From Monday the 14th of July, farmers and crofters will have the opportunity to benefit from a £14 Million capital fund to invest in items to align their operations with one or more objectives of the new agricultural policy framework, in terms of environmental outcomes or financial viability. While the fund is to be welcomed in principle, questionable choices have been made by government officials in terms of equity and sustainability of the funding.

 The Future Farming Investment Scheme offers an opportunity for farmers and crofters to invest in a number of useful items not usually covered by other capital grants. The competitive scheme gives priority to applications from small producers under thirty hectares, tenants, island businesses, new entrants, young farmers and crofters, organic producers, as well as EID and water efficiency measures. Many measures eligible for funding under this scheme will be invaluable in helping farmers transition their practices, including support for planting hedges and trees, water harvesting equipment, diverse seed mixes and no-fence grazing collars for livestock. This is all good news. 

 However, the scheme suffers from a number of major flaws. Firstly, the smallest producers with an area under three hectares are – again – not entitled to apply as a matter of principle, and common grazings shares are excluded from the eligible area which disadvantages smaller crofters. Meanwhile, the biggest farming businesses qualify for the largest amounts: While those with less than thirty hectares can only claim items up to £5000, those over 150 hectares receive up to £20,000. Given that the support system is already skewed in favour of the largest producers on the best land, this raises serious questions of equity. 

 Another problem is that the items eligible do not necessarily support more ecologically sound, low-input practices and items helping producers to sell meat and produce locally from the farm and croft gate are excluded. Meanwhile, the fact that second hand items are ineligible for funding not only makes individual items that can be claimed more expensive, but also starkly contrasts the government’s commitments towards environmental sustainability and the promotion of circular economies. 

 Accordingly, member organisation representatives of the Scottish Agroecology Partnership see urgent need for improvement.

 Tara Wight, Policy and Campaigns Coordinator from the Landworkers’ Alliance Scotland, said: “The agricultural subsidy system is already deeply unequal, with the majority of public funding going to the wealthiest landowners, while small and medium scale producers who are feeding their local communities struggle to make ends meet. While we welcome the principle of capital grants to support sustainable practices, the manner in which this grant is being rolled out risks further entrenching inequality in our farming system. Excluding producers with under 3ha of land means that many fruit and vegetable farms, who already receive nothing from the government, will be ineligible for this support. Many of the items this fund is there to support, such as water saving equipment, will be essential for the resilience of Scotland’s fruit and vegetable sector in a changing climate. We urge the government to reconsider the eligibility criteria for this fund and target support to those who need it most.”

 Donna Smith, Chief Executive from the Scottish Crofting Federation said: “To be eligible for the scheme, you must be registered with the agricultural payment system and have claimed support before.  Many crofters are not registered in the system, since the paperwork that is required is disproportionate to the minimal support payments many crofters get, in particular with the new Whole Farm Plan requirements. Yet these people should be able to benefit from this fund, too. It also appears unfair that those who struggled to comply with the Whole Farm Plan are automatically excluded, given that government had previously said that people will not be penalised for noncompliance in the first year. RPID officers should act with a sense of proportion where it is clear that people struggled to comply without any fault on their part.”

 David McKay, Co-Director of the Soil Association Scotland said: “We welcome this capital fund and the priority given to organic and smaller producers, but we do have some concerns about the eligibility requirements. We would like to have seen a flat grant rate for all, rather than limiting smaller producers below 30ha to a £5,000 grant. Excluding second hand equipment also places an added constraint on smaller farms and is not in line with Scottish Government circular economy objectives."

 The Scottish Agroecology Partnership is a recently founded coalition of Scottish organisations in the agricultural sector dedicated to ambitious and just agricultural transformation that better supports low-input, nature friendly practices, local food production, and smaller producers. At this year’s Royal Highland Show, they presented a set of joint policy asks ahead of the first Rural Support Plan under the new agricultural support framework. More information can be found at www.agroecology.scot