Guest blog written by Verity Winn, RSPB
A week on from the March for Clean Water, public outcry about sewage pollution in our waterways looms large. The impact of nitrogen fertilisers from agriculture on water quality, however, has received less attention, despite accounting for over 78% of nitrogen losses into water UK-wide in 2021 while sewage discharge accounted for 13%.
Since the 1950s, humans have more than doubled the amount of reactive nitrogen in the world, largely through agricultural practices and management. This is a legacy of government incentives after the Second World War, and subsequent increasing demand for cheap meat which has driven the intensification of livestock systems. Now, 95% of woodlands in the UK are overloaded with nitrogen and nitrous oxide contributes 6% of the UK’s total greenhouse gases, with a warming potential 237x that of CO2. This dynamic persists despite evidence suggesting many farm businesses could become more profitable by reducing inorganic nitrogen inputs.
A new report from the Sustainable Nitrogen Alliance and IEEP UK identifies several gaps in policy measures to reduce nitrogen loss from farming, including the absence of spatial targeting in Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) measures to reduce pollution and poor enforcement of regulation, after years of cuts in the Environment Agency. To achieve a more integrated approach, the report recommends increasing the budget for Environmental Land Management schemes (ELMs), allocating more of it to advice, and setting a pathway from the public goods delivered through ELMs to meeting statutory nature and climate targets.
Eastbrook Farm, credit to Elliot Neep
So, did last week’s budget boost ELMs ability to tackle nitrogen pollution from agriculture? While fears of a cut to Defra’s budget were allayed when the £2.4bn funding in England was maintained, the removal of ring-fenced funding means setting agricultural budgets in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will be a devolved matter. Whilst it is positive that funding was not cut, there is still a significant funding gap between the £1.8bn from this pot that will be spent on ELMs and the £2.6-3.2bn required to meet our climate and nature targets. Steeper than expected cuts to Basic Payments were also announced, which may drive more farmers to enter ELMs. Changes to Agricultural Property Relief (APR) also mean that land entered into ELMs schemes will receive the same tax exemptions as other farmed land, removing a barrier to scheme entry.
Decisions which determine whether ELMs can significantly reduce nitrogen pollution have yet to come. Access to good-quality advice is crucial to ensuring schemes deliver, and providing this to farmers receiving funding through the SFI could dramatically improve its outcomes. This budget also means there is no more capacity to waste money on low-value actions. For example, maintaining buffer strips next to watercourses used to be required by previous cross compliance regulations, but is now paid for through the SFI. This, along with nutrient management plans, should be transitioned into the regulatory baseline over time as basic sustainable practices; this would ramp up action and save money.
To meet pressing targets to bring our waterways and protected sites into good condition, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and polluted air, Government must now spend the allocated budget wisely. By investing in advice, enforcement capacity, optimising spend in the SFI, and filling gaps in regulation, Government can unlock ELMs’ ability to turn the tide on nitrogen pollution.
Eversfield Organic Farm
Comments