- Population of 1,173 (Of which 590 are Male, and 583 are Female).
- Population Density (people per hectare) is 0.52.
- Percentage of economically active, full-time employees 34.47%.
- 481 Households.
- 79.38% view themselves as Christian, with 0 Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim or Sikh. The remaining percentage (20.61) are either not religious or there is no data.
- The super output area is 22,451.49 square meters. 94.3% of which is green space, and 2.5% is viewed as domestic gardens.
Although these figures may be true for my SOA, it does not mean they are true for the community I see myself living in. The SOA is a very large area, at nearly 22,500 square meters, and on the map my hamlet is not even one twentieth of the section. This means the data may not be true for my immediate surroundings, and could be effected by a larger village or an edge of a town. I don't live near a pub, shop, post office or school. The nearest pub is 4 miles away on a main road, opposite the nearest primary school. The nearest Post office and shop is 6 miles away in the nearest town. The only amenities are a village hall, and a church, both of which are kept locked.
Going back to the definition of a sustainable community, the main points of the definition were "limiting waste, preventing pollution, maximizing conservation and promoting efficiency, and developing local resources to enhance the local economy." This is a bit of a problem, because each time a resident needs to visit the post office, or needs a loaf of bread, they must drive to the nearest town, as public transport is very rare and unreliable. This is not preventing pollution or promoting efficiency. Not only do we not have a local shop, the nearest town has 3 major supermarkets within 200m of each other, driving away local businesses and smaller shops. This is not helping to enhance the local economy. A farm shop selling locally produced fruit, vegetables, cheeses, meats and gifts had to close recently because residents bought all their shopping in one go at the supermarket, rather than getting locally produced items, sometimes working out as a cheaper option. Buying imported fruit and veg, rather than local, is not developing local resources.
House prices are relatively high which leads to more elderly people buying a house to retire to, or second home owners able to afford a 'weekend house'. If there was a local shop the residents would use it and promote local services, and hence be a more sustainable community.
As Julia Goldsworthy mentions in the video, if a village is full of second homes "the community dies, the school closes, the post office closes and there's nothing that can be done about it." For a sustainable community to be successful it has to be just that; a community.
Marshall McCluhan once said: "There are no passengers on Spaceship Earth. We are all crew." We ALL have to involve ourselves or have an input for something to happen, which is also true at a more local level, for a sustainable community. For the community to be sustainable, the whole community must be a part of it. If the majority of the houses are second homes, or belong to people that are unable to participate, the community will not be as sustainable as it could be. If only a few houses reduce their waste output then it doesn't make much of a difference, but if all of the houses reduce it then the difference is noticeable.
It’s interesting that while we have such a problem defining sustainability, we can easily identify un-sustainability. We can make lists of unsustainable activities; inefficient use of energy, lack of water conservation, overuse of transportation, high amounts of consumerism… But we should not condemn ourselves over our inability to define sustainability; we should work around the problem.
