A socio-economic profile of Irish Upland Areas commissioned by the Irish Uplands Forum in 2016. Highlights characteristics of farmed and inhabited mountainous areas in the Republic of Ireland. Outlines the importance of developing a community-led, multi-stakeholder vision of the future to help to address depopulation, poor service provision and the ongoing decline in agricultural activity in the Irish uplands.

1. A Socio-economic Profile
of Irish Upland Areas – Irish
Uplands Forum
CAROLINE CROWLEY, CROWLEY RESEARCH, BRENDAN
O’KEEFFE, MIC, UL AND SHANE O’SULLIVAN, LIT
Upland Environments: Drivers of Change
Conference of Irish Geographers, Cork – 4 May 2017

2. Contents
1. Why profiling the uplands is important
2. The profile in context
a. Rural Restructuring
b. Sustainable Development
3. An Upland Panorama
a. Demographic Features
b. Educational Attainment
c. Labour Force
d. Connectivity
e. Farming
4. Future

3. Ireland’s inhabited and farmed Upland Areas

4. 1. The Importance of Profiling
“Mountains are home to at least 12 percent of the world’s
people… A further 14 percent live very close to mountain areas,
and well over half the world’s population depends on mountains
for water, food, hydroelectricity, timber and mineral resources.
In order to support the world’s growing population, it is
necessary to protect mountain ecosystems and enable
mountain people to sustain and improve their way of life”
Scott, D. (2005: 78) Guide to Mountains. London: Philips.
 14% of land mass of the island of Ireland
 2% of its population
Hill, A. (2016) Uplands Community Study: Irish Uplands Forum.

5. 2. Profile in Context
1. Rural Restructuring
2. Sustainable
Development

6. 2.1 Rural Restructuring
1958
2006
1948
2006

7. 1938
2006

8. 2.2 Sustainable Development and
Visioning
210. We recognize that the benefits derived from mountain regions
are essential for sustainable development.
211. Mountains are often home to communities…, that have
developed sustainable uses of mountain resources… We invite
States to strengthen cooperative action with effective involvement
and sharing of experience of all relevant stakeholders.
212. …We encourage States to adopt a long-term vision and holistic
approaches, including by incorporating mountain-specific policies
into national sustainable development strategies.
Report of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable
Development,
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20-22 June 2012

9. 3. An Irish Uplands’ Panorama
1. Demographic Features
2. Educational Attainment
3. Labour Force
4. Connectivity
5. Farming

10. 3.1 Key Demographic Features
 83,600 people live in Ireland’s Uplands
 Population density of 17/km2
 Population increased by 8.5% between 2006 and 2011
 Youth Dependency (0 to 14 year olds) and Elderly Dependency
(person aged 65+) are above the national average
 There are notably fewer persons aged 20 to 39
 More Irish nationals (92%) than the State

11. 34.6
7.3
10.9
5.0
5.3
7.4
14.4
8.6
12.5
14.8
18.5
21.1
10.8
19.1
34.4
60.1
0 20 40 60 80
Inishowen
Bluestack Drimarone
Benwiskin
Lough Ta lt
Murrisk
Leenane
Mount Brandon
McGillycuddy Reeks
Ballyhoura
Munster Vales
Galtee
Sliabh Felim
Sliabh Bloom
Blackstairs
Dublin Wicklow
Cooley Mountains
Population per km2 land, 2011
De-population – most common issue (Hill, 2016)

12. 11.4
4.9
11.7
7.8
7.7
8.5
8.5
-0.5
7.5
8.7
5.7
12.0
2.8
4.5
6.5
17.4
-5 0 5 10 15 20
Inishowen
Bluestack Drimarone
Benwiskin
Lough Talt
Murrisk
Leenane
Mount Brandon
McGillycuddy Reeks
Ballyhoura
Munster Vales
Galtee
Sliabh Felim
Sliabh Bloom
Blackstairs
Dublin Wicklow
Cooley Mountains
Percentage Population Change, 2006-11
Recent trends

13. 1.4
1.0
1.2
0.9
1.0
1.4
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.8
1.4
1.3
1.9
1.6
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Inishowen
Bluestack Drimarone
Benwiskin
Lough Talt
Murrisk
Leenane
Mount Brandon
McGillycuddy Reeks
Ballyhoura
Munster Vales
Galtee
Sliabh Felim
Sliabh Bloom
Blackstairs
Dublin Wicklow
Cooley Mountains
Demographic Vitality Ratio
Future trends

14. 3.2 Educational Attainment
 Early school leaving rates are higher.
 Third-level education rates are much lower,
particularly so for males.

