Scottish Rural Development Programme 2014-2020: ex-post evaluation - annex A scheme summary report

5. Farm Advisory Service

Scheme description

The Farm Advisory Service (FAS), which was launched in September 2016 and ran until 31 December 2020, provided information, advice and other resources aimed at increasing the profitability and sustainability of farms and crofts.

The SG procured the services of external service providers to deliver each of the two components of the FAS, including:

• the national one-to-many FAS function which was delivered by SAC Consulting (part of the SRUC).
• the national one-to-one FAS function which was delivered by Ricardo Energy and Environment.

The FAS service provided integrated advice and support to farmers and crofters across Scotland.

The main components of the one-to-one FAS function included:

• Integrated Land Management Plans – an advisor undertook a confidential assessment of each supported business and developed a holistic plan to help support a sustainable and profitable future for the business.
• specialist advice – as part of the Integrated Land Management Plans an advisor helped supported businesses to identify where specialist advice was needed across a range of topics.
• carbon audits – an experienced agricultural consultant helped supported businesses to establish their carbon footprint, identify the sources of emissions (through comparison to others), and identify areas for improved operational efficiency.
• mentoring for new entrants – up to four days advice for new entrants, including support from a personal mentor.
• training of advisers.

The one-to-many component of the FAS service comprised a range of features, including: in-person events; providing information on the website; specialist support via the advice line; delivering a small farm and crofter subscription service which provided discounted advice; and a range of other services aimed at a mass audience (that is, podcasts, videos, social media, and downloadable technical publications).

Public expenditure

The FAS was programmed to contribute to various Priorities and FAs, including:

• Priority 2 (Enhancing farm viability and competitiveness of all types of agriculture in all regions and promoting innovative farm technologies and the sustainable management of forests), and to FA 2A and FA 2B.
• Priority 3 (Promoting food chain organisation, including processing and marketing of agricultural products, animal welfare and risk management in agriculture) and to FA 3B.
• Priority 4 (Restoring, preserving, and enhancing ecosystems dependent on agriculture and forestry) and to FA 4A, FA 4B, and FA 4C.
• Priority 5 (Promoting resource efficiency and supporting the shift towards a low carbon and climate resilient economy in agriculture, food, and forestry sectors) and to FA 5B.

Note: all financial and performance data for Priority 4 and associated FAs are presented in the AIR 2023 in aggregate form. This is due to how the monitoring data was required by the EC.

A summary of the public expenditure achieved by the FAS is provided in Table 5.1. The FAS made final co-financed payments to beneficiaries in 2022.

The FAS also contributed to Priority 1 (Fostering knowledge transfer and innovation in agriculture, forestry, and rural areas), and to FA 1A (Fostering innovation, cooperation, and the development of the knowledge base in rural areas).

Source: Scottish Government, Annual Implementation Report 2023.

Performance indicators

A summary of the outcomes achieved by the FAS is provided in Table 5.2.

Source: Scottish Government, Annual implementation Report 2023.

Scheme evaluation

The FAS was subject to evaluation, as follows.

First, the FAS one-to-one service was subject to enhanced monitoring and evaluation (Winning Moves, 2019). This research was commissioned by the SG to explore in more depth the quality, focus and effectiveness of the FAS. The enhanced monitoring and evaluation research was commissioned to help fill a gap in the existing evidence base. FAS contractors largely collated and reported on key performance indicators (KPIs) that focused on input and output measures (for example, number of attendees and/or participants, number of technical notes, articles). This meant there was limited evidence on the impact and outcomes of the FAS, for example, what changes were made as a direct result of the support.

This FAS evaluation comprised a telephone survey with a sample of 116 beneficiaries of the FAS one-to-one support. The survey focused on the extent to which recommended actions had been undertaken and asked questions such as: reasons for seeking support; the outcomes of the support; satisfaction with the support; and any gaps in the support or suggested improvements.

Second, the SG Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division (RESAS) undertook an internal evaluation of the FAS one-to-many service (2021). The methodology included a desk review, a survey of beneficiaries (148 responses), and 10 stakeholder interviews with the delivery team and agricultural stakeholders.

What worked well and/or less well

According to SG officials a key strength of the FAS was the involvement of users in shaping service delivery, and that FAS service providers were able to bring in experts as and when needed. In addition, there was a supportive and effective stakeholder group behind FAS that involved relevant partners such as the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and NatureScot.

Another key strength of the FAS, according to SG officials, was its ability to adapt in year, for example, wet weather a few years back resulted in plans being changed to prioritise flooding and water management. They believed the Annual Planning Process kept FAS relevant and agile in meeting the needs of the farming community.

A SG official stated that there will always be some farmers that are difficult to engage and reach. Better advice can lead to improved economic performance and increased productivity, so it is an area for continuous improvement to engage more farmers and crofters. They also said that some sectors such as pigs and poultry, are more progressive but some sheep farmers are slower to embrace innovation. They went on to say that in the future these farmers may have no choice as the subsidy may be conditional.

SG officials acknowledged that evaluating the impact of advice services such as the FAS can be challenging. They reported that it can be difficult to assess how much of the advice received has been taken on board and implemented by farmers and crofters. However, SG officials noted that this is slightly reliant on advisor capacity, knowledge, and willingness, and that advisors largely steer what they wish to deliver, what they charge and their capacity as a whole. They noted that it is a constant challenge to deliver on government priorities not just what expertise they have, for example, organics, Agroeconomy, biodiversity and ecology are very rudimental. Scottish organic producers felt the advice on offer was not that useful. It is a key aim to make progress against these priorities and implement training for advisors.

Lessons learned

According to SG officials a key lesson learned was the ability of the scheme to adapt and be responsive to changing needs and emerging threats and opportunities.

Multi-annual investment has its strengths, but a lot can change in that period (for example, flooding, pandemics, wars, cost of living crisis). The ability to reprioritise through annual planning was a real strength of the service.

Another lesson learned identified by SG officials was flexibility in the structure of the FAS contract. The contract framework enabled small players to be involved in response to the evolving policy context and operating environment. The contract framework allowed specialist advice such as regenerative farming, organic farming, ecology and the full spectrum of farming with nature to come on board to match an evolving landscape.

SG officials stated that “the government must recognise the value and the time this takes to manage, the importance of it in achieving the outcomes needed. Going forward we must seek a balance of management contracts that includes smaller contractors providing more niche services”.

Current status of the scheme

SG officials felt that the move away from the European Union (EU) funding has in some respects given the FAS more prominence. The FAS remains operational and is supported through the SRDP domestic programme 2021-2024.

Going forward SG officials acknowledged a requirement for more flexibility on advice beyond primary agriculture. This is being considered along with how to best support the supply chains. In addition, conversations on the new contract framework’s advice and support to farmers and crofters beyond the transition period are considering how to integrate some activities delivered under the FAS that supported the continuing professional development of farmers, crofters, and land managers.

For now, the FAS is carrying on as is – existing contracts run to 2027 with an option for a further year extension. In the new framework advice to farmers falls into Tier 4 of the SG Agriculture Reform Routemap (2023) and any future advice service would need to align to Tier 4 priorities.