fer­ent Loc­al Author­ity areas in the Park

Of the poten­tially eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive in the Park (being people of 16 – 74 years), the 2011 Census classed around 69% as employed, which is high­er than the Scot­tish fig­ure of around 60% (fig­ure 14). How­ever the Park has a high­er pro­por­tion of part time and self-employed people (both around 15%) than the Scot­tish pop­u­la­tion (around 13%). This may reflect the makeup of the main employ­ment sec­tors in the Park (accom­mod­a­tion and food; arts, enter­tain­ment, recre­ation and oth­er; skilled trades), which tend to be ful­filled by part time and self-employed workers.

Fig­ure 14 – 2011 Census pro­por­tion of eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive age (16 plus years) people by activ­ity type

At 2%, there was a lower pro­por­tion of the eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive age pop­u­la­tion in full time edu­ca­tion com­pared to 4% nation­ally. How­ever edu­ca­tion­al achieve­ment in the Park is a little high­er than the Scot­tish aver­age, des­pite there being no fur­ther edu­ca­tion facil­ity in the Park.

In terms of qual­i­fic­a­tions, the 2011 Census iden­ti­fied that around 77% of the eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive age pop­u­la­tion in the Park had qual­i­fic­a­tions to NVQI level (equi­val­ent to first tier school qual­i­fic­a­tions) and above com­pared to Scot­land at around 73%, and around 31% had NVQ4 and above (equi­val­ent to high­er edu­ca­tion qual­i­fic­a­tions) com­pared to Scot­land with around 26%. It is unclear why this is, as while the High­lands and Islands Enter­prise 2011 Census ana­lys­is of employ­ment by sec­tor found that the Park had a high­er pro­por­tion of man­agers, dir­ect­ors and seni­or offi­cials than else­where in the High­lands and Islands or Scot­land, the Park had a lower pro­por­tion of work­ers classed as pro­fes­sion­als or asso­ci­ate pro­fes­sion­als, who may be expec­ted to have qual­i­fic­a­tions at high­er edu­ca­tion level. (http://​www​.hie​.co​.uk/​c​o​m​m​o​n​/​h​a​n​d​l​e​r​s​/​d​o​w​n​l​o​a​d​-​d​o​c​u​m​e​n​t​.​a​s​h​x​?​i​d​=​0​d​f​d​a​0​c​8​-​5​b​1​7​-​4762- b15a-74504e1003cf)

Of the eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive, the fig­ures between the Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park are fairly con­sist­ent. Com­par­ing the Park to the Scot­tish fig­ures, in the Park there was a slightly high­er pro­por­tion of retired people of eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive age and a lower pro­por­tion of long term sick or dis­abled people (table 5).

Table 5 — pro­por­tion of eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive people by inactiv­ity type in the 2011 Census

CNP/LA Area	Retired	Stu­dent	Look­ing after home or fam­ily	Long-term sick or dis­abled	Oth­er
Aber­deen­shire	19%	2%	3%	2%	2%
High­land	16%	2%	3%	3%	1%
Moray	17%	3%	4%	2%	1%
Perth and Kinross	15%	2%	3%	3%	2%
Park	17%	2%	3%	2%	1%
Scot­land	15%	6%	4%	5%	2%

How­ever although the pro­por­tion of retired people of eco­nom­ic­ally act­ive age in the Park was only slightly high­er than the nation­al aver­age, when look­ing at this as a pro­por­tion of the total num­ber of eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive people in the Park, inactiv­ity by retire­ment made up around 64% of the total. This is far high­er than the nation­al fig­ure of around 48% of eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive people being inact­ive through retire­ment. Con­versely, the pro­por­tion of the total num­ber of eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive people in the Park made up by stu­dents was lower than the nation­al aver­age at 9% com­pared to 18% for Scotland.

There are two likely reas­ons for this. Firstly, as shown by fig­ures 2 and 3, the Park has a high­er pro­por­tion of those over the age of 55 than the nation­al aver­age, and secondly, the absence of a high­er edu­ca­tion facil­ity means there are rel­at­ively few full time stu­dents resid­ing with­in the Park.

Accord­ing to 2012 Scot­tish Index of Mul­tiple Depriva­tion (SIMD) data, the Park has rel­at­ively low levels of employ­ment related depriva­tion, which it rates using indic­at­ors such as Work­ing Age Unem­ploy­ment Claimant Count, Work­ing Age Inca­pa­city Bene­fit recip­i­ents and Work­ing Age Severe Dis­able­ment Allow­ance recip­i­ents. None of the data zones with­in the Nation­al Park fall into any of the most deprived cat­egor­ies (fig­ure 15). Ten out of the 23 datazones fall with­in the 20% least deprived.

