APPENDIX 23
Memorandum submitted by the Council for
the Protection of Rural England (F 32)
1. CPRE is a national charity which helps
people to protect their local countryside where there is threat,
to enhance it where there is opportunity and to keep it beautiful,
productive and enjoyable for everyone. CPRE, therefore, has a
particular interest in the future and development of organic farming
and we welcome the opportunity to submit evidence to the Committee.
2. Our comments concentrate on three key
areas which we urge the Committee to address:
— the justification of public funding
for organic farming;
— paying for the environmental benefits
of organic farming; and
— ensuring best value from public support
for organic farming.
JUSTIFICATION OF
PUBLIC FUNDING
FOR ORGANIC
FARMING
3. The dramatic growth in demand for food
produced to organic standards is well recorded. The market for
organic food in the UK is growing at the rate of 49 per cent per
annum. The UK, however, relies heavily on imports to meet this
demand and the volume of UK exports of organic food is negligible.
The cost of conversion to organic farming is significant as farmers
experience a reduction in yields while being unable to benefit
from any premium price until the conversion is complete. We believe
that Government support for farmers converting to organic production
is justified on the grounds of the public demand for organic products,
the failure of domestic supply to meet that demand and the high
costs of conversion. We are not convinced, however, of the need
to support organic farming per se. Organic farming benefits from
the same CAP subsidies as conventional agriculture, although it
has been argued that this is not to the same extent. CPRE does
not believe that farming and rural areas are best supported through
subsidies related to agricultural production. The CAP is slowly
moving towards a new basis for farm and rural support that pays
for the social and environmental benefits of farming that can't
be rewarded by the market. Support is also being re-focused onto
aid to help farmers to adapt to new economic circumstances and
market demands. We believe organic farming will be well placed
to benefit from these shifts in agricultural policy.
4. Organic farming in England is supported
by Government by the Organic Farming Scheme (OFS). The financial
pressures facing the OFS have been well publicised, with the scheme
having exhausted its 1999 budget in the first half of the year,
and the budget for 2000 already largely allocated to those who
could not enter the scheme in 1999. CPRE has warmly welcomed
the new money announced in December 1999 for funding the Rural
Development Regulation, which includes the OFS. There is already
enormous demand for these resources, illustrating the great potential
for extending a range of green farming schemes, including organic
farming, and this will require a greater switch of resources in
the long-term. The £140 million allocated to organic funding
over the next six years will, however, be subject to similar demands
as soon as it comes on line in 2001.
5. Given the likely demands on the OFS in
future years, we believe there is a clear need to re-assess the
scheme and look at how to utilise the limited resources available
in order to achieve best value for money. We also believe that
any potential shortfall in resources for the OFS in the future
should not be met from a redirection of money available for agri-environment
schemes.
PAYING FOR
THE ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS OF
ORGANIC FARMING
6. CPRE recognises the intrinsic environmental
benefits which flow from organic production. Organic farming encourages
the maintenance of mixed farming which can be important in landscape
terms and in supporting a diversity of wildlife habitats. Synthetic
fertilisers and pesticides, which can have a direct and indirect
impact on wildlife, are not permitted in organic farming, although
some "natural" pesticides are. Organic farming also
encourages a greater variety in cropping and also the greater
use of spring sown crops which have benefits for species such
as ground nesting birds. The benefits of organic farming methods
for the landscape, or managing specific wildlife habitats are,
however, less clear cut.
7. Research conducted by the Countryside
Commission in 1997 into the Effects of Organic Farming on the
Landscape concluded that:
"the degree to which farmers positively
affect the landscape is more a matter of the attitude and initiatives
of the particular farmer and not the direct result of whether
a farm adopts an organic farming system or not".
8. This suggests that organic farmers may
be more likely to adopt management practices which benefit the
landscape due to their greater awareness and convictions about
the impact of farming on the environment. As more farmers are
attracted to conversion to organic production for primarily financial
reasons, rather than other convictions, then this indirect relationship
between organic farming and a well managed countryside may change.
Indeed it is possible that a farmer converting to organic may
choose to plough ancient grassland, rich in wildlife and landscape
value, specifically because it has been free from artificial inputs
and so short-cut the normal conversion period.
