About this site
Discussion topics
Bolstering resilience and improving competitiveness
A number of possible areas have been identified which have the potential to remove or reduce barriers to change and to make it easier for for the industry to take action to improve its resilience and productivity.
We would be grateful for your views on any of the points below and the relevant parts of the supporting document [PDF], particularly chapter 5. Your thoughts on the following would be of particular value:
- Are there particular areas for exploration that should be given particular attention in terms of raising farming’s productivity or bolstering its resilience?
- The areas identified as promising for further exploration are not developed in detail. Are there specific actions that you would welcome in addressing the issues of competitiveness and resilience?
- Are there areas for exploration other than those described above that might contribute to raising farming’s productivity or bolstering its resilience?
- At what level should actions be targeted – the individual farm business, the agricultural industry or sectors of it, the wider food chain or different parts of it?
Areas for discussion
- Structural change
- Joint-venture farming
- Self-assessment
- Knowledge transfer & new technology
- Business management skills
- Infrastructure
- Animal health & welfare
- Labour market & skills
Cereal farmer, East Anglia
Choice/range of varieties with different yield/quality/disease resistance charachteristics important for diversification/competitiveness.
Need on-going/sufficient level of investment in plant breeding. International competitiveness affected by availability/non-availability of GM crops.
To improve resilience:
- rewards [not penalties] for good behaviour (ie: Aristotelian ‘virtue’)
- ensure land is used by best individuals (flexibility)
- maintain dynamism
- ensure some buffer stocks exist (of: people/ skills/ tech capacities/ physical stocks/ econ clout/ surplus demand {eg biofuel: so have capacity to meet food demand in event of crisis seasons})
- Truly productive enterprises not driven out by ‘random’ (irrational/ not benefit driven) economic fluctuations
- Not exporting problems (global spread of ethics/virtue)
- Help resolve global problems (‘bigger picture’)
Having been involved with the production of field salads and vegetables for almost 40 years, we can reflect with a degree of practical authority on why horticulture/freshproduce is the UK Agriculture industry Cinderella. It has been the poor relation at Government level, a production area much abused by the Retail sector, and until recently the sector given less consideration by the NFU!
Generally it was seen as a specialist area which should generate reasonable reward in relation to investment and risk and that the “market” would operate effectively.
However a combination of less support from Government in terms of effective Research and Development, the fact that Retailer dominance has resulted in the laws of Supply and Demand largely being overridden and the fractured nature of Fresh Produce, resulting in less effective grower collaboration have all led to inadequate rewards being received by growers in relation to investment and risk.
In resilience terms would we be encouraging the next generation to be involved with primary Fresh Produce growing? The answer is No- unless the Government takes the opprtunity to recognise the importance of Fresh Produce in the UK, tackles the vexed question of Retailer dominance and invests particularly, in applied Research. On that latter point the government should take note of the National Horticultural Forum’s respose to Go-Science.
I am writing as chair of the National Horticultural Forum. I would like to endorse Mark’s point about R&D. For the last 25 years, HMG has taken a laissez faire approach to food supply, assuming that the market would provide and that it was therefore safe to cut R&D expenditure for agriculture and horticulture. The food price spikes of 2007 and 2008 showed that a hands-off approach by our Government to food security is no longer a sustainable strategy. Defra now accept that food production must rise in the UK, but are not yet showing the leadership needed to ensure that there is an effective two-way research pipeline which translates strategic research findings into knowledge and technology which help farmers and growers to produce. In the face of food security concerns and climate change, the sector cannot be resilient over the longer term unless there is an effective national research policy.
The areas for exploration presented appear sensible options given the issues highlighted in the previous discussion topics. To help advance these identified themes to demonstrable action, some attempt should be made to prioritise these areas. This should include an assessment of current/recent initiatives based around these themes, their impact, and who has been involved in the planning and delivery of them. Given likely limited resources, it would be practical to identify where actions would yield the most beneficial results within sectors as well as identifying potential partners at an early stage.
Further work should seek to identify the characteristics of farmers at the frontier of productivity. If our farmers are world beating at this level, effort should be made to map the characteristics that these farms possess, as well as simply including them in benchmarking.
In terms of where action should be targeted, this will vary depending on the themes explored, but wherever possible, the starting point should be the wider food chain. Even for themes where competitiveness and resilience will be improved at the individual farm level, the whole food chain has the ability to act as the catalyst for positive change. In addition, there is a clear vested interest and responsibility to ensuring that the supply base is both competitive and resilient in the future.
In fleshing out the detail around the themes for further exploration, the some further thoughts are included for consideration in the individual areas for discussion.
1. DEFRA and government should adopt a light touch only by setting the framework for the direction of the industry as per a revised vision ie one for a food focused agriculture, whilst enhancing environmental features as per current course set with CPRE etc.
2. Structural change is vital and can only be accelarated with a. reduced SFP and b. taxation which artificially inflate rents and land values. We must drop the vision of needing to support ‘the family farm’ (they will survive if there is a business case and desire). So Govenment must drop APR and CGT rollover relief to reinvigorate the land market at historic low supply volumes. 3. DEFRA must support the key infrastructure investments we need ie a. sea defences (eg The Wash grade 1 and other lands will be lost otherwise) b. water storage c. d. improved soil structures/humus and worm level collapses and e. dramatically reduced dependence on oil in production – the latter must have a price signal to make private investors and technology and systems adapt ie carbon taxes.(that will spawn the replacments eg biodiesel from secondary quality land or localised small scale but numerous horticulture initiativesand farming by hand/horse using 7.2m economically inactive people wasted in this country, who can also assist with a defensive timber shortage crisis by planting up every hedegrow in Uk with quality oaks or similar resistant to temperature rise. 3. R&D should be sponsored working with Universities and Industry. 4. Similarly sponsor only benchmarking, but do not try to over monitor ‘resilience targets’. 5. Encourage via grant aid collaboration and cooperative ventures to capture value up supply chain and protect our physical crop in better condition throughout year, and to reduce price taking. In Summary, we need much more boldness about the country we want to be and the food/energy/climate crisis upon us. The most important industry to the UK is in fact farming. We are now not sefl sufficient. The approach we must adopt is akin too Churchillian or the Dutch draing the fens ie we are at war – a war for survival, and making sure we can do so in the Uk as one of the few safe places in the world to be, that can pull up the drawbridge as needs be and feed itself, from a low carbon input base. The same principles need adopting on our vital fish resource where the EU and DEFRA has failed the people, the marine environment and fish stocks. Too radical – no, all the signs are there – common sense dictates. Do not be scared to scare the public or fear being different than other EU countries – we need and want scaring so businesses can focus on investing in our security. We would regain national pride and purpose.