Search

This deliverable D7.6 of the LIFT project is the final scientific deliverable of the project that was carried out during four years from May 2018 till April 2022. The deliverable summarises the methodologies used and the key results for the main research activities that were carried out in LIFT: definition of ecological agriculture; adoption of ecological approaches; farm performance of ecological agriculture; territorial sustainability of ecological agriculture; trade-offs and synergies across sustainability dimensions and scales; impact of policies; role of stakeholders. Recommendations in terms of policies, data and research needs, are then provided.

In light of the ambitions of the European Union (EU) to achieve an ecological transition of its agricultural sector it is crucial to assess and continuously monitor (i) the uptake of main ecological approaches by farms and (ii) associated effects on farm performance, considering all sustainability dimensions (economic, environmental, social) jointly. Given these needs, in the present deliverable D5.1 of the LIFT project, we develop a novel indicator system, which combines the LIFT farm typology and farm performance data, covering all sustainability dimensions. The approach compares performance of farms in five ecological groups (referred to as ecological farming approaches or ecological farming systems) from the LIFT farm typology (Conservation Agriculture, Low-Input farming, Integrated/Circular farming, Organic farming, Agroecology) as well as possible combinations of these groups with a less ecological group, referred to as Standard farming. This allows us to depict whether ecological farms perform differently or have different trade-offs and synergies than standard farms. Based on this system, we carry out a farm sustainability performance assessment with the two main data sources in the LIFT project, namely Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) data and data from the LIFT large-scale farmer survey, covering main farm types present in the European Union (EU) in several case study regions/countries. Additionally, we present in-depth analyses of further specific aspects, namely (i) the extension of the developed indicator framework to bio-economic models, (ii) the integration of the consumption and provision of ecosystem services into the developed indicator system through composite agri-environmental performance (AEP) indicators, derived from the body of secondary literature and region-specific stakeholder input, and (iii) working conditions and employment on farms in the context of an ecological transition. Overall, our results show the importance of considering trade-offs and synergies both within and between farm sustainability dimensions, in the assessment of farm level sustainability performance of ecological farming approaches. Our results also highlight that in many cases the effects of an increasing uptake of ecological approaches are heterogenous and need to be investigated further. We clearly point out the assumptions associated with our approach as well as its limitations. Given these limitations, the LIFT farm sustainability performance assessment developed here is nevertheless well suited for large-scale and long-term monitoring. This is based on readily available FADN data and, in the near future, could be based on Farm Sustainability Data Network (FSDN) data, providing an in-depth exploratory view for policy makers and researchers regarding farm level sustainability performance of ecological approaches in the EU farming sector. We outline several possible avenues for further research, namely (i) the inclusion of other data sources, (ii) the usage of econometric methods to facilitate causal inference, (iii) the broader usage of the developed composite AEP indicators, and (iv) further in-depth studies regarding the social sustainability dimension. Finally, in terms of policy recommendations we point out the importance of (i) flexible policy measures, able to properly address region-specific needs of farms, (ii) sound data as a basis for evidence-based policy, and (iii) investigating the ecological transition of the EU farming sector in more detail also at regional level, e.g. via living labs.

Early adoption of ecological management practices by farmers is a potential route to achieving sustainable and greener goals for agriculture. This briefing note outlines an economic assessment of four different ecological practiceson Scottish livestock farms. The ecological practices used are; ecological area, reducing farm inputs, organic adoption and agro-forestry. The results suggest that ecological area and reduced farm inputs have potential financial benefits on farms and can be easily adopted by farmers. The organic and agro-forestry systems, however, require capital investment to establish and hence provide a challenging prospect of adoption without a provision of financial support

Addressing both climate and biodiversity emergencies requires support for transitions to more ecological and climate friendly farming practices. Key to this will be the practices already adopted by Scottish farmers but also the incentives we offer to support change in our current farming practice. Key to this will be the underlying attitudes and perspective of farmers towards adopting ecological approaches. This briefing note outlines the results of a survey of Scottish farmers on their attitudes and perspectives towards ecological practices. It is part of the EU funded LIFT project looking at farming across Europe. We compare Scottish farmer perceptions to those of counterpart farmers in mainland Europe. This allows us to identify whether there are stronger or weaker levels of agreement towards these statements and whether they are significantly different from a mainland European perspective. We find that Scottish farmers have higher levels of agreement in a number of areas towards positive external influence, namely supply chain acceptability of ecological approaches and social acceptance of ecological approaches. Conversely, we find lower levels of agreement to more internal influences such as farmer outlooks towards ecological approaches and some farming goals. This suggests they identify less as an ecological farmer compared to those on mainland Europe. Nevertheless, agreement is still high with Scottish farmers towards some of these statements. Overall, the surveyed Scottish farmer perspectives are positive towards ecological approaches, when compared against other European farmers. Raising favourable outlook outlooks towards these practices may be enabled by a policy direction which embeds these approaches within a replacement to the CAP as a means to promote more mainstreaming of practices.

