13:I[11240,["/_next/static/chunks/3o586ehrmrdn4.js","/_next/static/chunks/2bi1in_35ezbe.js","/_next/static/chunks/1rjk61tr7rkc_.js"],"CategoryPage"] 14:T19cf,

Financial challenges for Generation Z need urgent attention. Young people in their twenties, or about to enter the work force, tace a combination of soaring housing costs and a fragile job market. All this has undermined a generation's confidence that they can ever secure their financial future.

Recent research highlights a bleak outlook for savings and retirement, as young adults navigate a fundamentally different economic landscape from previous generations. The danger is that many could be left financially vulnerable in their later years and see no need to engage with savings and investment. But it is not too late for policy changes to drive improvement and create hope.

Gen Z workers increasingly work in the gig economy or hold several part-time positions, attracted by flexibility but missing out on traditional workplace benefits. Their ability to save is compromised by high housing costs and often also student debt. While Scotland's free tuition materially reduces the burden of higher education on young people, many do need loans. University graduates can face a financial squeeze early in their working life, with a very high marginal tax rate as they begin to repay loans. Addressing these burdens, combined with high living costs, makes longer term saving a low priority.

The financial wellbeing of Gen Z will have profound long-term implications for social equity and the sustainability of pension systems. With longer lifespans, those entering work face extended working lives and a longer period of retirement. Traditional retirement models must adapt to these changes, moving away from the idea of a fixed retirement date. Pension reform in recent years has placed more responsibility on the individual to build the funds needed in later life.

In future, the majority of workers will not retire with any guarantees on work pensions, with the value depending instead on variable investment returns. State pension cannot be expected to fill the gap. What must be recognised is the need to shift from the current rigid life-stage model to a more flexible approach to retirement, possibly with an element of continuing part-time work in later life. Currently, three-quarters of retirees stop working completely at retirement.

Gen Z is the first generation to benefit from widespread automatic enrolment in work pension schemes. Nevertheless, it is not universal, with some workers still missing out. And attitudes to pensions are typically negative. Surveys suggest that almost half of young adults believe the state pension will not exist by the time they reach retirement. Increasing lifespan combined with a shrinking workforce and stretched public finances. mean that retirement age will be extended in the future. It is hard to get a generation to engage with provision for a later lite that seems so uncertain.

Declining homeownership adds to the problems. This has been a cornerstone of retirement planning for previous generations but is not currently realistic for most of Gen Z. The average house price in the UK is now eight times the average annual salary, and homeownership rates for those in their early 20s have fallen by one third in two decades. Two generations ago, the average age of the first-time buyer was 26, but now that has moved into the 30s. That means that fewer young people are accumulating housing wealth, increasing the likelihood of renting in later life.

Change is needed but the UK government's pension review is moving slowly. Phase two of the review - to focus on pensions adequacy and include the challenges facing Gen Z - is delayed. A pensions bill addressing costs will come before consultation on the Gen Z issues. That means the needs of younger workers will be balanced against cost pressures on employers, plans to increase investment in British businesses, and a 2026 review of retirement age.

Additional risk to the financial security of younger workers comes from gig-based roles, self-employment and job changes. And research has found that one in four in Gen Z have considered quitting work in the past year, with mental health cited as a key factor. These concerns represent barriers to pensions saving. What is is needed is a system that better reflects modern working lives. Without meaningful reform, more young people will reach retirement without the savings necessary to maintain an adequate standard of living.

Priority should be given to expanding pension access beyond traditional employment. A system of increased portability of pensions benefits, attached to individuals rather than employers, would be a better fit with modern career paths. Gen Z changes jobs frequently, accumulating multiple small pension pots, often subject to disproportionate ongoing fees. Someone in their first job finding that the pension they earned might be worthless when they leave must surely undermine their faith in the financial system. Consolidating small pension pots as people move jobs, while ensuring reasonable costs, is essential to make the system work for young people. Unfortunately, a proposed Pensions Dashboard Programme to help individuals view all their pension savings in one place has been delayed.

Thought should also be given to modernising communications on pensions and savings. Traditional pensions information is often in written statements or static email notifications. Gen Z's digital habits might be better addressed with interactive tools and personalised digital engagement. Research notes that more than half of Gen Z individuals follow financial influencers, compared to older generations who rely more heavily on traditional financial advice. However, this presents additional risks as the unregulated nature of social media financial guidance means young people may encounter misleading or inaccurate information. Young savers need regulated, evidence-based, digital content to navigate guidance on platforms they actually use.