9. In addition, a recent report on the benefits
of enhanced organic conservation standards by the Soil Association,
The Organic Farming Environment (1999), recognised that:
"some aspects of organic production might
conflict with conservation and environmental objectives".
10. It also illustrated that, while conservation
and environmental protection standards do exist, these are recommended
standards rather than requirements, they vary between the different
regulatory bodies and their full potential may not always be realised
in practice.
11. Organic farming should not, therefore,
be seen as intrinsically capable of delivering the whole range
of environmental benefits that society values nor is it the only
type of production that can deliver these, given the right incentives.
We believe that the existing Government schemes that reward farmers
for the production of public goods, such as the Countryside Stewardship
and Environmentally Sensitive Area schemes are complementary to
organic farming's intrinsic environmental benefits and should
remain separate from aid for organic conversion. Organic farmers
should be encouraged to apply for agri-environment schemes on
the same basis as conventional farmers. The intrinsic environmental
benefits of organic farming should give them a competitive advantage
in being selected for these schemes.
12. There appears to be some confusion in
Government policy, however, in the way agri-environment schemes
are capable of rewarding intrinsic environmental benefits that
flow from not only organic farming, but also less intensive conventional
farming, such as upland livestock production. The proposed Hill
Farming Scheme, which is intended to be the replacement for the
Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowance scheme, includes an element
of reward for the production of intrinsic environmental benefits
of upland farming, such as the maintenance of rough grassland
and moor. The maintenance of our lowland grazed landscapes, which
contribute so much to the beauty of counties such as Devon or
Herefordshire, however, do not receive any support of this type,
which is justified for their upland contemporaries.
13. CPRE believes that this confusion over
paying for the environmental benefits of farming needs to be resolved
as soon as possible. We believe that the Government should launch
a comprehensive review of its agri-environment schemes in order
to assess if the intrinsic environmental benefits of various farming
systems, including organic farming, should be rewarded by public
support and if so how these benefits are assessed and how they
will be paid for.
ENSURING BEST
VALUE FROM
PUBLIC SUPPORT
FOR ORGANIC
FARMING
14. The growing popularity of organic and
agri-environment schemes suggests that they are being increasingly
seen by farmers as providing opportunities for making their businesses
more economically viable. This fits in with the Government's new
direction for agriculture and its emphasis on integrated rural
development through accessing new markets by adding value to products
and encouraging the development of diversification initiatives,
support for which is available through the RDR.
15. Conversion to organic farming is a complex
process with additional business risks associated with it and
the need for particular marketing skills. CPRE wishes to see the
OFS contribute to business success in the countryside. We, therefore,
believe that applicants should be required to submit a business
plan with their application to the OFS. The business plan could
be used to identify the other strands of Government support for
farming that the applicant would wish to access, and any plans
for diversification should be shown to be consistent with local
planning policies. The plan would also help to ensure the long-term
viability of the business.
16. CPRE would also welcome the inclusion
of an assessment of the prospective environmental benefits of
conversion to organic farming to be submitted with the applicant
for aid. This could take the form of a requirement for the completion
of a whole farm conservation plan when making an application and
should include an assessment of the impact of conversion on the
landscape. A recent survey by the Soil Association found that
currently only 31 per cent of organic farmers had a conservation
plan for their farm, although 83 per cent were open to the idea
of preparing one, if the financial costs could be overcome. The
completion of a whole farm conservation plan would therefore help
to ensure that farmers' were fully aware of the impacts of conversion
to organic farming on the countryside.
17. CPRE believes that a tendering system
similar to the discretionary approach used to assess applications
for the Countryside Stewardship Scheme will be desirable as a
means of ensuring best value for Government support for organic
conversion, given that resources are likely to remain limited
and demand high. The submission of a business plan and a conservation
plan, as discussed above, could form the basis of the tender.
This would help to ensure that those best prepared and fully committed
to conversion to organic farming were given priority and would
make applicants fully consider the environmental and economic
implications of conversion.
18. Preparation of plans will have cost
implications for the farmer. In order to minimise the administrative
burden the process of preparing and submitting a tender should
be partially subsidised, following the model currently used for
the Countryside Stewardship Scheme. The information services that
are currently available for farmers wishing to convert to organic
production would also need to be extended to provide appropriate
advice regarding the preparation of business plans and whole farm
conservation plans and other training needs.
12 June 2000
| 
