Policy reform and the sustainability of farming in the uplands of the United Kingdom: conflicts between environment and social support

Abstract

The European Union's support for farming in 'less favoured areas' (LFAs) is currently implemented in the United Kingdom through headage payments for cattle and sheep, although reforms to the system are under way. These payments have caused environmental concern, since, although formally social in nature, they are implicated in processes of agricultural intensification and management practices that reduce ecosystem integrity and landscape interest. In this paper, we examine the extent to which enhancement of the policy mix could take such concerns into account. Initially, we review the evidence of environmental change, also taking into account afforestation and increasing recreational demands on the hills and uplands. An analysis of the environmental perspective is interwoven with current economic, cultural and social difficulties, based on summaries of farmer attitudes drawn from a range of inquiries. We then examine options proposed for change, particularly the conversion of the Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowances headage payments to an area-based compensation, and greater cross-compliance with environmental preconditions. We conclude that scope exists for improved integration of social support for farming with measures to conserve and enhance the environment in hill and upland areas. However, more coherent policies that encompass marketing to pro-ecological, pro-social consumers, education and research, community and infrastructure could strike a more effective balance in attaining objectives for farming and society as a whole, by according a pivotal role to organic farming as a standard for low-input agriculture.

Result-oriented agri-environmental schemes in Europe and their potential for promoting behavioural change

“…As a result, farmers in their action-oriented conservation roles often perceive themselves as little more than 'glorified park-keepers' (Midmore et al, 2001), and the prescribed nature of the activities renders conservation work neither of particular interest nor of any social value.…”

Policy Reform and the Sustainability of Farming in the Uplands of the United Kingdom: Conflicts between Environment and Social Support

“…Legal restrictions on fencing, together with difficulties in achieving consensus for change from all commoners, have prevented afforestation and agricultural improvement (RSPB, 1 986; Pen ford & Francis, 1990). Despite this, many commons may be suffering from severe overgrazing, since legal grazing rights have not been adjusted to take changes in agricultural practice, including year-round grazing and supplementary feeding, into account (Cadbury, 1992;Drew Associates, 1997;Midmore et al, 1998). Since registered rights do not prevail over the maximum stocking rates allowed under the latest HLCA regulations, in theory overgrazing may be penalized in exactly the same way as if it had occurred on land with sole grazing rights8 Where management plans cannot be agreed with commoners' associations, MAFF can insist on a blanket reduction based on registered rights or on stock actually grazed (DETR, 1 998).…”