The challenges facing Gen Z reflect a system designed for a stability that no longer exists. Pensions providers need to think about how they can better support individuals, including those in Gen Z, to make financial choices that will support them later in life. Without meaningful intervention, we risk creating a retirement crisis decades from now. Policymakers and providers have an opportunity to reimagine financial security across the lifespan. For Gen Z, financial stability means new systems that provide security within the economic realities they actually face. It is time for meaningful reform

15:T1bbb,

Scotland continues to face major health challenges - can our private sector help? It seems a lot to ask when business growth and profitability are squeezed. But the private sector represents the majority of Scotland's economy and workforce and it could have a bigger role in driving the change to wellbeing that Scotland needs. To that sector can be added charities and social enterprises, the third sector. Some of Scotland's business leaders are already stepping up their focus on employee wellbeing. Can these early movers inspire others to follow?

Private sector employment in Scotland accounts for approximately two million workers, while the third sector employs around 140,000 people. Together, these parts of the economy represent roughly three quarters of the nation's total employment, offering huge potential to support wellbeing. The linkage of health and work is clearly recognised in Scotland's ten-year Population Health Framework. As much as 80% of what affects population health happens outside the health and care system. Good work is a key building block of physical and mental health; providing secure incomes, purpose and fulfilment.

The scale of the challenge is sobering. Scotland's life expectancy, which had been improving steadily for decades, has largely stalled since 2010. Long-term sickness has become the primary reason people are economically inactive in Scotland, with poor mental health and musculoskeletal conditions leading the way. Recently, the Scottish Fiscal Commission warned explicitly about the burden of disease that lies ahead; projecting that, without intervention, healthcare costs will rise as a proportion of GDP while the productive workforce shrinks.

A recent survey of Scottish employers revealed both progress and persistent challenges. Most employers expressed concern about employee health, with mental health cited by 87% as the most challenging condition to address in the workplace. Employers identified employee difficulty accessing health support, resulting in pressures on colleagues and constraints around time, cost and resources. Many reported NHS delays affecting their ability to support staff effectively, while others noted gaps in manager awareness and training - particularly around mental health.

The good news in the survey is that many of Scotland's largest employers are already going well beyond statutory requirements, with a real focus on wellbeing across their workforce. Most are adopting inclusive workforce policies around parental and carer leave and sick leave. Typically, they provide healthy and safe physical environments and offer flexible working arrangements. Many show genuine engagement with employees to identify opportunities to support employee health, recognising that work is unlikely to be effective when people have other life stresses.

The leadership shown in these organisations should be harnessed to improve practice in Scotland's many medium-sized businesses. There may even be some smaller businesses that could step up. This would complement what is being done by the NHS and local authorities.

Companies and social enterprises that have moved early to embed health and wellbeing into their operations can demonstrate what works. They are able to share learning about practical implementation; what succeeds and what does not. Their experiences could help smaller and medium-sized businesses recognise that investing in employee health is not a luxury for those with deep pockets, but something that makes sense for all organisations. What Scotland needs is a mechanism or forum to harness this thought leadership and make good practice more widely known.

The evidence base linking good workplace practice to productivity and business success is robust and growing. Organisations that invest in employee wellbeing see measurable returns. Reduced absenteeism alone can save substantial costs. Companies with effective health and wellbeing programmes report absenteeism rates up to forty percent lower than industry averages. In contrast, studies have demonstrated that lower control within jobs correlates with higher mortality and more sickness absence.

Beyond absence reduction, the productivity gains are significant. Research from health economics shows that presenteeism, where employees attend work while unwell and operate at reduced capacity, costs businesses far more than absenteeism. Employees working with untreated mental health conditions, chronic pain, or other health issues may be physically present but operating at fifty to seventy percent of their normal productivity. Organisations that provide early intervention and appropriate workplace adjustments see substantial improvements in actual productive output, not just attendance figures.

Retention benefits compound these advantages. The cost of recruiting and training replacement staff typically ranges from fifty to two hundred percent of an annual salary depending on seniority and sector. Companies recognised as good employers with genuine commitments to workforce health find recruitment easier and retention rates higher, reducing these substantial costs while maintaining institutional knowledge and experience. In sectors facing skills shortages, this competitive advantage becomes even more pronounced.

Is the answer a new corporate standard? Scotland already has various recognition schemes and standards. Companies can demonstrate commitment to paying living wages, achieving B Corporation status, or meeting net zero targets. These schemes have helped drive cultural change by making certain practices aspirational and recognisable. Any new initiative would need to be carefully defined to avoid overlap with existing schemes, possibly just focused on rolling out best practice in health and wellbeing.