This plan formalises specific operations (meetings and agendas), at Work Package (WP) and sub-WP level for the following 12 months. The output will be formalised via the private workspace, and associated project management software. The plan will identify and facilitate the necessary Coordination to help ensure the timely delivery and success of linked project activities and meetings or workshops. This plan will also help inform the framework of the Data Management Plan.&nbsp

The series of decision models produced in this Deliverable (D8.2) will be integrated into a model for the assessment of overall sustainability of legume systems, with respect to the identification of key legume-based system indicators for the three pillars of sustainability. The decision model will be then used for evaluation of the relative sustainability of transition pathways to more effective scenarios.&nbsp

Impact Plan: this Deliverable report (D9.8, D56) is directed by feedback from TRUE’s Stakeholder Advisory Board (SAB, the commercial partners), and also from other multi-actors engaged via the ISAB (Intercontinental Science Advisory Board), and including operatives of the European Legume Innovation Network (or ‘E-LIN’) workshops, existing relevant H2020 research projects, and successful RUR (rural renaissance) projects. This direction will help ensure research complementarity, synergy and science excellence. The aim of this report is to define the best routes to impact. &nbsp

This Deliverable describes the Project Legacy Plan (version I) of the TRUE-Project. It formally details how the various products developed from TRUE-Project activities will be manged and coordinated to ensure project impact legacy beyond the funded project term. To improve this aim the bulk of this document present a highly detailed series of vignettes that capture a wide range of perspectives from the exercise of, 'considering legumes in context'. Going forward, the TRUE-Project’s implementation plans will be developed based on these insights. Also, delivered collectively, they are expected to encourage transition from current conventional food- and feed-networks, to those which are legume-based and more sustainable.

This is the final report on this deliverable. It presents a methodological description of the sector model, CAPRI, and the scenarios used to examine legume production under three different pathways which were assumed to be the conditions which would lead to increase legume production in the EU27+UK. Three alternative legume production scenarios have been identified and described including changes in legume support payment (policy), dietary change (consumer demand) and soya import ban (trade). The scenario results were compared with a baseline scenario, analysed and presented in this report.

Early adoption of ecological management practices by farmers is a potential route to achieving sustainable and greener goals for agriculture. This briefing note outlines an economic assessment of four different ecological practices on Scottish livestock farms. The ecological practices used are; ecological area, reducing farm inputs, organic adoption and agro-forestry. The results suggest that ecological area and reduced farm inputs have potential financial benefits on farms and can be easily adopted by farmers. The organic and agro-forestry systems, however, require capital investment to establish and hence provide a challenging prospect of adoption without a provision of financial support

This deliverable (D2.3) of the LIFT project presents the results of a series of investigations around up-take of ecological approaches across the value chain. We use primary and secondary data collected utilising a number of methods, built on conceptual frameworks developed within LIFT and elsewhere. This provides a range of empirical investigations for an overview of farming, supply chains and consumption drivers which may constrain or enable uptake of ecological approaches. Both exogenous and endogenous drivers were considered for these studies. The report is presented as a set of summaries from academic paper outputs - to show the individual exercises across farmers, value chains and consumers – and to understand both the barriers and enablers for transition to more ecological approaches within European farming. A summary table is provided to show these investigations, as well as the approach used and the type of data collected. Specifically the following sets of studies are presented: Typologies of farm activity and farmer perceptions towards ecological practices.This allows us to partition a large scale farmer dataset (from the LIFT large-scale farmer survey) with multiple variables of interest [papers 1,2]. Examination of the exogenous and endogenous drivers behind ecological uptake, such as gender, the farm family life-cycle, neighbouring farms and supply chains.These papers take either a quantitative approach, through the application of behavioural models, or a qualitative approach to understand what drives this decision to adopt ecological practices [papers 3,4,5,6]. Examination of the value chain, collaboration and cooperation.These are explored through quantitative and qualitative routes to understand how value chains operate for ecological practices, compared to conventional practices, and how actors engage within specific value chains [papers 7,8,9,10,11]. Finally the role of consumption is explored, through market segmentation, labels or specific traits of food products that offer opportunities to promote ecological practices [papers 12,13,14]. Overall, we find much heterogeneity in both practice and attitudes towards production and consumption of ecological approaches. The investigations presented here provide illustrations of how these approaches and perceptions are driven by both personal, informal and formal institutional influences, such as the support from local market conditions or sharing of knowledge. This leads to us understand the relationships between economic and non-economic goals, which are key to eventual uptake of ecological approaches. Incentives were considered to balance the conflicts between endogenous and exogenous drivers, such as labelling and support for social incentives, but also as a means to overcome perceived or real barriers through mechanisms which support further collaboration between farmers.

