Scottish Rural Development Programme 2014-2020: ex-post evaluation - main report

13. Focus Area 4C

Introduction

This chapter answers the evaluation question related to FA 4C.

CEQ 10: To what extent have RDP interventions supported the prevention of soil erosion and improvement of soil management?

Contribution to Priority 4 - FA 4A, FA 4B and FA4C

Public expenditure

This is covered in Chapter 11 – as the expenditure data for Priority 4 was collated and reported in aggregate form.

Performance indicators

This is also covered in Chapter 11 – for the same reason outlined above.

Wider commentary at a scheme level on contribution to FA 4C

Agri-Environment Climate Scheme

Feedback from SG officials was that AECS interventions are expected to deliver good soil management in addition to their effects in terms of better management of water, fertilizers, and pesticides. It was reported that soil erosion has been addressed through management options such as converting arable land at risk of erosion or flooding to low-input grassland and from use of a range of other options such as water margins, grass strips in arable fields and retention of winter stubbles for wildlife and water quality. Further, there were also measures for peatland restoration, and the organic scheme options also improves soil quality.

Some options, such as tramline interruption, were not taken forward during the Programme period because of the difficulty in verifying that work had been undertaken and lack of clarity over contributions to equipment costs.

Wider findings from the AECS evaluation were presented earlier. The evaluation report notes that:

• carbon rich soils and climate change – an estimated 7,400 hectares of carbon rich soils (lowland bogs and wetlands) were managed under the 2015-2018 rounds with a £5 million^[25] budget and contributing to climate change and biodiversity targets. A cluster of contracts were in the Caithness and Sutherland peatland area, the largest blanket bog in Europe - a key carbon store in Scotland and at international level. Peatland restoration capital work was also funded under AECS with a £2.3 million budget spent or committed during this period.

There is, however, further information available that can be used to update the data reported above, for instance from the AECS Core Brief (last updated August 2024) and also from the information from NatureScot overlaying AECS contracts with peatland data. This gives:

• an estimated 232,640 hectares of peatland within AECS contracts that are active in 2023 (these are contracts arising from the 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2022 AECS application rounds.
• an estimated 321,010 hectares of peatland within AECS contracts that were active in 2022 (these are contracts arising from the 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2021 AECS application rounds).

Nearly all of the peatland is under the AECS Moorland Management option, with very small amounts under the Lowland Bog, Heath, and Wetland options.

Further, by supporting good soil management (for example, peatland management, green manures, grassland strips, etc.) AECS has helped to ensure that the carbon is captured and stored in soils. This is further reflected in The State of Scotland’s Soil report (SEPA, 2011) which notes that good soil management:

• supports ‘increased efficiency within farming systems’, and therefore contributes towards ‘reduced costs’.
• is ‘increasingly seen as making an important contribution to reducing Scotland’s GHG emissions’.
• plays an important role in mitigating climate change – ‘The implementation of appropriate soil management practices will not only protect soils but will also contribute to protecting the ecosystem services to which these soils contribute. Soils can be part of the solution to many environmental problems and should be viewed in that way.’

Farm Advisory Service

The prevention of soil erosion and improvement of soil management was a key feature in the advice that was to be delivered in the one-to-one and one-to-many FAS services (Integrated Land Management Plans, for example). This activity was delivered via a series of publications, risk assessments, videos, podcasts.

The FAS one-to-many component had a significant input into soil erosion and more particularly soil improvement. The FAS one-to-many evaluation identified the creation of 12 Soil Nutrient Network farms as demonstration sites across Scotland, covering a wide range of agricultural systems as well as soil types, including some of the most fragile soils in the country. The Soil Nutrient Network farm initiative ran throughout the FAS one-to-many delivery period to December 2020. The scheme evaluation found that these Soil Nutrient Network farms were highly effective. It is anticipated by SG officials that the impact of the Soil Nutrient Network farms will be more evident over time once results of changing management practices take effect.

The focus on soil biodiversity is relatively novel and was considered by SG officials to be of great importance in encouraging good practice. Attendance at agricultural shows under the Farming and Water Scotland banner also focused on soil improvements. According to SAC, the organisation that delivered the one-to-many service of FAS, soil management material was very well received (by farmers) and evidence of impacts should be forthcoming in time.

FAS delivery agents identified building in messages on diffuse pollution and climate change as a useful opportunity for some soft lobbying of farmers interested in the economic benefits of these measures.

The SG commissioned a monitoring and evaluation of FAS (2019), however, whilst it provided some analysis on self-reported benefits the evaluation focussed on process-related issues and levels of satisfaction rather than impact. As a result, it did not provide any wider insights to help answer this CEQ.

Forestry Grant Scheme

Through the delivery of the FGS, 12,598 hectares of native woodland was planted within 20 metres of a watercourse or waterbody – however, it should be noted these were not necessarily planted as riparian woodland.

The scheme provided extensive guidance on the type of cultivation that could be used on forestry operations. Where old networks of field drains have broken down and become water courses, a forestry scheme would initiate a buffer system to stop the water running straight into a water course. The prevention of erosion in such circumstances is an implied outcome in the scheme requirements.

Similar to FA 4B, the FGS did not have a workstream or specific grant scheme targeted at soil improvement and management. However, according to SG officials the native woodland schemes and peatland restoration scheme should directly support good soil management and improvement. Similar to water management this is an area that requires further work and time in terms of the impact on soil. As such, Scottish Forestry is undertaking further analysis work to better understand the impact of its activities on soil management and erosion.

Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Fund

While none of the KTIF projects were focussed specifically on soil management, several were concerned with input use, primarily for biodiversity reasons, and these also have some relevance for soil erosion and soil management.

In a response from the Soil Association Scotland, which administered several KTIF-funded projects, the organisation reported that a substantial proportion (around half) of its KTIF-related activities had a focus on good soil management as the fundamental basis for a productive and profitable farming system. The Soil Association Scotland estimated that around 1,000 land managers were implementing management practices (including reducing fertiliser) to improve soil management on their land as a result of participating in its projects.

Further, soil erosion and management were integral to the KTIF Monitor Farms Programme (as are biodiversity and water quality issues).

Less Favoured Area Support Scheme

According to SG officials, LFASS helped to promote good management of grassland by keeping farmers on the land. To be eligible for LFASS applicants must comply with Good Agriculture and Environmental Conditions - this includes measures to protect soil against erosion and maintaining soil organic matter.

EKOS conclusions and recommendations

It is likely, based on the intervention logic, that SRDP interventions have contributed to supporting the prevention of soil erosion and have led to soil improvement and better soil management. The extent of this cannot, however, be quantified at this stage.

The enhanced AIR 2018 noted that monitoring and evaluation exercises for AECS and FAS were being initiated and could help inform the ex-post evaluation. These evaluations have since been completed. While both scheme evaluations provide an overview of activities delivered and immediate outputs, they do not quantify impacts in any way. Some impacts are, however, not likely to be delivered for some time.

The FAS evaluations did not look at specific areas such the impact of the service on soil quality. The FAS one-to-many evaluation did report some benefits (feedback from farmers) but only in areas of financial improvement and sales. It did not quantify impacts in any what that helps to answer this CEQ.