But a specific standard would give organisations that represent a large part of Scotland's economy something concrete to work towards, providing a framework for measuring progress. Helpfully it might create peer pressure in the positive sense, where being recognised as a healthy workplace becomes a badge that attracts talent and customers alike. Such a standard would need to be accessible to organisations of different sizes, and focused on outcomes rather than paperwork. It should recognise that each sector faces different challenges - a healthy workplace in hospitality looks different from one in professional services or the third sector. The standard could build on existing disability confidence schemes and fair work frameworks while adding specific focus on health outcomes and wellbeing practices. It would highlight nationally the contribution that enlightened organisations can make to population health.

Many of Scotland's largest organisations are already taking meaningful action to improve employee health and wellbeing. Health and care is a complex system; businesses and the third sector have a role to play. Leadership could bring cohesion and accelerate the impact of best practice in wellbeing at work.

16:T233c,

Income inequalities seem to be widening. But this may not be a uniquely British problem. Recent studies show that global economic convergence — the process by which poorer countries catch up with richer ones — is slowing. For two decades, developing nations grew faster than advanced economies. That era has ended. Poor countries are no longer gaining ground on rich ones at the pace they were, and in some regions the gap is widening again. The World Bank assesses that nine out of ten people now live in countries with high inequality. Can the world be put on a fairer path to growth? 

For the UK and Scotland, these global trends matter because they are a symptom of a polarised economic environment. Multinational corporations are capturing a larger share of global profits, whilst smaller domestic firms struggle. The biggest companies now account for the bulk of corporate earnings, but their gains are increasingly detached from the communities around the world where they operate. More than forty percent of all wealth generated since the start of this century has flowed to the wealthiest one percent, while the bottom half of the world's population received barely one percent. Individual nations struggle to tax global businesses for their activities in a particular jurisdiction. Although many corporations have stockmarket investors and public listings, genuine accountability seems diminished. 

International efforts to address this have made some progress but remain fragile. The OECD and G20 have pursued a global minimum corporate tax framework, designed to prevent countries from undercutting each other with low rates and to ensure multinationals pay a fairer share in the countries where they actually do business. Yet the politics of implementation remain fraught. With major economies pulling in different directions, the prospect of a coherent international settlement that properly captures the profits of global technology and financial firms remains elusive. The structural incentives favouring capital concentration have not yet been seriously challenged. 

Added to this increasing concentration in global business, the productivity benefits of Artificial Intelligence seem likely also to be spread unevenly. AI offers the prospect of detaching a large portion of economic activity from individual labour. In advanced economies, around sixty percent of jobs may be affected in some way by AI, with roughly half of those exposed roles potentially benefiting from augmentation while the other half face displacement of tasks currently performed by humans. Crucially, gains in productivity from firms that adopt AI are likely to boost returns to capital, which tends to favour those who already own assets. Despite the potential for social upheaval, there remains little serious public debate about what this should mean for the tax system and government policy. The question of who ultimately benefits from AI-driven growth deserves far more attention than it is currently receiving. 

Something fundamental has shifted in how prosperity is shared globally, and Britain is impacted more than most. Our economy continues to grow, albeit slowly, but most people are seeing little benefit. For a brief period following the financial crisis, low-income workers made genuine gains. Labour shortages gave bargaining power, and wages at the bottom began rising faster than those at the top. That progress has now reversed. Top earners are pulling ahead while wages for the bottom third have stagnated. 

The statistics on household incomes are stark. The most recent official data show that median income for households in the lowest ten percent increased by just two percent in real terms in the latest financial year, compared to significantly stronger gains further up the distribution. In Britain today, the richest fifth of households receive disposable incomes more than four times higher than the poorest fifth. Among developed nations, only the United States shows greater disparity. Meanwhile, several small European countries demonstrate that advanced economies can distribute their wealth far more evenly. The Gini coefficient for UK income inequality stands at thirty-seven percent when measured after housing costs — a figure that tells us something important about the relationship between housing markets and living standards, and the degree to which property wealth amplifies underlying income differences. 

The roots of this inequality run deep. Britain has long struggled with a productivity problem that became acute after the financial crisis. Between 2000 and 2007, productivity grew at over two percent annually. Since 2011, that figure collapsed to half a percent, and since the pandemic to just two tenths of a percent. This matters because productivity drives living standards. When an economy fails to produce more value per hour worked, real wages stagnate and growth slows. The challenge is compounded by regional concentration. London dominates national output, with median household income well above the UK average, while large parts of the Midlands and the North continue to trail significantly. Scotland has its own regional disparities, and while capital investment has been increasing, productivity performance across Scotland's regions remains uneven. 

