Introduction 

On 18th September 2014, Scotland will decide whether it wishes to remain part of the United Kingdom or whether it prefers instead to become an independent state. Under the terms of the agreement between the Scottish and UK governments that paved the way for the referendum (Scottish Government, 2012) both governments have pledged to respect the outcome. That means that if a majority vote in favour of independence, the UK government is pledged to enter into talks on the terms of Scotland’s exit from the UK, an outcome that the Scottish Government at least would like to achieve by March 2016. The ballot in September thus clearly represents a major challenge to the future cohesion and integrity of the United Kingdom as currently constituted.

But what underlies the choice that voters in Scotland are being asked to make? One seemingly obvious answer is national identity. Rather than being a classic European nation state, the United Kingdom has always been a multi-national state that combines three distinct nations – England, Wales and Scotland – with (since 1922) part of a fourth nation – Ireland – across all of which a common sense of Britishness has come to be forged (Colley, 2005). However, Scotland in particular can look back on a long, if far from secure, history as a separate kingdom until James VI of Scotland inherited the English crown as James I in 1603 – and as a separate ‘state’ until the Treaty of Union in 1707. Even thereafter, Scotland retained a distinct legal, religious and educational settlement that, together with a distinctive culture and associated iconography, would seem more than enough to sustain a separate sense of Scottish identity (Devine, 2006). So, perhaps what underlies support for independence is simply a wish amongst those who feel a strong sense of Scottish identity for their distinctive sense of nationhood to be recognised through independent statehood, much as is currently the position in much of the rest of Europe (Gellner, 1983).

This is not, though, an argument that is made explicitly by those campaigning in favour of independence. In its White Paper setting out the case for independence (Scottish Government, 2013), the Scottish Government preferred to argue that it would be more ‘democratic’ for Scotland to be able to choose its own governments, and not be at risk of being governed by a government in London for which relatively few in Scotland had voted – as is the case with the current Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition. However, such an argument assumes that Scotland is indeed a distinct ‘demos’ that thus has the right to govern itself should it so wish. That inevitably brings us back to how far people in Scotland feel a distinctive sense of identity that leads them to question whether they should be part of a Britain-wide system of governance.

There are, though, other more obviously instrumental reasons why a territorial unit such as Scotland might want to seek independence. One that comes most immediately to mind is a belief that such a step would enhance the territory’s level of prosperity. It could have access to resources that it might be better off keeping to itself rather than sharing with a wider polity (Hechter, 2000; Sorens, 2005). Certainly, ‘It’s Scotland’s oil’ was a key battle cry of the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP) as the first oil started to flow from the North Sea in the early 1970s (Lynch, 2013). Meanwhile a territory might well feel that it would be more prosperous if it were able to run its own economy rather than being part of a larger unit for whom that particular territory’s interests are not a central concern of economic management. This is certainly an argument that receives considerable emphasis in the Scottish Government’s White Papers.

There is, however, another instrumental argument that is also to be found in that document. This is that an independent Scotland would be a fairer country than the UK is at present. The White Paper complains that the United Kingdom is one of the most unequal countries in the world, the result, it is suggested, of policies pursued by Labour as well as Conservative governments. The SNP is wont to argue that Scotland has a more social democratic ethos than England, and, thus, left to its own devices would be more likely to pursue policies designed to bring about a more equal society (Salmond, 2006; 2007). It has certainly been critical of many of the cuts to welfare benefits that have been implemented by the UK coalition government.

In this chapter, we assess the degree to which these possible motivations for backing independence appear to be playing a role in shaping voters’ inclinations to vote Yes or No in September. Is support for independence simply rooted in a wish to see a distinctive sense of Scottish identity reflected in how the country is governed? Or do more instrumental considerations play a role too? Do people want independence because they believe it would bring either greater prosperity or more equality? We address these questions using data from the British Social Attitude’s sister survey, the Scottish Social Attitudes survey. We focus in particular on the most recent evidence gathered from a representative sample of 1,497 people interviewed between June and October 2013.