Fig­ure 15 — depriva­tion levels in the Park, based in 2016 SIMD data for the datazones with­in the Park

Unem­ploy­ment levels with­in the Park are rel­at­ively low, with the 2011 Census find­ing that only around 3% of the pop­u­la­tion aged 16 – 74 were unem­ployed, com­pared to around 5% for Scot­land (table 6). Around 0.3% had nev­er worked com­pared to around 1% for Scot­land, with around 1% being long term unem­ployed com­pared to around 2% for Scot­land. There is a vari­ation between the Loc­al Author­ity areas, with Moray exper­i­en­cing high­er rates of unem­ploy­ment than Scot­land and the oth­er Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park, and Perth and Kinross exper­i­en­cing much lower rates.

Table 6 — pro­por­tion of eco­nom­ic­ally inact­ive people by inactiv­ity type in the 2011 Census

CNP/LA Area	Unem­ployed	Unem­ployed: nev­er worked	Unem­ployed: long- term unemployed
Aber­deen­shire	2%	0%	0.7%
High­land	3.3%	0.3%	1%
Moray	6.2%	0.5%	2.2%
Perth and Kinross	1.8%	0.1%	0.7%
Park	3.1%	0.3%	1%
Scot­land	4.8%	0.7%	1.8%

The nature of employ­ment with­in the Park is how­ever extremely sea­son­al, with Job Seekers Allow­ance (JSA) claimants peak­ing in the winter months (fig­ure 16). Unem­ploy­ment is at its low­est in July, which coin­cides with Scot­tish school and pub­lic hol­i­days and key tour­ism months.

Fig­ure 16 — num­ber of Job Seekers Allow­ance claimants in the Park and by Loc­al Author­ity area

It should be noted that although fig­ure 16 shows a sig­ni­fic­ant reduc­tion in the num­ber of JSA claimants from mid-2013, this is a reflec­tion of changes in the bene­fits sys­tem around that time rather than a drop in people claim­ing unem­ploy­ment related bene­fits because they found work.

Due to the low level of unem­ploy­ment with­in the Park, levels of income depriva­tion were rel­at­ively low accord­ing in the 2012 SIMD. How­ever, this masks the fact that there is evid­ence to sug­gest that aver­age earn­ings with­in the Park were very close to or below the Scot­tish aver­age for many of the datazones with­in the Park, with around 39% of datazones found to be below the Scot­tish aver­age in 2014.

Ana­lys­is car­ried out on 2014 data (the latest cur­rently avail­able) by the Centre for Hous­ing Mar­ket Ana­lys­is iden­ti­fies a nation­al aver­age weekly income of £589.21. Of the datazones with­in the Park, 9 (39%) out of 23 fall below this level (fig­ure 17).

Fig­ure 17 ‑2014 gross medi­an weekly earn­ings by datazone in the Park versus the Scot­tish average

There were also vari­ations with­in the Loc­al Author­ity areas that fall with­in the Park. In the Aber­deen­shire area, income in two datazones fell below the Scot­tish aver­age, and there was a £125.95 dif­fer­ence between the low­est income and the highest. For the High­land area, the dif­fer­ence was more marked, with sev­en datazones fall­ing below the Scot­tish aver­age and a dif­fer­ence of £171.68 between the low­est income and the highest.

Travel to work inform­a­tion Data from the 2011 Census found that, of the 18,712 people aged 16 ‑74 in employ­ment in the Park, around 52% of them com­muted to work via car, van or motor­bike (Error! Ref­er­ence source not found.). This is lower than the Scot­tish level of 56%, a reflec­tion of the fact that the Park has a rel­at­ively high level of home work­ing at around 23.4%. The use of pub­lic trans­port is par­tic­u­larly low with­in the Park at around 3%, a reflec­tion of the dif­fi­culties of provid­ing good ser­vice in such a rur­al area.

