The government’s consultation on the future of agriculture closed last week. Policy Manager Ben Brown shares the LI’s thoughts on the proposals

    Common land in South East Wales. Photo: TACP

    The government’s consultation on the future of agriculture closed on 8 May. Their proposals – for a new UK support scheme for farmers and the environment to replace the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) – have been widely discussed.

    The rumours are that Defra have received responses in the tens of thousands. Given that there are about 140,000 farmers in the UK, some of whom could lose big money, this is probably unsurprising.

    It’s fair to assume that not all of those responses will read: ‘Sounds good. Carry on.’

    The LI wants to see the billions of pounds of public money that will be spent go towards improving, not worsening, agricultural landscapes. If the current proposals survive, we could see the opposite.

    You can download the LI’s full consultation response here. For those who haven’t yet got their head around the details, here are five things the CAP’s replacement must do, and why it matters for landscapes:

    1. Be bold

    The current CAP costs the UK about €4bn (£3.5bn). The ‘£350m per week’ on Boris’s buses? It’s a healthy chunk of that. The problem with the ‘let’s spend it all on the NHS’ argument is that it would mean taking millions of pounds away from this pot, which keeps our farmers in business and our environment healthy. (At least, that’s the idea.)

    Leaving the EU mustn’t result in unhealthy hedgerows and polluted water. That means Defra must maintain the budget level, and use it to improve the widest possible area of land.

    2. Target the spend

    Assuming Defra do maintain the budget, they will still need to decide which environmental outcomes to prioritise. If the principle of ‘public money for public goods’ is to have real meaning, we will have to get serious about funding environment outcomes. This means looking at causal effects, and funding those with the greatest benefit. £3.5bn will buy you about 120 million bird boxes, at the current Natural England rates. What would the measurable outcomes of that be? (A lot of happy birds is a safe answer.)

    3. Use a landscape lens

    At the moment, most of the CAP money goes directly to farmers, with some green conditions attached. A much smaller amount goes towards specific environmental schemes.

    Meanwhile, some farmers talk to each other. (Some even take part in successful Farm Clusters.) Some don’t. Some government agencies talk to each other. Some don’t. It’s fair to say that cooperation could be better.

    We need a framework to bring everything together. We need to ensure that we’re not nurturing something with one hand that we’re spoiling with the other. Crucially, if we want ordinary people to care, they need be able to see noticeable improvement to places they care about. That means landscapes.

    4. Use what’s already there

    In some places, effective connections already exist. The National Parks, for instance, provide a framework for working together and deciding on priorities. The new system will definitely need to empower designated landscapes and ensure their management plans have clout.

    But where does that leave the other 77% of the UK? Just as we have local economic partnerships (LEPs) that ignore local authority boundaries if they’re not economically meaningful, so we need landscape-level partnerships.

    Step forward, National Character Areas (NCAs). Created by Natural England, the 159 NCAs provide a holistic framework through which measurement can be undertaken and priorities set. (In fact, they already have been.) There is no need to reinvent the wheel when these – and other, more bespoke frameworks, such as the catchment-based approach – already exist.

    5. Develop the skills

    None of this is possible if we don’t have the people to do it. We’ll need a new generation of young skilled farmers, of course. But those farmers are almost guaranteed to fail if they can’t draw upon an ecosystem of robust evidence, talented land managers, an aligned planning system, etc.

    We’re already expecting an awful lot of farmers, some of whom have enough trouble keeping the lights on. If the Brexit trade negotiations don’t go as planned, that’s only going to get harder. One way we can support them is by making sure that the UK’s land managers (for instance) are the best in the world, that they’re skilled and supported, and, most importantly, that we have enough of them.

    4 COMMENTS

    1. FOLAR held an excellent symposium on the subject, chaired by the President of the Landscape Institute and with most of the lectures given by LI members http://www.landscapearchitecture.org.uk/new-agricultural-landscape-uk-post-brexit-2018-folar-symposium-day/ .
      My view is that agricultural landscapes will require plans, probably for groups of farms rather than individual farms and possibly for Landscape Character Areas. The plans should set out what public goods should be specifically targeted in different areas of the country. For example:
      – public access and land management will be important in green belts
      – biodiversity will be important in marginal and heritage farming areas
      – care of hedges, woodlands and farm walls will be important in highly productive landscapes
      Britain’s landscape is too varied for a national landscape plan. We need a rich diversity of local landscape plans – and landscape professionals in all their varieties need to be involved.

      • Hi Tom,
        Yes, I was there! It was an excellent day.
        Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I think your views are spot on. Do get in touch if you’d like to help shape our policy agenda on this topic.
        Ben

    2. A great summary of what is needed and I like the idea that we should make better use of what already exists and often works well. The National Parks, AONB’s and don’t forget the Forestry Commission! I agree with Tom Turner,s comments above and the possible use of Landscape Character Areas and (where they exist) more detailed County and District Landscape policies. Good plans and policies will not be enough – there should be no public money committed without sufficient trained, experienced and dedicated staff to properly administer the scheme over a long period. Besides the need for a variety of landscape professionals, it is essential that there is joined up training on the wider environment and landscape for all land management education courses, including ecology, farming, forestry and game management.

      • Hi Roger,
        A long-overdue reply, but just to say thank you for your comment. Good to know we’re on the right track.
        Do get in touch if you’d like to contribute to our policy in this area.
        Best,
        Ben

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here