Do agri-environment schemes deliver for nature?

Agri-environment schemes have been around for decades, aiming to improve habitats, protect nature, boost soil health, cut pollution, and help fight climate change.

There are more than 40 public and 35 private schemes currently available to UK farmers, and they are often seen as a fundamental mechanism to improve environmental outcomes.

However, debate over their efficacy is wide-ranging, with reports on the state of nature in the UK continuing to describe biodiversity in “freefall”, with critical species in decline.

See also: How environmental schemes are affecting UK arable area

Martin Lines, chief executive of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, says: “There is clear evidence they can work, and they have worked in places, but they need to be at a whole farm level and have ambition.”

Previous “broad and shallow” approaches, he says, have not met environmental needs, were costly to implement, and failed to halt nature’s decline or deliver environmental benefits.

The RSPB agrees, saying agri-environment schemes haven’t purchased what is needed and are lacking proper design.

“The most recent version of the Sustainable Farming Incentive [in England] is too broad, and it doesn’t work,” says Alice Groom, head of sustainable land policy at the RSPB.

“It has a high uptake, but it is not going to deliver what is in the Environmental Improvement Plan,” she adds.

Delivering for nature

Prof Simon Denny, an external associate of the Institute for Social Innovation and Impact at the University of Northampton, believes agri-environment schemes can be effective if farmers have the right tools, support, and long-term funding.

“Organisations that receive large amounts of taxpayer money to tackle the so-called ‘biodiversity crisis’ have a vested interest in talking up a crisis, selecting statistics that support their arguments, so they can continue to get funding,” he suggests.

“They may not always look carefully at what some agri-environment schemes are delivering.”

Prof Bridget Emmett, principal scientist at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, agrees there is evidence that agri-environment schemes have helped halt some of the decline in UK biodiversity.

However, more is now being demanded of these schemes.

© UKCEH

“The expectation of what they should deliver now includes protecting soil and water, and reducing greenhouse gases, while also benefiting biodiversity,” she says.

But the evidence supporting their success is often short-term and piecemeal, and often does not include all species used for national scale reporting.

“We’ve managed to halt the decline for many species, but there remains a problem for some, particularly those more sensitive to specific conditions and with specialist needs,” she says.

The RSPB maintains that farming is largely to blame, and chemicals used in agriculture negatively affect the number and variety of insects available to birds.

“If you want to recover those numbers, you have to put back what they need, such as flower meadows, big hedges for safe breeding, and clean water,” says Ms Groom.

Mixed picture

Despite some species recorded as declining, Prof Emmett says many identified in the last 10-year review period in Wales were, in fact, stable.

“Looking across over 200 metrics, we measured for birds and pollinators as well as for plants, soil and water, and found 70% of all the different indicators were stable.

“Just 20% were in decline, while 10% had improved at a national level.”

This, she says, is a significant win. “If you think what farmers have been going through – Ukraine, commodity prices, climate change extremes, floods and droughts – just to hold the line, where we have managed this, is actually quite impressive.”

Ms Groom, however, insists that “breaking even isn’t good enough”.

The farmland bird index for the whole of the UK shows that species have declined by 11% since 2019, and despite having 64,000 live agri-environment agreements, farmland birds are not stabilising in line with targets.

Unintended consequences

Furthermore, while previous impact assessments highlight some successes, they also show unintended consequences. 

Prof Emmett says that by solving one problem, sometimes we create another one.

“Actions that are good for one species might not be good for another,” she says and points out that actions beneficial for woodland-favouring species might not be helpful for species that favour arable or grassland.

And while joining spaces to create habitat corridors can benefit some species, it can also create barriers for other animals and runs the risk of spreading non-native species.

Some agri-environment schemes have also required productive farmland to be taken out of production, so increasing the agronomic pressure on other parcels of land.

Under fire

But while the RSPB is critical about the perceived shortcomings of agri-environmental schemes, the charity itself has recently come under fire in a research report written by Prof Denny.

It highlighted that, according to the RSPB’s own data, many red-listed birds at Lake Vyrnwy in mid-Wales – a reserve and organic upland farm managed by the RSPB since 1996 – have subsequently declined.

Prof Denny also highlights that many estates and farms across Wales and the UK run profitable, sustainable food-producing businesses while also managing land to improve habitats and boost wildlife, including red-listed birds.

Importantly, he says, these food-producing businesses do not receive anything like the amount of taxpayers’ money that the RSPB at Lake Vyrnwy and elsewhere has received.

Future policy

Overall, industry experts agree that future schemes and policies aimed at nature recovery should be more targeted, longer-term, and well-funded to meet their goals.

Prof Emmett says: “We cannot just rely on the public purse and agri-environment schemes to restore nature.

“We need other sources of funding, such as green finance from the business sector to support more nature-positive farming practices.”

Improved communication is also essential, while streamlining administration and hiring knowledgeable contract officers familiar with the landscape and context will facilitate better future adoption.