It seems to have always been with us, like flu, or Ant and Dec. But it’s too often ignored. And Land Reform could underpin major social, economic and environmental benefits.

As far back as 1879, Henry George’s Progress and Poverty noted that, no matter what technological or industrial innovation takes place, the abiding concentration of wealth in natural resources - particularly land - has meant that those without have remained, well, steadfastly without.

Sixty-seven per cent of Scotland’s land is owned by 0.025% of the population.

And while the excessive concentration of land ownership has concerned manysuch as Jimmy Reid, Donald Dewar, Andy Wightman and Peter Peacock, a perfect storm is coalescing.

Dr Calum MacLeod’s excellent Land Reform for the Common Good, for Community Land Scotland, reports that, for all the positives such as community buyouts in West Helmsdale, Ulva, and Langholm, following Assynt and Eigg, even these advances are small potatoes. Just 2.9% of rural Scotland is in community ownership.

And this matters. Although the land issue is Scotland-wide, urban and rural, its starkest injustice is in the communities of the rural Highlands and Islands. Already marginalised, their services are under strain, remote or cancelled, their post offices, banks, schools, shops, pubs are under threat or have gone. Fuel poverty afflicts almost one-third of households. "Normal" family houses in, for instance, Plockton are for sale at £500,000, a rise of a third in two years. As short-term lets grow, people cannot rent, let alone buy, in their local area.

Land, more than ever, is a financial asset: hold onto it long enough, even without making any improvements, and you profit. As one property portfolio management company puts it: “There’s never been a better time to consider investing in UK real estate, with plenty of opportunities to add ‘hands-off’ hassle-free developments to your portfolio.” 21% is quoted as the likely profit. That’s the reality of our times.

A key point is our taxation regime. Wealth and property aren’t taxed anywhere near enough: it’s easier to tax those in work than to raise capital gains or inheritance tax. The result, as Harry Lambert of The New Statesman argues, is that “the system entrenches inequality, stymies growth, and rewards a few at the expense of the many.” Millionaire Rishi Sunak effectively pays 23% on his income, while those on basic rate income tax pay 37%.

Read more: A9 backtrack is a betrayal of the Highlands

So land becomes a commodity, and land use too often geared to privileged leisure pursuits of little benefit to the wider rural population. A Scottish Land Commission study shows that while a grouse moor produces £30 of value per hectare, and requires 330 hectares to produce one job, forestry produces £900 of value per hectare and creates one job for every 42 hectares. Similar figures exist for biomass energy production.

The concentration of large-scale landholdings is disastrous in terms of enabling community benefit: the "monopolising effect" strangles opportunity, as Highlands & Islands Enterprise confirms. Its goal is to build stronger communities. How can HIE do that when community assets are shared so unequally?

Just as this economic case for land reform is building momentum, so is the climate case. The Climate Change Committee considers change so far to be slow and inadequate. Few large landowners are laser-focused on the key signifiers: soil health, natural habitats and species, carbon stores and crops, livestock and timber.

And the recent advent of "green lairds" doesn’t cut it. While the likes of Brewdog, Standard Life, and Anders Povlsen’s Wildland have invested in Highland estates, the policies which encourage them are “not fit for purpose” according to Calum MacLeod. Certainly carbon credits and "offsetting" by storing carbon - for a time - in peatland or forest plantation cannot be a permanent solution. And while we might admire the desire for rewilding, fewer sheep, more woodland, equitable distribution doesn’t feature. As Andy Wightman says: “the governance of land on our planet…is everything… touches on everything.” And is it right that so few control the everything?

The Scottish Land Commission’s Emma Cooper has urged “a land use transformation” foregrounding community needs and aspirations. She proposes mixed ownership, and models blending private, public and community interest. Certainly land responsibilities should be taken as seriously as rights. Even Land Value Taxation may come into play.

The Scottish Government has been consulting on a proposed Bill to allow intervention "in the public interest"- where land becomes available for sale or is transferred. There has been discussion about what constitutes "large-scale landholding": many favour a threshold of 1000 hectares, to open up the market to more interest groups.

What shouldn’t be in dispute is that we need Land Reform. And we need to reduce carbon emissions. Given the ongoing debate about carbon credits, this issue could run and run. Like Ant and Dec.

Dr Michael Gregson is an Inverness-based teacher and writer