This Deliverable report presents the impact of key factors influencing decision making of farmers and consumers to uptake legume cultivation and, respectively, the choice to include legumes into diets. Results provide guidance on determinants of positive behavioural change towards legume inclusion. Farmer and consumer analyses are based on survey data for the UK farmers and consumers, and findings are discussed comparatively in the context of European production and consumption and main factors potentially influencing behaviours and trends. The report informs how we may operate more effectively to affect behavioural change positively towards legume inclusion.

This deliverable D2.1 of the LIFT project presents the conceptual framework on farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches across the supply chain. The framework combines behavioural theories on individual decision-making with drivers and methodological considerations related to economic decision-making. Furthermore, deliverable D2.1 presents a systematic map of previous literature related to farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches. The purpose of D2.1 is to guide data collection through the LIFT survey to farmers and interview studies in WP (workpackage) 2 of LIFT. The theoretical part of the framework departs from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) for understanding individual decision-making, extended by integrating the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Furthermore, the framework distinguishes between endogenous, as well as exogenous factors such as: (i) motivational factors; (ii) farmers’ self-identity; (iii) farm characteristics; (iv) supply-chain characteristics; (v) institutional conditions (including policy framework); and (vi) consumers’ preferences and demands. Factors serve to identify the main drivers of farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches, and to enable comparison of different dimensions of up-take across territories. The decision to implement the up-take of ecological approaches is approached across four different dimensions, according to their: (i) timing; (ii) intensity/extensity; (iii) size of change, and (iv) type of practices adopted. These dimensions are important since the factors that affect the decision to adopt have been found to differ across them. The deliverable continues by presenting a systematic map of previous literature related to farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches. Two methodological approaches for understanding the drivers of farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches are suggested: psychometric methodology and qualitative interviews, using the means-end chain and laddering approach. The deliverable ends by concluding on implications for the LIFT farmers’ survey.

This document presents the results of Task 3.2 (farm technical-economic performance) in workpackage (WP) 3 (farm performance of ecological agriculture) of the LIFT project. The overall aim of Task 3.2 is to assess and compare technical-economic farm performance across the European Union (EU) depending on the degree of ecological approaches adopted by farms and analyse drivers, affecting their performance. This requires an approach, which allows to consider regional specifics, while still allowing comparisons between different regions and countries. The deliverable thus consists of several academic papers, focussing on a range of different case studies, applying a wide range of methods, which can most generally be divided into empirical econometric approaches and bio-economic models. At the same time, all case studies follow a similar structure and include some common elements in terms of the applied methods, in particular a set of common indicators of technical-economic farm performance was implemented in several papers. Various approaches to differentiate farms according to the degree of ecological approaches adopted were explored, including the LIFT farm typology developed in WP1 and other strategies. Overall, our results show that the wide variety of farm types and biophysical, socio-economic and political framework conditions present in the EU matter: results of comparing technical-economic farm performance depending on the degree of ecological approaches adopted, as well as with respect to drivers of farm technical-economic performance, are heterogenous and vary between the different analyses. Therefore, this heterogeneity needs to be considered by policy makers and can most likely best be addressed by providing a policy framework, which provides the necessary flexibility to adjust measures to region-specific framework conditions in order to foster economic viability of farms in the context of an ecological transition of EU agriculture. Building on the results of this deliverable and the other deliverables within WP3, Task 5.1 will in a next step undertake an integrative assessment of all performance dimensions jointly (technical-economic, environmental and private-social performance as well as employment effects at the farm level), uncovering associated trade-offs and synergies of an increasing uptake of ecological approaches in the EU farming sector, while WP6, in particular Task 6.2 and Task 6.3, will further investigate the role of policies in the development of ecological agriculture.

