We’ve been building a central data system at the CIC Association that tracks the creation and distribution of CICs across the UK. The national picture is encouraging — over 4,100 CICs created, 95% still active, activity across every sector and region.

But when you drill into the data, a clear pattern emerges. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are consistently at the bottom of almost every index.

CIC creation per head of population is significantly lower in all three nations compared to England. The density of CIC activity — measured by organisations per 10,000 people — shows a marked north-south divide, with the South East and London leading and the devolved nations trailing.

Now, there will be a multitude of reasons for this. Each nation has its own legal context, its own social enterprise infrastructure, its own policy priorities. The Welsh Assembly has taken a different approach to social enterprise than Westminster. Scotland has a strong co-operative tradition that may draw potential CIC founders in a different direction. Northern Ireland’s unique circumstances present their own challenges.

But I don’t think these factors explain the full picture. I think there’s also a simpler explanation: CICs are simply less well understood in these nations, and the infrastructure to support them is weaker.

When I visited Scotland earlier this year, I spoke to several people who were running organisations that looked exactly like CICs — community businesses with social purposes, asset locks, and trading models — but who had never heard of the CIC structure. They were operating as ordinary companies or unincorporated associations, missing out on the legal protections and brand recognition that CIC status provides.

That’s a loss for those organisations, but it’s also a loss for their communities. The data suggests that CIC activity is concentrated in the poorest wards — the areas that need innovative social business models most. If Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are missing the CIC boom, their most disadvantaged communities are the ones that suffer.

The practical implication is clear. If we can identify the barriers to CIC creation in these nations — whether they’re about awareness, infrastructure, policy alignment, or something else — we can target our efforts to address them. The CIC Association’s data system gives us the tools to do that.

I raised this at the CIC Forum in July, and I want to raise it again. The devolved nations represent a significant growth opportunity for the CIC movement. With relatively little targeted effort — some awareness-raising, some local network building, some engagement with national policymakers — we could see a substantial uplift.

The potential is there. It just needs someone to unlock it.

← Back to articles