Opinion: Support is crucial for agri-environment schemes to deliver

Looking forward, with the threat of climate change and changes to how farms are supported, it is quite clear that maintaining the status quo is not an option. If we are to continue to receive public money, the way we farm is going to have to change.

There’s currently a lot of attention around the Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes, and in my opinion, the overall direction of travel is about right. The details, though, need a lot of ironing out.

See also: Concern over growing complexity of SFI in England

On our farm, we’ve currently got a mid-tier agreement for 24ha of our land which comes to an end this year.

We’ve also got 97ha in the higher-tier scheme which we’re currently mid-way through. Some of those options last for 10 years, some last for five.

We’re also in the 2023 options for the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI23) and we are planning to apply for the SFI24 options.

On top of that we have a Woodland Management Plan for our ancient oak woodland and woodland-surrounded pond.

So, what we have at the moment, is a huge mix of different schemes with different start times and different payment rates.

We have had long periods when we didn’t get some of our payments due to compatibility issues. Some of the options are only available in certain schemes, while some options overlap with their aims, but with different rates and rules.

None of this is to say that moving towards public money for public goods is a mistake. The overall aim of ELM schemes is broadly the right one.

But more support and clarity is urgently needed, especially for farmers just starting out, who may be grappling to understand how the various schemes work, who to ask for advice, and what are the potential pitfalls.

The simplest scheme is the SFI, and in theory that is easy for a farmer to apply for without using an agent.

But the manner in which it is being rolled out is causing so much doubt and uncertainty that people are delaying applications, hoping there will be some clarity around the corner.

All this does, though, is delay money getting back onto farms after the Basic Payment Scheme reductions, and it means that the much-needed halt to biodiversity decline is postponed even further.

The demand for access into a “higher tier” type scheme is huge at the moment, especially from upland farmers.

But Natural England cannot currently process the numbers needed to move hundreds of agreements over from the old Higher Level Scheme, never mind adding any new plans to the mix.

We urgently need alignment between the different schemes to make the whole process much more attractive and easier to manage for farmers.

This doesn’t mean dumbing down, or scaling back ambition: quite the opposite, we need smarter schemes working coherently together.

Getting this transition right also depends on farmers doing the right thing and managing their land in the best way. That means looking at the wider picture, not just taking the highest-paying options.

We need a good range of entry-level options, then a secure, long-term budget that can fully support those farmers who have ambitions to go further.

We then need to keep supporting them as their ambition continues to grow, which it will, once the benefits of farming alongside nature are seen.