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

15. Focus Area 5B

Introduction

This chapter answers the evaluation question related to FA 5B.

CEQ 12: To what extent have RDP interventions contributed to increasing efficiency in energy use in agriculture and food processing?

Contribution to FA 5B

Public expenditure

Two SRDP 2014-2020 schemes were programmed to contribute to FA 5B – FAS the KTIF. The AIR 2023 reports that:

• there are three Measures programmed under FA 5B and all had committed and realised expenditure to date.
• the overall planned expenditure under FA 5B was small compared to some other FAs - the level of expenditure under FA 5B was relatively low at circa €4.5 million committed and circa €3.8 million realised, see Table 15.1.

Source: Scottish Government, Annual Implementation Report, 2023.

Other points to note from the AIR 2023 report include that:

• over 80% of the committed and realised expenditure under FA 5B was for Measure 2 (Advisory services, farm management and farm relief services) – delivered through the FAS.
• the committed expenditure for Measure 2 and Measure 16 (Cooperation) were both higher than the overall planned expenditure for the Programme – as noted previously, commitments do not necessarily translate to realised expenditure (only the realised expenditure for Measure 16 was slightly higher than the planned expenditure), and small differences may be the result of different exchange rates between Pounds Sterling and Euros used.

Performance indicators

A summary of the outcomes achieved under FA 5B is provided in Table 15.2.

Source: Scottish Government, Annual Implementation Report, 2023.

There is one Programme specific target indicator for FA 5B - the number of participants trained under Measure 1 (Knowledge transfer and information actions).

Measure 1 was delivered by the KTIF. In the initial years of the 2014-2020 Programme period, the KTIF expenditure related predominately to on-going commitments made by the predecessor SDS under the 2007-2013 Programme (reported under FA 2A, see Chapter 7).

From 2019 there was expenditure on one KTIF project under Measure 1 and FA 5B. Points to note include that:

• 1,099 participants were trained between 2019 and 2021 - no further participants were trained after this time period.
• the planned output for the number of participants trained and the Programme specific target indicator was amended to 1,100 (eighth programme modification) - 99.91% of the amended target was achieved by the end of the Programme.

Wider commentary at a SRDP scheme level

Farm Advisory Service

The FAS accounted for the vast majority of realised expenditure under FA 5B (circa €3.1 million or 81.6% of total expenditure).

Within the FAS scheme Carbon Audits were one of the main tools used to increase efficiency in energy use in agriculture and food processing. Carbon Audits were undertaken alongside the provision of advice on renewable energy. A key area of focus for the FAS has been to increase education and awareness of what a Carbon Audit is and the potential business benefits to farms.

As part of this, the FAS produced and disseminated practical information and guides around how to reduce energy bills on farms and fuel management.

The Carbon Audits (and one-to-one advice) resulted in an action plan which included recommendations for consideration by supported farmers – that is, it identified areas where the farmers could make improvements which may lead to increases in energy efficiency (although this was not a target per se). The farmers may or may not implement the recommended actions (in full or at all).

The FAS one-to-many service delivered activities that focussed on energy efficiency through the Farming for a Better Climate initiative and its use in agriculture – it demonstrated and disseminated information on practical low carbon farming practices, and trailed and developed ideas on farms which could provide practical, innovative solutions to help climate change mitigation. It sought to encourage collective collaboration, maximising the opportunity for testing innovative solutions in a variety of situations. The initiative also aimed to demonstrate the financial and economic benefits of climate change action on the focus farms to encourage wider adoption of the different techniques across the sector.

Part of the Farming for a Better Climate initiative utilised new technologies to improve energy efficiency – this was a key topic area along with renewable energy. However, there is little evidence on impacts resulting from these activities other than self-reported impacts by farmers. The following quote was provided by Hugh Black’s farm (Forfar) who participated in the initiative.

"The group that have come together for this project very interestingly have different enterprises and crops, but we all share the same challenges and recognise the need to gather more learning around soils and how best to manage them. I see it as a learning journey of a group of mixed ages, experience and regions but led with an open mind set and eagerness to excel. I expect to have open discussions around what we do and intend to grow our knowledge together and help develop the understanding for all in Scottish agriculture.”

In addition, FAS officials reported that there was a growing interest and emphasis on costs and energy use when the prices of goods and services increased as a result of the war in the Ukraine and the cost-of-living crisis. For example, they reported that there has been increased interest in on-farm battery storage for those with renewable energy generation sources. There has been a lot of work on renewable energy advice delivered and this continued with work on smart energy networks in 2019.

Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Fund

The KTIF accounted for the remainder of realised expenditure under FA 5B (circa €700,000 or 18.4% of total expenditure). SG officials told evaluators as part of the ex-post evaluation that energy efficiency was within scope of the 91 projects supported by KTIF. A good example would be the Skinny Milk project (see Chapter 4, FA 1A for more details).

EKOS conclusions and recommendations

Total realised expenditure of circa €3.8 million was achieved under FA 5B, mainly delivered through the FAS.

SRDP interventions have the potential to contribute to increasing efficiency in energy use in agriculture and food processing. This may have been achieved through the FAS – however, evidence on the extent of any impact is limited.

It is recommended that progress is made in gathering data to populate the existing indicators and it may be necessary to amend key performance indicators according to the FAS evaluations.

Further, some limited information on impact may be available (for example, in KTIF project reports and Carbon Audit action plans) but as this is not collated or aggregated across the various projects, data is not readily or easily available.