Farmers shunning green subsidies in favour of crops
Low take-up is likely to prompt review but it is feared environmental aims could be diluted as a result
NEW green subsidies are failing to attract many farmers, who are instead focusing on food production.
Just 1,000 have signed up since June to the most basic part of the new £2.4billion environmental land management scheme (ELMS), which will replace the old EU-style subsidies.
That is just 1.6 per cent of the Government’s target of participants by 2028.
The Government is now considering a review to make it easier and more profitable for farmers, prompting warnings from green groups that its environmental benefits could be watered down.
Instead of paying farmers simply for the amount of land on which they produce food as under EU subsidies, ELMS pays for environmental benefits such as soil health, air quality and reduced water pollution.
But farming groups say payments for the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI), intended to be the most accessible part of the scheme, are too low to encourage farmers to join, particularly as global food shortages push prices up.
Arable farmers can make £22 a hectare from the scheme intended to improve their soil, compared with up to £4,000 a hectare from sugar beet.
“Particularly for arable farmers, the incentive that’s on offer is basically not worth the paperwork,” said Martin Lines, chairman of the Nature Friendly Farming Network.
The Government pledged to review the ELMS scheme when Liz Truss came to power, and the review is expected to go ahead under the new prime minister.
“There are some warning signs about lack of engagement in SFI,” said David Exwood, vice-president of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU). “We’ve got to crunch time.” The NFU and other traditional farming groups want the Government to commit to moving money from the more ambitious parts of the scheme, in particular elements focused on landscape-scale work, including rewilding.
“The majority of that land is not expected to produce very much food,” said Mark Tufnell, from the Country Land & Business Association. “We feel that from 2024 onwards, there should only ever be up to 10 per cent of the budget focused on landscape recovery.”
But green groups fear simplifying ELMS could undermine its environmental aims, and shrinking its rewilding and tree-planting schemes could undermine farming’s ability to help the Government reach its nature and net zero goals.
“I don’t believe simplifying things is going to get us to those targets,” said Mr Lines. “SFI was pretty weak in its lower ambitions anyway … barely more than encouraging farmers to meet a little bit more than legal requirements.
“Many farmers may participate. But you won’t get a real nature recovery or water quality improvements, because the standard is so basic.”