Following the recent ELMS review, FFCC Farming Co-lead and Oxford Inspire candidate Emily Linton reflects on what Defra needs to do, to create a scheme that can deliver real change.

The Food, Farming and Countryside Commission was established in the wake of Brexit to help shape a new and shared version of a more sustainable future for food and farming, so we are deeply interested in ELMS and its potential to support this farming transition. Following the recent ELMS review, it is useful to reflect on how far things have progressed, and how far there is still to go, in creating a scheme that can deliver real change.   

Of course, trying to create the enabling conditions for a successful farming transition at a time when farmers are battling the multiple challenges presented by sky-high fuel and fertilisers prices, rising inflation and market uncertainty is far from ideal. And yet, the evidence is increasingly clear. Shifting to new ways of farming that enable farmers to work with nature has the potential to benefit the environment (by sequestering carbon, reducing emissions, restoring ecosystems and biodiversity, mitigating flooding etc) and help farming businesses to thrive (such as reducing dependencies on fertiliser and fuel, increasing resilience in the face of climate change).

In our conversations with farmers and farming organisations, we repeatedly hear the frustration at both the delay and the lack of detail.

Farmers are on the front line of these issues, with real skin in the game, and, have spent the last five years engaging in painstaking discussions. There was an outcry when the review of ELMS was announced. People feared the whole scheme might be scrapped. Yet DEFRA is struggling to meet its targets to enrol 15,000 farm businesses by 2024. In our conversations with farmers and farming organisations, we repeatedly hear the frustration at both the delay in rolling out the schemes and the lack of detail within them. The delay has also meant that other big questions about areas such as natural capital markets, biodiversity net gain legislation and the production of healthy, affordable food in a cost-of-living crisis have crowded in, and complicated an already complex picture. This makes it even harder for the government to bring in clarity to a challenging situation.

So, what should DEFRA focus on to ensure ELMs meets the governments ambitious targets around enrolment and delivers on environmental benefits?

So, what next?  What should DEFRA focus on to ensure ELMs meets the governments ambitious targets around enrolment and delivers on environmental benefits? We think they should prioritise the following areas as we move into the new year:

• Fair and functional agricultural schemes: Given that farmers consistently report agricultural schemes fail to reflect the true cost of the work, this needs to be a priority. Future schemes should involve the whole farm (not just the edges and margins) and work for all types, scales and locations of farming businesses. Outcomes must be meaningful, measured and monitored to ensure public money is indeed resulting in public value.  Most importantly details should be released without delay.

• Natural capital markets: The government is currently leaving decisions about the production of food to market forces with worrying consequences, whilst the natural capital markets are – as we hear so often – like the ‘wild west’. We need clear governance through the regulation of natural capital markets to ensure investment is channelled fairly and in ways that benefit public value and rural economies, as well as supporting the transition for food and farming businesses that produce more good quality food alongside nature.  

• Polluter pays: We see real value in adopting the polluter pays principle alongside incentives to foster environmental responsibility through the food and farming supply chain, ensuring the taxpayer stops picking up the costs of cheap food in ill health, air and water pollution, and species loss.  

• Land Use Framework: Land is repeatedly seen in binary terms - doing one thing or another. A framework for land use in England would manage competing pressures on land and encourage multifunctionality. It would develop a common vision for land between often estranged interests – farmers and environmentalists, local residents and developers – and, where disputes do arise, provide a framework for mediation. It would also support different government departments to work together to get the best out of our unique landscape, meeting present needs and preserving it in good shape for generations to come. 

With decisive action and clear policy signals, the consensus is clear: farming will be a force for change

Although questions remain, a focus on these key areas could significantly shift the dial to create the enabling conditions for a successful farming transition. We'll be bringing farmers and policymakers together at the Oxford Farming Conference in January to discuss how a Land Use Framework can work alongside ELMS to catalyse a more aligned transition to a fairer and more sustainable farming future. With decisive action and clear policy signals, the consensus is clear: farming will be a force for change, and part of the solution to the critical challenges ahead.

Emily Linton is Co-Lead of FFCC's Farming Transition programme and a 2023 Oxford Farming Conference Inspire Programme candidate.