Britain now invests far less than comparable nations. For thirty years, investment rates have lagged behind the rest of the G7. Infrastructure, research and the tools that would make the workforce more productive have all been underfunded relative to peer economies. British workers are consequently less productive than their counterparts in France, Germany and the Netherlands. The consequences are now structural. A lower capital stock means lower output per worker, which flows directly into stagnant wages and constrained public revenues. The cycle is self-reinforcing and requires deliberate intervention to break. 

Scotland faces particular challenges in this context. The CBI and Fraser of Allander Institute have highlighted that Scotland continues to struggle with slower productivity growth than the UK average, weaker export orientation and persistent regional disparities in business dynamism. Planning delays, regulatory uncertainty and infrastructure gaps compound the picture. Of the businesses that do export, a handful of very large firms account for the vast majority of export value, leaving Scotland's economic base narrow and vulnerable. The Scottish Government's National Strategy for Economic Transformation sets out ambitions for a fairer, greener economy, but the proliferation of strategy documents — more than fifty currently active — without clear implementation has drawn justified criticism. Good intentions need to be translated into investment decisions, planning approvals and measurable outcomes. 

Breaking out of this pattern requires confronting uncomfortable truths. Britain needs sustained economic growth of two percent or higher, maintained over many years, to generate the tax revenue and rising living standards that improve public services and reduce social tension. Greater incentives for business investment and entrepreneurship are essential. But growth alone will not solve the distributional problem if the returns continue to flow disproportionately to capital owners and highly-paid professionals. The design of the tax system, the strength of labour market institutions and the quality of public investment all determine whether growth translates into broad-based prosperity or simply compounds existing inequalities. 

The world must develop public policy that addresses some unhealthy business trends. The power of governments relative to large corporations has weakened, and a genuine debate is needed on holding those corporations to account in the jurisdictions where they generate their wealth. Encouragingly, international forums have begun to acknowledge that inequality is not simply a social concern but an economic one — that excessive concentration of income and wealth reduces aggregate demand, undermines social cohesion and ultimately damages the conditions for sustainable growth. Whether that acknowledgement will be translated into policy change remains to be seen. 

Scotland should be part of that international debate, not a passive observer of it. Scotland has genuine assets — in renewable energy, life sciences, financial services and higher education — that could underpin broad-based prosperity if investment is sustained and the benefits properly distributed. But harnessing those assets requires productivity growth, infrastructure investment and policies that ensure the gains from economic expansion are shared across regions, sectors and income groups. The choice is not between growth and fairness. They are, in the long run, the same objective.

17:Tf6b,

Should we care about how long individual companies last? Economic change in recent years is driving a dramatic shift in corporate lifespan. In the US, accounting for two thirds of total global stockmarket value, the average listed company boasted an 85 year history in 2000, but that has since more than halved. The UK shows a similar trend, though less extreme. In the longer term the attrition is clear. Of the companies listed on the UK stock exchange in the middle of last century, just 1 in 1000 are still independent today. Notably, Glasgow's Weir Group is one of that small fraction. Investors can apply the lessons of company survival to how they pick shares and manage portfolios.

Business longevity gets little attention, yet Investment for retirement now involves longer time frames than typical company lifespans. Certainly, some of the disappearances are due to bids and mergers, which can represent profitable exits for shareholders. But investors may find after a takeover that a business changes from the one they wished to back. And when an acquirer is listed overseas, some individual investors are forced to sell.

The rapid US stockmarket change points to the dynamism of the US economy. Its strong growth and new business formation, contrasts with the UK and European Union. Recent research on large listed companies founded in the last 50 years shows that the US total represents 70 times the comparable EU value.

In terms of the very biggest listed companies the comparison is even more extreme. There is no EU company with a market capitalisation over €100 billion that has been set up from scratch in the last 50 years. However, all six US companies with a current individual valuation of over $1 trillion have been created in this time. Chipmaker, Nvidia, is the most recent success story. Technology has driven these global giants and the US has allowed rapid scaling up. EU competition rules aim to protect consumers but have prevented new national champions from emerging to compete on the world stage.

