Uphill or downhill – where next for the uplands?
People tend to think of the uplands as wild areas, but the truth is very different. Influenced by humans over thousands of years, today they support farming, forestry and outdoor recreation. They provide more than 70% of our drinking water, store billions of tonnes of carbon and are home to rare wildlife. Yet many hill farmers dependent upon subsidies face a difficult future and many communities do not have adequate access to services. We cannot be complacent about their future. How, then, can we find ways to reward these different outputs? Jessica Sellick investigates.
The uplands span the north of England and the mountainous Lake District, Pennines, and Yorkshire Dales through to the south west and Dartmoor, the Quantocks and Bodmin Moor. Defined by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) as comprising ‘Less Favoured Areas’ (the EU classification for socially and economically disadvantaged areas established in 1975) and by Natural England as land above 300 metres; these geographically remote areas are nationally and internationally important landscapes, formed by generations of history, culture, agricultural endeavour and traditions. According to the Statistical Digest of the English Uplands, in 2010 approximately 2 million people lived in Less Favoured Areas (4% of the population of England) and between 2001 and 2010 the population increased by 3%. Yet, on average, upland areas had lower overall accessibility to services, with 46.9% of the population likely to access a range of services by public transport or walking compared to the England average of 52.1% (actual figures vary from service to service). Average broadband speeds were also slower in upland areas (0.5Mbit/s to 3.1Mbit/s), with 16% of households receiving broadband speeds of less than 2Mbit/s. While upland communities face many of the challenges characterising other parts of rural England (e.g. access to healthcare, transport, village shops, pubs and post offices) these are amplified by the topography. Furthermore, with agriculture the principle form of land management, many hill farmers are operating at the margins of financial viability, with low, or even negative, returns.
We are also in a period of change with the impact of the recession and economic downturn, negotiating the next phase of the Common Agricultural Policy, a shift in viewpoint towards ecosystem services and public goods, increasing farm input costs, rising food prices, and the ‘digital divide’ affecting many upland communities. Amid these changes, how can the potential of the English uplands be realised? What do we want the uplands to deliver and for whom? How can differing viewpoints be reconciled and ‘balanced’? I offer three points.
First, the ‘uplands’ has been taken up by policy and decision-makers at a national level. The Commission for Rural Communities (CRC) and EFRA Select Committee both called for a fundamental shift in the way we look at the uplands, citing them as areas of significant environmental, cultural and social value and calling on the Government to produce an integrated strategy setting out how it would ensure the viability of hill farming. If the potential of the uplands is to be realised levers around the payment for public goods, the future of farming, investing in communications infrastructure and using planning for sustainable housing and business need to be addressed.
The ‘uplands’ has become a specific policy priority within Defra. In launching the Uplands Policy Review in March 2011, the Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said she was “determined that these areas will not be overlooked and that is why I will champion their interests right from the centre of Government”. The Review takes up many of the issues cited by the CRC and EFRA Select Committee. For example, the Government, in partnership with other agencies, wants to encourage hill farmers to improve their competitiveness, develop mechanisms for ‘ecosystem services’ and promote rural communities in government policies and programmes.
Collectively, what these policy documents bring to the fore is a need to think about how upland land management can provide a reasonable standard of living and sustainable future not only for hill farmers but for all rural residents. A Minimum Income Standard for the United Kingdom (MIS) is an ongoing research programme at Loughborough University defining what level of income is needed to allow a minimum acceptable standard of living today. According to the MIS, single, working-age adults need to earn at least £15,600 a year in rural towns, £17,900 in villages and £18,600 in hamlets or remote countryside to reach a minimum living standard, compared to £14,400 in urban areas. How can we develop the right frameworks for individuals and communities so that they can achieve the £18,600 required to obtain a ‘reasonable’ rural standard of living?
Second, various policy adjustments are being made to tackle living standards. Defra’s Business Plan (2011-2015), for example, includes reference to ‘the development of affordable measures of support for hill farmers’; and a range of upland measures have been incorporated into the delivery of the Rural Development Programme for England, the Task Force on Farming Regulation, and rural community broadband fund. A ‘championing role’ now falls within the remit of the Rural Communities Policy Unit (RCPU). In January 2012 a Rural and Farming Network was announced, comprising 14 local groups from across England that will now feedback local issues and concerns directly to Government. With Caroline Spelman describing how “for too long, little was done to address rural poverty or rural employment”. These have been accompanied by a range of policy measures from other government departments, notably Communities and Local Government (localism = big society activities, housing and planning reforms); and HM Treasury and Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (Growth Review = new rural economy measures, rural growth networks).
While Defra is leading on the rural aspects of these policies, to what extent are they participatory and adapted to meet remote rural needs and circumstances? It is important to recognise the considerable variation between individual towns and villages and parts of England that comprise the uplands (e.g. MIS figures vary according to your degree of rurality), nor is there a Rural and Farming Network covering North West England. How will government policies become ‘more rural friendly?’ Will these policy adjustments address fragmentation wherein land management is broken between numerous bodies (e.g. Natural England, Forestry Commission, Environment Agency, Trading Standards, Rural Payments Agency) to provide a truly integrated approach? In these difficult economic times will the measures announced so far be successful in ‘wiring up’ communities and creating secure livelihoods for farmers or will any success be piecemeal?
Third, and perhaps most importantly of all, in practice I think we still need to address what it is that we expect from these special and treasured places. What does a sustainable future for the uplands look like? Is it about producing food or ecosystem services? Growing a green economy and building resilience to climate change? Providing clean drinking water or preserving settlements and scenery for visitors to enjoy? Incorporating rural voices into policy making? Or all of the above? If so, what weighting should we assign to each output? Natural England’s ‘Viital Uplands: a Vision for England’s uplands‘ presented a blueprint for 2060 which sought to reconcile issues around using land to produce food whilst delivering multiple public benefits. The Vision was underpinned by the better management of soils, woodlands and grazing systems alongside the provision of green energy and low carbon growth. Rose Regeneration is presently working with farmers in the North of England to understand the challenges that they face living on low incomes. Farmers want to earn a living from the livestock they raise and are proud individuals who do not want to rely on handouts. However, the current policy agenda means that some farmers do not feel able to invest in their farms or livelihoods, describing how: “We’re not in control of what we do anymore, there’s little in the way of security”, “there are too many pressures from external bodies…there are lots of fingers in the agricultural pie” and “it’s like being told you have to speak Greek or we’re taking something away from you tomorrow”. How can we respond to their concerns and create the conditions for viable incomes whilst enhancing environmental quality?
Whilst the benefits that these stunning landscapes deliver are huge we are at a crossroads in thinking how we balance all of these outputs and improve people’s livelihoods. This requires us to be much clearer about the character of the uplands we long for. To explore these issues further, the Rural Services Network is holding a seminar on 22 February at the University of Cumbria (Ambleside campus). The programme will consider the pressures the uplands are under, how are they changing, what the future might hold and how we can prepare. The day will include presentations from Dr Lois Mansfield on ‘Whole Valley Planning: the next 50 years’ and Will Rawling and Dorothy Wilkinson (from the Cumbria Farmer Network). Places are limited to 50 delegates. To book your place please contact Wendy Cooper at the RSN by email wendy.cooper@sparse.gov.uk or telephone 01822 813693.
Jessica Sellick has undertaken a variety of projects on food and farming covering a number of issues. These include: how the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) can be reformed to benefit rural communities; how food box schemes can reduce waste and promote health and well-being; economic impact studies of livestock markets; the viability of auction marts; and farm poverty. Jessica can be contacted by email jessica.sellick@roseregeneration.co.uk or telephone 01522 521211.