Fig­ure 18 — pro­por­tion of work­ers aged 16 – 74 by meth­od of trav­el­ling to work

There was how­ever vari­ation between the datazones with­in each of the Loc­al Author­ity areas in the Park (fig­ure 18). For example, in Aber­deen­shire, the pro­por­tions of people work­ing mainly at or from home var­ied from the low­est at 17 and the highest at 30%, and with High­land vary­ing between the low­est level at 11 and the highest at 38%. In both areas the fig­ures for people using pub­lic trans­port var­ied between the low­est level at 1% and 5% at the highest. In Aber­deen­shire and High­land areas, the num­ber of people using a car or van var­ied between 36/37% at the low­est level and 56/61% at the highest for the respect­ive Loc­al Author­ity areas. Oth­er meth­ods of trav­el­ling to work var­ied respect­ively between 12/11% at the low­est level and 38/46% at the highest. Unfor­tu­nately a break­down of the oth­er meth­ods of trans­port was not avail­able, so it is not pos­sible to say how many people in the Park walk or cycle to work. (It was also not pos­sible to get a break­down of meth­od com­bined with dis­tance trav­elled to work for the datazones with­in the Park, so it is not pos­sible to identi­fy for example, wheth­er those trav­el­ling short­er dis­tances tend use pub­lic transport.)

Exclud­ing people who work off­shore, out­with the UK, with no fixed place of work and people work­ing from home, the largest pro­por­tion of people com­mut­ing with­in the Park travel less than 2km to their work (table 7). At around 23%, the Park fig­ure is high­er than the Scot­tish level of around 17%. How­ever, in the Park a great­er pro­por­tion of people com­mute fur­ther when com­pared to the Scot­tish aver­age; in Scot­land around 50% of com­muters travel less than 10km to their work, where­as for the Park only around 36% of com­muters travel that dis­tance. In the Park around 16% travel of com­muters travel more than 30km, com­pared to the Scot­tish aver­age of 7%.

Table 7 — pro­por­tion of com­muters by dis­tance by Loc­al Author­ity area with­in the Park com­pared to the Park and Scot­tish average

CNP/​Local Author­ity area	<2km	2km to <5km	5km to <10km	10km to <20km	20km to <30km	30km +
Aber­deen­shire	25.1%	20.4%	3.6%	3.7%	8.6%	4.9%
High­land	21.9%	24.1%	5.8%	7.6%	9.2%	3.4%
Moray	8.4%	2.9%	7.7%	16.1%	4.5%	16.6%
Perth and Kinross	11.7%	5.7%	6.7%	11.3%	4.5%	11.7%
Park	23.3%	5.4%	6.8%	9.3%	3.8%	15.5%
Scot­land	16.8%	17.6%	16.2%	14.5%	6.2%	7.0%

A note of cau­tion is required when look­ing at the Loc­al Author­ity aver­ages how­ever, as there is sig­ni­fic­ant vari­ation between the Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park (table 7), and between the datazones of the two Loc­al Author­it­ies with mul­tiple datazones in the Park, Aber­deen­shire and High­land (fig­ure 19).

Fig­ure 19 — vari­ation between low­est and highest fig­ures for Aber­deen­shire and High­land datazones

The A9 dualling pro­ject may affect how people move through the Park. How­ever until it is built and been in use for sev­er­al years, it will not be pos­sible to ascer­tain wheth­er it makes com­mut­ing out­with or into the Park more (or less) attractive.

Health, hous­ing and depriva­tion inform­a­tion It is well recog­nised that the qual­ity of hous­ing, depriva­tion and health are linked. The NHS con­sider that hous­ing costs and qual­ity, along with fuel poverty, influ­ence health inequal­ity in Scot­land (http://www.healthscotland.scot/media/1250/housing-and-health_nov2016_english.pdf).

The 2018 Regis­trar General’s Annu­al Review of Demo­graph­ic Trends (https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/rgar/2018/rgar18.pdf) found males in the most deprived areas of Scot­land had a life expect­ancy 13 years less than those liv­ing in the least deprived areas, with the fig­ure being 9.6 years for females. How­ever that is just part of the pic­ture, as males in the most deprived areas would also spend 22.5 few­er years in good health com­pared to those in the least deprived areas, with the fig­ure being 23 years for females.

There is a low level of hous­ing related depriva­tion with­in the Park, with no data zones fall­ing with­in the 20% most deprived. How­ever there are areas where indic­at­ors of hous­ing depriva­tion exceed the nation­al aver­age. In par­tic­u­lar, at 4.3% many areas of the Nation­al Park have rel­at­ively high pro­por­tions of the house­hold pop­u­la­tion liv­ing in homes with no cent­ral heat­ing, high­er than the Scot­tish aver­age of 2.3%. Levels of house­hold over­crowding are rel­at­ively low with­in the Park, with the vast major­ity of data zones fall­ing below the Scot­tish aver­age of around 13.9%.