We are in a world where size and success are strongly interlinked. Recognising this, UK investors have moved more of their portfolios into US companies. This concentration may increase risk but research points to long term investment performance also being narrowly focused, with a few big winners delivering the bulk of stockmarket gains. In last 10-15 years, investors have made the most money owning companies that have not been around for long. Typically, a US listed firm now spends less than 20 years on the stockmarket.

Growth may be duller in the UK, but a few sectors have consistently demonstrated remarkable staying power. Consumer staples companies in particular, such as food and drink, have a long record of adaptation and survival, as have industrial firms with strong market positions. Healthcare and financial services businesses with deep roots in the economy are also sectors with long-term survivors.

Investors may want a balance of growth and resilience in portfolios. Global growth remains dull, pointing to the need for exposure to the most dynamic major businesses. Dominance in their markets gives them monopolistic characteristics and easy access to cash for investment. But given continuing technological change, investors may want to underpin their long term investment with resilient adaptable businesses that have demonstrated sound stewardship.

The key to look for those firms that have shown sustained evolution of their core products and services, investing in technology to support efficiency and customer value. Controlling debt levels to limit financial risk is also essential. These businesses may look dull, particularly the consumer staples, but their consistency and resilience is their strength. Growth and technology is the popular choice today, but complementing with some enduring businesses should balance portfolio risk

18:T1c66,

Evidence is building on the dangers of digital platforms and social media for children. Growing up as digital natives, they navigate complex online environments that may not have their best interests at heart. Now, adding to smartphone risks comes the challenge of AI. How can we create a safe digital environment and respect children's rights when parents and policymakers are struggling to understand all the implications?

Scotland faces a critical moment in approaching children's online safety. Future wellbeing and economic growth will depend on the next generation harnessing AI opportunities effectively. Getting the best from AI, while mitigating harms, will need co-ordinated delivery of the various current initiatives. Scotland has the potential to assess best practice in other nations and create its own distinctive policy approach.

Scottish children interact with AI systems through social media algorithms, educational apps, gaming, and smart devices—often without recognising these as AI-driven. Scotland has already begun exploring the problem and possible solutions. A promising initiative by the Scottish Children's Parliament takes a rights-based approach to AI, supporting Scotland's vision of becoming a leader in trustworthy, ethical, and inclusive AI. This project highlighted children's concerns about fairness, bias, privacy, and mental health, while recognising that children need education about AI as it becomes intrinsic to their daily lives. Policy might be best developed alongside consultation with young people about technologies that affect them.

The algorithms and design features that children encounter online are rarely developed to recognise their specific developmental needs or vulnerabilities. Social media may exacerbate pre-existing issues. Economic insecurity, diminishing social institutions, and uncertainty about the future create fertile ground for digital platforms to intensify anxiety, particularly among teenagers already prone to social comparison. The evidence points to specific design features and business models that contribute to harm.

To increase engagement, recommendation algorithms can promote content encouraging negative self-image. Similarly, social validation metrics like likes and followers encourage harmful comparisons, while infinite scroll feeds remove natural stopping points, leading children to spend far more time on platforms than they intend. These engagement-focused features can disrupt sleep patterns and reduce participation in essential offline activities. And data collection practices track children's behaviour to optimise for engagement, often without meaningful consent.

Studies worldwide have found associations between digital media use and mental wellbeing. UK guidance has noted correlations between screen time and reduced physical activity, depressive symptoms, and poorer diet. The Scottish Health Survey has identified patterns of increased screen time and poorer mental wellbeing scores among Scottish children and adolescents, along with sleep quality and anxiety issues. While causality remains difficult to establish in this relatively new field, we shouldn't be surprised that commercial digital environments prioritise engagement over wellbeing.

Yet these platforms are not without perceived benefits. Content consumption alone isn't necessarily harmful - it is the social comparison and validation-seeking aspects that may be most detrimental. AI brings additional risks beyond smartphones and social media, with more opaque data control than when using a single website or app. While AI promises productivity improvements and personalised learning, it simultaneously allows information to tunnel through boundaries. AI may eventually offer a way for users to represent their own personal interests and data permissions online in virtual form, but currently ownership is easily compromised.

The UK's Online Safety Act represents a step toward holding platforms accountable for harmful content, but further changes are needed. Removing "like" counts, limiting infinite scrolling, disabling autoplay, and creating friction in addictive features could help reduce psychological impact without eliminating benefits. Tech companies have begun implementing changes, though improvements like break reminders and screen time limits remain optional rather than default for young users. However, it now appears that the UK Government will delay AI legislation as it attempts to bring technology regulation nearer alignment with the US.

