Abstract :
In North-western Europe, most of the land mass is classified as Less Favoured Area (LFA)
under European designation and hill farms in these areas are a major contributor to the
rural industry. Scotland alone is no different, as its rural land-based industry is fragile and
has been dependent for many decades on high and continued levels of support payments.
With recent agricultural policy reforms and changes in support for hill farmers, the future
of these farming businesses is uncertain, and one purpose of this paper is to understand
how they have already responded and might respond to further policy changes. This is not
only important for the land use economy but also for the wider Scottish rural community
and environment.
Data from three regions, typical of hill farming areas in mainland Scotland, was collated in
2007; firstly from a postal survey with 47 respondents, followed by 30 face-to-face on-farm
interviews. Farmers were asked to consider three time periods (2001–2005; 2005–2007;
2008–2013) and to detail any changes they had made, or planned to make, in their management
and livestock numbers. During the interviews, additional questions regarding their
motivations, drive and constraints were also asked.
Fifty-three percent of the farmers surveyed had made major management changes in
2001–2005; 49% made changes in 2005–2007 and 53% projected to do so in 2008–2013.
The main reported change was a decrease in animal numbers, due to economic factors, such
as costs of labour and feed, and loss of subsidies. Multivariate analysis (Principal Coordinate
and Cluster Analysis) of the results identified 3 clusters of farmers. Subsequent ANOVA and
Chi-square analyses on the clusters showed that age, education, impact on farm labour,
and impacts of neighbouring farms and their livestock reductions, were the differing farmers’ motivation and constraints when faced with reforms; this indicated
that policy development should rely on multi-faceted data sources. The interdependency
and fragility of these varied hill systems was highlighted by this study, pointing out the value
of more targeted delivery of policy mechanisms to reflect such diversity. This is not unique
to Scotland and reflects similar experiences elsewhere in Europe’s marginal agricultural
areas.the most important
factors that separated these clusters. Cluster 1 (adaptive farmers) broadly represented
extensive sheep farms with farmers, who could and did diversify their income; they were
also older and had the highest level of education. It was found that their animal management
was greatly influenced by their neighbours’ decisions. Cluster 2 (focused farmers)
was reflective of relatively more intensive sheep and beef farms, with no direct interest in
farm diversification. Cluster 3 (resource constrained farmers) comprised very large extensive
sheep and beef farms, which were also limited by their resources. Most ‘adaptive’ and
‘focused’ farmers planned to further modify their management in 2008–2013.
Declining stock numbers in the study farms were consistent with trends in agricultural
census data following the latest CAP reforms. However, the typology gave more insight of