How­ever over­crowding may be hid­den by the fact that there is high­er pro­por­tion of large dwell­ings with 6 or more hab­it­able rooms (usu­ally bed and liv­ing rooms) with­in the Park at 24% com­pared to the nation­al fig­ure of 14%, com­bined with a lower pro­por­tion of small dwell­ings (two and three hab­it­able rooms) at 30% com­pared 41% (fig­ure 12). This may there­fore mask loc­al instances of over­crowding suffered by those unable to afford lar­ger properties.

Fig­ure 12-pro­por­tion of dwell­ings by num­ber of hab­it­able rooms for Scot­land and the Park

A sig­ni­fic­ant bar­ri­er in redu­cing house­hold depriva­tion is the avail­ab­il­ity of enough new hous­ing to enable people to move from hous­ing that does not meet their needs (such as over­crowded or lack­ing cent­ral heat­ing) into more suit­able homes that are with­in their means. New hous­ing also needs to meet the pro­jec­ted growth in the num­ber of house­holds. The num­ber of new homes com­pleted in the Nation­al Park fell fol­low­ing the ​‘cred­it crunch’ in 2008, with an aver­age annu­al com­ple­tion rate of around 100 new dwell­ings (fig­ure 13).

Fig­ure 13 — house com­ple­tions between 2000 and 2018 by Plan­ning Author­ity and total for the Park (Although 2 single com­ple­tions were recor­ded in the Park over the 18 year peri­od for Angus, these have not been included above as they would not appear graphically.)

Afford­ab­il­ity is a recog­nised issue in the Park. Between 1993 and 2015, the medi­an price of a prop­erty in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park saw a net rise of almost 230%, with a peak in 2015 of £192,500. In 2018 it had reduced slightly to £190,000.

There is also con­sid­er­able vari­ation in the medi­an house prices across the Park, ran­ging from £112,500 to £335,000 in 2018 in parts of Badenoch and Strath­spey. How­ever, it should be noted that stat­ist­ics for these indi­vidu­al data zones can rep­res­ent only a small num­ber of sales year on year and there­fore annu­al changes in these areas can be significant.

Between 2007 and 2015, the medi­an house price to medi­an house­hold income/​earnings ratio in the Nation­al Park fell from over 8 times income to around 5. How­ever, the medi­an house prices in the High­land, Moray and Aber­deen­shire areas with­in the Park, and the Park as a whole, have con­sist­ently been well above the Scot­tish aver­age (fig­ure 14). In con­trast, medi­an house prices in the Angus and Perth and Kinross areas with­in the Park have been below or very close to the Scot­tish aver­age, how­ever this is likely to be a reflec­tion of the smal­ler data­set for these areas.

Fig­ure 14 — amount that medi­an house prices in the Park and Loc­al Author­ity areas with­in the Park are below/​above the Scot­tish medi­an house price since the Park was established

When the Park was estab­lished in 2003, the medi­an Park house price was already £13,197 above the Scot­tish aver­age. This gap has since increased to £37,500 in 2018, pla­cing many houses out­with the fin­an­cial reach of work­ers in the Park wish­ing to buy a home there. The reduced avail­ab­il­ity of mort­gage fin­ance for first time buy­ers since the cred­it crunch in 2008 also means that many aspir­ing house­holds still can­not afford to buy. There­fore, des­pite the appar­ent improve­ment in the income/​earnings ratio, many houses are still unaffordable.

Recre­ation oppor­tun­it­ies In addi­tion to the usu­al meas­ures of depriva­tion related to employ­ment, fin­ances and trans­port, oth­er factors can influ­ence human health, such as oppor­tun­it­ies to access the out­doors for recre­ation, leis­ure and exer­cise. Being out­side and phys­ic­al activ­ity is well known to improve phys­ic­al and men­tal health, as well as address­ing health inequalities.

The Park is a world renowned area where both res­id­ents and vis­it­ors can enjoy a large range of out­door recre­ation oppor­tun­it­ies. People are able to explore the major­ity of the Park by non- motor­ised means in accord­ance with the Scot­tish Out­door Access Code – for example by foot, wheel­chair, horse-back, bicycle, skis, over land as well as in or on the water.

Paths in the Park are a key resource for provid­ing oppor­tun­it­ies to get out­side, either for recre­ation or for act­ive travel, with the Core Paths net­work play­ing a sig­ni­fic­ant role. The net­work is made up of a mix­ture of exist­ing and new paths, which togeth­er provide a cohes­ive sys­tem. The Park now has a net­work that totals nearly 1,000km of core path on land and 88km on water (the River Spey). Over 300km of the net­work has been signed and promoted