Scotland's incorporation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) into law provides a powerful framework for addressing digital wellbeing. This rights-based approach recognises children not just as vulnerable subjects needing protection but as rights-holders deserving of participation in decisions affecting them.

Foundations are already in place: Scotland has the opportunity to become a world leader in child-centred digital governance. Scotland may have little leverage directly with the big global tech companies but has influence with its schools and parents. We need clear standards for age-appropriate design, transparency, and data protection. These standards should require meaningful explanation of how AI systems work in language children can understand, and genuine options for control over personal data and algorithms.

To pull together a wide range of policies and organisations, here may be value in an independent commissioner position with the authority to set standards, monitor compliance and advise on good practice for young users. It would cover a broader range of action than existing roles and initiatives. Digital literacy education should go beyond basic online safety to include critical understanding of how AI systems work, how data is collected and used, and how to evaluate information online. Schools must incorporate robust digital citizenship and literacy, alongside mental health awareness, critical thinking about algorithms, and healthy technology usage habits.

Parents often report feeling overwhelmed by the rapid evolution of technology. Scotland should develop comprehensive resources to help parents understand digital environments, facilitate healthy conversations about technology use, and implement appropriate boundaries without cutting children off from beneficial aspects of the digital world.

Scottish universities and researchers could be encouraged to conduct Scotland-specific research on technology's impact on young people's wellbeing, ensuring policies are based on evidence relevant to Scottish youth. The goal is to create an environment where young people can access the benefits of digital connection without being subjected to features designed to manipulate their attention and emotions.

Scotland has always prioritised children's wellbeing. Now, navigating the digital age, we have an opportunity to lead in creating an online environment where young people can truly flourish. Coordinated action should bring together educators, policymakers, parents, and young people themselves to create a digital landscape that is safe and enhances our children's potential

19:T19a2,

Scotland’s new AI Strategy for 2026 to 2031 is ambitious, projecting that AI could add £23 billion to Scotland's annual GDP by 2035. It aims for responsible and inclusive growth, fair work principles, and a new national transformation programme called AI Scotland. All of this is welcome. The question is whether aspiration will translate into the kind of concrete action needed now to address the immediate challenge for jobs, felt most acutely by the young.

AI brings big challenges, with the sheer speed of progress perhaps the hardest for businesses to grasp. It is already reshaping hiring patterns, hollowing out entry-level roles, and restructuring the economics of key industries, such as finance. Scotland is no more insulated from these forces than anywhere else.

UK labour market data is already warning. Recent research from King's College London found that firms with workforces highly exposed to AI capabilities reduced total employment by an average of 4.5%, with the effect concentrated in junior positions. Graduate job postings have declined by around a third since 2022. And sectors with higher AI adoption have on average experienced greater slowing in wage growth. This includes many professional and technical services.

The roles at greatest risk are precisely the kind of entry-level positions that allow people to build careers. Scotland's universities produce talented graduates across law, finance, computing and life sciences. These young people have a contribution to make if only they could enter the labour market.

The Governor of the Bank of England has explicitly warned that AI could damage the talent pipeline that allows workers to progress from junior positions into senior ones. The apprenticeship model of the knowledge economy - where people learn by doing less complex work before being trusted with more - is being disrupted before any alternative pathway has been established.

There is a strategic threat, too. Europe is leading in AI adoption but falling behind in transformation. Many organisations are stuck in using AI in a relatively basic way to summarise emails and manage documents, but much greater potential for productivity gains lies in new AI technology. Over the last twelve months, agentic AI has emerged as the next major divergence for businesses. This involves empowering AI for more independent proactive roles, taking on tasks such as customer onboarding, predictive maintenance and fraud prevention. The technology promises much in terms of productivity, innovation and growth, but there are real barriers to adoption.

Embedding advanced AI can let organisations move beyond efficiency gains to radically transform how they operate and serve customers. But first there are major hurdles to overcome. Larger enterprises have more complex processes and often a legacy structure, needing more careful planning. Many workflows need to be reinvented alongside management of stakeholders and consideration of risk, governance and regulation. All that takes time in a bigger or older organisation. Scotland’s major sectors, such as financial services and health, are heavily regulated and any significant change requires approval. Some organisations are finding that a large portion of their technology budgets are being spent on compliance.

In financial services, around three quarters of UK firms already use some form of AI, but there is a gap between broad deployment and meaningful transformation. The industry regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority, has deliberately chosen not to introduce AI-specific regulation, relying instead on existing frameworks to govern how firms use the new technology. This has the advantage of flexibility, but it leaves boards and compliance functions navigating significant uncertainty. What harm might an AI system cause and where does accountability sit? And for major Scottish finance firms operating internationally, fragmented regulation means that AI comes with real risk.

