New report: sustainable farming must be profitable

A new report looking at farm profitability has made some important recommendations for how to make sustainable farming profitable – but we are concerned it could be used to allow more toxic pesticides into the UK.

This week the government has released the Farm Profitability Review, compiled for the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra).

The review, led by Baroness Minette Batters, examines the structural and economic challenges facing farm businesses and sets out recommendations to improve long-term profitability across the sector.

While the Farming Profitability Review will take some time to fully digest, we welcome many of the key messages and the direction of travel. For too long, farming has been financially insecure, and often environmentally damaging. The recognition that food production must go hand in hand with the protection of the natural resources on which farming and society depends is crucial. Sustainable, regenerative food production must find ways to become profitable.

In particular, we welcome the emphasis on how soil is the foundation to sustainable farming. Improving soil health and soil quality presents a big opportunity to leverage green finance.

And it doesn’t stop with soils. We need a full suite of environmental, social and animal welfare metrics to ensure that the public goods farmers can generate are valued and paid for. We know through our experience with Soil Association Exchange that this approach works for farmers, banks and retailers.

There is now an opportunity for Defra make baselining and monitoring central to the next round of agri-environment schemes.

Synthetic pesticide regulation must not be relaxed

We are alarmed by a recommendation to move the approvals process for synthetic pesticides from a hazard-based approach to a risk-based approach, which could see regulators moving away from a precautionary approach.

However, the recommendation for a 'fit-for-purpose approval pathway' for biological crop protection products may be a useful opportunity to support farmers, including organic and agroecological farmers and those taking up Integrated Pest Management. Biological crop protection products include natural substances used in organic pest management routines. Research shows that only 3% of the active substances authorised for organic agriculture contain environmental or health toxicity warnings, compared to more than half of the active substances (predominantly synthetic pesticides) allowed in conventional agriculture. A streamlined licensing process for the responsible use of natural pesticides will support nature-friendly farming practices less depending on synthetical chemicals we know are bad for our food systems and the environment.

Soil Association Policy Director Brendan Costelloe said: “The last thing the UK needs is a more relaxed approach to pesticides. The Farm Profitability report’s suggestion to switch to a risk-based approach essentially means we throw caution to the wind. Time and time again where we see this approach applied, we later see devastating consequences from hazardous pesticides that could have been avoided.

"A more relaxed, risk-based approach would almost certainly increase the number and toxicity of the pesticides that are already driving catastrophic declines in insect populations that simply cannot afford any more 'risk'. Nor can farmers afford more declines in pollinators – one of the biggest threats to farm businesses. The report is right to call for farmers to have more of a level playing field – they need support to take up natural approaches to manage troublesome pests, and we should not be importing products from other countries using pesticides that are banned here. We need to be levelling up, not levelling down.”

Sustainable diets need to be healthy

But we’re encouraged to see the review highlighting the importance of whole and minimally processed foods, especially fruit and veg, and the opportunity for public procurement to open up larger scale markets, while pump priming supply chains which allow more farmers to participate.

Updating Government Buying Standards to cover all sectors is a no brainer, though implementation will be a challenge. It’s great to see the Soil Association’s Food for Life Served Here cited as an example of how civil society can facilitate the supply of food produced to high standards and the integration of dynamic local procurement. This approach is key to enabling smaller producers to participate and could be scaled across the country with modest government funding.

We also welcome the recognition of the vital role food education and access to nature provides in giving children the best start in life, as well as supporting future careers in food and farming, and very much aligns with the aims of our Food for Life programme and the Food Education Network.

The Batters review deserves deep scrutiny and discussion. The Soil Association is standing by to assist in the areas of our expertise, and to play our part in forging a farming and food future which is both environmentally and socially responsible, while ensuring just rewards for those who help deliver these outcomes.

The obvious next move for government is to urgently reinstate the Sustainable Farming Incentive, which provides stability in the short term and resilience to climate adaptation in the long-term.

This must include support for the organic sector and for farmers to covert to organic, as we know this whole-farm approach delivers resilience as well as benefits for nature.