15. 11.9
11.3
15.1
12.6
19.1
18.9
19.7
17.9
16.4
11.3
12.9
19.3
8.7
9.1
24.2
18.3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Inishowen
Bluestack Drimarone
Benwiskin
Lough Talt
Murrisk
Leenane
Mount Brandon
McGillycuddy Reeks
Ballyhoura
Munster Vales
Galtee
Sliabh Felim
Sliabh Bloom
Blackstairs
Dublin Wicklow
Cooley Mountains
% 3rd-level – male

16. 3.3 Labour Force
 A gender divide in availability to work: The male
LFPR is similar to national averages whereas the
female LFPR is lower → more home makers,
unpaid carers, unrecognised farmers
 Male unemployment rate in upland areas is
above average → education barrier

17. Indicator Uplands State % of State
% at work in agriculture and forestry – M 18.4 8.4 218
% at work in building and construction – M 11.0 8.4 131
% at work in manufacturing - M 14.6 15.5 94
% at work in trade and commerce - M 18.8 24.0 79
% at work in professional services – M 10.1 11.9 85
% at work in ‘other’ – M 13.6 14.2 96
% at work in trade and commerce – F 23.5 26.7 88
% at work in professional services – F 38.3 36.5 105
Labour Force Composition

18.  Lower ICT ownership (69% HHs own PC vs. 73% nationally) and
connectivity (67% HHs have internet access vs. 72%)
 Rarer for households in uplands not to have car (11% vs. 18%)
 More workers and students commute by car(69% vs. 63%)
 Remoteness / distance from services [roads, transport, signage]
 Vulnerability – isolation
 Self-sufficiency – cost implication
 “Poor quality, expensive and unpredictable broadband is an inhibitor
to development”
 “Invest in infrastructure and private sector investment will follow”
 “It is as simple as this … we are fighting now for our economic
survival”
3.4 Connectivity
Quotes in Hill, A. (2016: 8-9) Uplands Community Study: IUF

19. 3.5 Farming
• In EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland, primary
sector employment is proportionately higher in
mountain than lowland areas …
• In the EU, massifs with a very high proportion of
employment (>10%) in this sector are located in the
Iberian peninsula, Ireland, the Bohemian mountains
(Austria, Germany), the French Pyrenees, the Azores,
and Finland …. Polish Carpathians and Bulgaria.
- European Commission, 2004
European Commission (2004) Mountain Areas in Europe: Analysis of mountain areas
in EU member states, acceding and other European countries. Luxembourg:
European Commission

20.  “Agricultural colleges around the country are not informing the next
generation of farmers on uplands farming.”
 “It is not possible to raise a family on a 100 acre [40ha] upland farm
today where you would be lucky to have a 16-20k annual profit.
 “…challenge of increased uplands afforestation making whole areas
‘dark’ and further diminishing traditional communities. Will the next
generation be as keen to return home … ?”
 “Need for a dedicated uplands ‘heritage scheme’ similar to the
national walks scheme as uplands archaeology in particular has not
been tapped into.”
What communities say
Quotes in Hill, A. (2016: 8-9) Uplands Community Study: IUF

21. Selected Farming Data
Indicator Uplands State % of State
Av. farm size (ha) 34.6 32.7 106
Av. labour input (AWU) 1.1 1.2 93
Av. farm output (SO) 20,414 30,620 67
% farms <20ha 45 42 107
% farms 80+ha 7 6 117
% farmers <45 yrs 25 24 105
% farmers >65 yrs 27 26 102
% sheep farms 38 10 380
% beef farms 34 56 61
Stocking density (LUs) 91.2 126.7 72
% diversified farms 8 9 90

22. 19.9
22.9
20.7
38.3
26.6
15.7
30.1
22.0
28.7
31.8
25.8
14.5
27.1
29.8
4.3
7.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Inishowen
Bluestack Drimarone
Benwiskin
Lough Talt
Murrisk
Leenane
Mount Brandon
McGillycuddy Reeks
Ballyhoura
Munster Vales
Galtee
Sliabh Felim
Sliabh Bloom
Blackstairs
Dublin Wicklow
Cooley Mountains
% at Work in Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing - male

23. 5. Future
• Vision Planning: evidence-based, pro-active approach
• Community-Led Local Development e.g. LEADER, SICAP
(diversification, adding value, integration through
synergies – recreation, education, crafts, food, energy,
heritage) → partnership approach
• Innovation and Distinctiveness in Upland Farming and
Landscape Management e.g. European Innovation
Partnerships (EIPs) to combine the best of traditional
farming with R&D (focus on assets and strengths)
• Strategic Investment: joined-up thinking
• Rural Proofing - with tailored approaches