Too many organisations are still in an experimental stage where they run pilot projects but are slow to scale up what is successful. Workforce skill gaps may be part of the problem in rolling out new practice but management need to step up training if individual employees are to responsibly use the tools on a daily basis. Typically what is missing is a plan of action – it is estimated that fewer than one third of businesses have a formal AI strategy. Organisations need to set goals, not just have a general direction of travel.

For workers, the roles most at risk in the immediate term are those involving repetitive cognitive tasks; data entry, routine financial analysis, standardised report writing and first-pass document review. The roles that are better insulated, at least for now, are those requiring complex judgement in unpredictable environments, senior accountability, and genuinely creative or interpersonal skill.

In time, jobs will be unbundled as individual tasks move to AI, but whether the job itself disappears will depend on how how much human work is involved in the bundle. The ability to work with AI tools, evaluate their outputs critically, and know when human judgement should override is itself becoming a core professional skill across every sector.

It might seem that AI will de-skill many roles but the immediate challenge for organisations is to increase workforce training, investing in people alongside technology. This is not easy when budgets are already squeezed and some shedding of labour is inevitable. Skills shortages remain a primary challenge to AI adoption, with many businesses lacking the talent, workforce readiness, or capacity needed to scale AI use effectively. For the young people unable to start their hoped-for careers, entrepreneurship may be an option – our economy could gain from supporting new business. The alternative for Scotland may be an exodus of graduate talent.

The most urgent gap is not in strategy but in implementation capacity. Scotland now has a published AI strategy, an AI Scotland programme and a new AI Growth Zone in Lanarkshire. Scotland’s Technology Council, in its Vision 2035 report, wants the nation to become a global leader, addressing structural barriers that have historically constrained growth, noting issues with leadership capacity. Ambitious, certainly, but removing the many current frictions will not be easy. Any delay now in meaningful action would risk the economic growth that Scotland needs.

6:["$","$L13",null,{"category":{"id":"public-policy","name":"Public Policy","slug":"public-policy","dbSlug":"public-policy","aliases":["public-policy","behaviour-public-health"],"heading":"Policies Shaping Business and Society","subheading":"Exploring how government policies, regulations and economic decisions affect businesses and communities.","eyebrow":"Public Policy","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/rectangle_32-1790074333052-636685667.png","imageAlt":"Public health and policy decision-making illustration"},"posts":[{"slug":"fxing-finance-for-Generation-Z","title":"Fxing finance for Generation Z","category":"Public Policy","categoryHref":"/writing/public-policy","excerpt":"Social Policy Economics Business Education","date":"17 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/image_2604-1790696515068-136156534.png","imageAlt":"Fxing finance for Generation Z","href":"/writing/public-policy/fxing-finance-for-Generation-Z","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$14"},{"slug":"scotland-should-build-on-the-private-sector-role-in-public-health","title":"Scotland Should Build on the Private Sector Role in Public Health","category":"Public Policy","categoryHref":"/writing/public-policy","excerpt":"Social Policy Economics Business Scotland","date":"22 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/colin_mclean-1790696466473-259074029.png","imageAlt":"Scotland Should Build on the Private Sector Role in Public Health","href":"/writing/public-policy/scotland-should-build-on-the-private-sector-role-in-public-health","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$15"}],"categories":[{"_id":"6aaa6cb81a787a02c9d3e139","name":"Investment Markets","slug":"economics","priority":1,"shortDescription":"","metaTitle":"","metaDescription":"","metaKeywords":"","status":true,"isDeleted":false,"createdAt":"2026-09-16T10:17:28.175Z","updatedAt":"2026-09-22T15:01:41.658Z","eyebrow":"Economics","heading":"Industry Trends Reshaping the Market","image":"rectangle_23_(1)-1790074279966-263465746.png","showInFooter":true,"showInNavbar":true,"subheading":"Key shifts in markets, consumer demand, competition and the economic forces influencing industries."},{"_id":"6aaa6cd51a787a02c9d3e13e","name":"Business","slug":"business","priority":2,"shortDescription":"","metaTitle":"","metaDescription":"","metaKeywords":"","status":true,"isDeleted":false,"createdAt":"2026-09-16T10:17:57.484Z","updatedAt":"2026-09-22T10:51:55.655Z","eyebrow":"Business","heading":"Business Strategies for a Changing Economy","image":"rectangle_31-1790074303835-50375962.png","showInFooter":true,"showInNavbar":true,"subheading":"Insights into growth, leadership, innovation, entrepreneurship and the decisions shaping modern businesses."},{"_id":"6aaa6ce41a787a02c9d3e143","name":"Public Policy","slug":"public-policy","priority":3,"shortDescription":"","metaTitle":"","metaDescription":"","metaKeywords":"","status":true,"isDeleted":false,"createdAt":"2026-09-16T10:18:12.501Z","updatedAt":"2026-09-22T10:52:16.731Z","eyebrow":"Public Policy","heading":"Policies Shaping Business and Society","image":"rectangle_32-1790074333052-636685667.png","showInFooter":true,"showInNavbar":true,"subheading":"Exploring how government policies, regulations and economic decisions affect businesses and communities."},{"_id":"6aaa6cf21a787a02c9d3e148","name":"Education","slug":"education","priority":4,"shortDescription":"","metaTitle":"","metaDescription":"","metaKeywords":"","status":true,"isDeleted":false,"createdAt":"2026-09-16T10:18:26.225Z","updatedAt":"2026-09-22T10:52:40.371Z","eyebrow":"Education","heading":"The Future of Education and Skills","image":"rectangle_33-1790074355616-394549887.png","showInFooter":true,"showInNavbar":true,"subheading":"Examining changing education models, workforce skills, technology and the evolving needs of learners."},{"_id":"6aaa6cfb1a787a02c9d3e14d","name":"Other Interests","slug":"other-interests","priority":5,"shortDescription":"","metaTitle":"","metaDescription":"","metaKeywords":"","status":true,"isDeleted":false,"createdAt":"2026-09-16T10:18:35.893Z","updatedAt":"2026-09-22T10:53:00.763Z","eyebrow":"Other Interests","heading":"Ideas Beyond Business and Economics","image":"rectangle_34_(1)-1790074377145-667256511.png","showInFooter":true,"showInNavbar":true,"subheading":"Perspectives on technology, society, culture and other developments influencing the world around us"}],"popularPosts":[{"slug":"sharing-prosperity-tackling-income-inequalities","title":"Sharing Prosperity Tackling Income Inequalities","category":"Investment Markets","categoryHref":"/writing/economics","excerpt":"Income inequality is widening across the world. What does this mean for Britain and Scotland, and how can economic growth become more widely shared?","date":"21 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/blog1_(1)-1790696431538-984640205.webp","imageAlt":"Sharing Prosperity Tackling Income Inequalities","href":"/writing/economics/sharing-prosperity-tackling-income-inequalities","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$16"},{"slug":"companies-arent-living-as-long-now-should-investors-worry","title":"Companies Are not Living as Long Now Should Investors Worry","category":"Investment Markets","categoryHref":"/writing/economics","excerpt":"Business Economy Markets","date":"22 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/image_2605-1790696392388-179544611.png","imageAlt":"Companies Are not Living as Long Now Should Investors Worry","href":"/writing/economics/companies-arent-living-as-long-now-should-investors-worry","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$17"},{"slug":"action-needed-on-digital-harms-for-scotlands-young-people","title":"Action Needed on Digital Harms for Scotlands Young People","category":"Education","categoryHref":"/writing/education","excerpt":"Social Policy Scotland","date":"22 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/image_2609-1790696361734-444207056.png","imageAlt":"Action Needed on Digital Harms for Scotlands Young People","href":"/writing/education/action-needed-on-digital-harms-for-scotlands-young-people","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$18"},{"slug":"ai-hitting-the-talent-pipeline-policy-implementation-is-too-slow","title":"AI Hitting the Talent Pipeline Policy Implementation Is Too Slow","category":"Business","categoryHref":"/writing/business","excerpt":"Economy Business Social Policy Scotland","date":"22 Sept 2026","readingTime":"5 min read","image":"https://api.articlesbycolin.com/uploads/image_2608-1790696315728-668182544.png","imageAlt":"AI Hitting the Talent Pipeline Policy Implementation Is Too Slow","href":"/writing/business/ai-hitting-the-talent-pipeline-policy-implementation-is-too-slow","author":{"name":"Colin McLean","avatar":"/images/portrait.png"},"htmlContent":"$19"}]}]

Policies Shaping Business and Society

Featured Post

Fxing finance for Generation Z

Latest Posts

Scotland Should Build on the Private Sector Role in Public Health

Let's stay in touch