The industrialisation of agri-food systems and the demise of home-grown legumes in Europe P.P.M. Iannetta1,*, ±, B. Balázs2, G. Begg1, M. Debeljak3, K.T. Hamann4, B. Howard5, E. Kelemen2, A. Kolmans6, H. Maaß6, G. Ntatsi7,8, N. Quesada1, F. Tran1, A. Trajanov3, D. Savvas7, S. Shrestha9, D. Styles10, L. Toma9, M.W. Vasconcelos11, R. Vickers5, M. Williams12 and G.R. Squire1 1 Ecological Sciences, James Hutton Institute, Dundee, Scotland, UK 2 Environmental Social Science Research Group, Budapest, Hungary 3 Department of Knowledge Technologies, The Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia 4 Institute for Food Studies & Agroindustrial Development, Hoersholm, Denmark 5 PGRO, The Research Station, Great North Road, Thornhaugh, Peterborough, England, UK 6 Research Centre Global Food Security and Ecosystems, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany 7 Agricultural University of Athens, Department of Crop Science, Athens, Greece 8 Institute of Plant Breeding and Genetic Resources, ELGO-DEMETER, Thermi, Thessaloniki, Greece 9 SRUC, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH93JG, Scotland, UK 10 SNS, Bangor University, Bangor, Wales, UK 11 Universidade Católica Portuguesa, CBQF Laboratório Associado, Escola Superior de Biotecnologia, Porto, Portugal 12 Department of Botany, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland ∗ Speaker ± Corresponding author: pete.iannetta@hutton.ac.uk 1 Introduction The multiple benefits of well-managed legume-supported agri-food systems are known and include provision of: nutritious feed and food; natural nitrogen cycling; improved soil qualities; lowered greenhouse gas emissions; protection of biodiversity; and good-food culture and literacy. Yet, these benefits are all-but forfeited since the vast majority of the legume grains used in Europe are not home-grown, and only rarely (knowingly), consumed directly by humans. Legume grains are mainly imported in the form of soybean for use as animal feed. Consequently, European farmed systems are characterised by specialised and intensive approaches using crops dependent on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and pesticide inputs - again mainly routed to meat production. Harmonising of ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability’ (‘social’, ‘environmental’ and ‘economic’: Passet, 1979), demands that greater functional understanding (Figure 1) is applied and with respect to legumes. Figure 1.(see slide 21) An illustrative model (opposite) which aims to help re-define ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability’, in functional- or relational-terms, Each www.true-project.eu Work Package (WP) will define indicators of new sub-pillar components. WP8 Transition Design (not shown), is developing a Decision Support System to identify indicators of sustainable function for each pillar individually, and collectively. 2 Materials and methods New insight was gained from knowledge sources, including: 1, the multi-stakeholder European Legume Innovation Network (LIN) workshops (www.true-project.eu/lin-workshops/); 2, the ECs report on, “Market developments and policy evaluation aspects of the plant protein sector in the EU” (https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/plants_and_plant_products/documents/plant-proteins-study-report_en.pdf); 3, abstracts and outputs made during the European Plant Protein Plan launch (https://ec.europa.eu/info/events/development-plant-proteins-europe-opportunities-and-challenges-2018-nov-22_en); 4, recent articles such as Eyhorn et al., (2019); and 5, the public Deliverable, ‘Coproduction of policy assessment’ (https://www.true-project.eu/publications-resources/deliverables/), published by the EU H2020 funded project TRUE. 3 Results Modern day agri-food systems in Europe are characterised by high input dependency and a low level of environmental and societal safeguarding. However, the rejection of legume-based cropping systems preceded the global trade in grain legumes and the introduction of synthetic nitrogen fertilisers by several decades. This coincided with a period of increasing specialisation and intensification of production units to serve high-throughput processing units which demanded the highest possible yields - which could not be provided by grain legumes. These local market challenges have been exacerbated by current day global trade trends whereby political decisions permit the importation of soya and other legume-based protein products to the EU. These imports are allowed at low rates in exchange for low export-tariff rates on cereals and oilseeds. If sustainable agri-food systems are to be enabled in Europe, effective policies and capacities must recognise these historical, and forfeited socio-ecological contexts. 4 Discussion and Conclusions Consumers are no longer passive recipients in a global protein market and wish to realise more-sustainable consumption. They question the nature of their food, such as its nutritional value, environmental impact of production plus authenticity and provenance. Demitarianism is increasing and specific types of carbohydrate are sought to help offset obesity and diabetes. The diversification of cropping systems and good agronomy will not by themselves realise more-sustainable legume supported food- and feed-chains. Greater cooperation among all supply chain actors is essential to establish a more-effective policy environment to help realise consumers’ desires for access to the most-nutritious of food, affordably, and which is produced in a manner that ensures protection of the environment and biodiversity. Acknowledgments This research is supported by the European Union Horizon-2020 project ‘TRansition paths to sUstainable legume-based systems in Europe’ (TRUE, www.true-project.eu), Grant Agreement 727973; and the Scottish Government’s Strategic Research Programme. The James Hutton Institute (www.hutton.ac.uk) is supported by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services (RESAS), a division of the Scottish Government. References Eyhorn et al., (2019). Sustainability in global agriculture driven by organic farming. Nature Sustainability, 253. Passet, R. (1979).L'économique et le vivant[The economic and the living] 23, Payot. &nbsp

This questionnaire is for the survey to farmers that is to be carried out in the LIFT project, to at least 1,500 farms across the European Union (EU) in the LIFT case study areas. The LIFT large-scale farmer survey represents a key task that provides value added to the LIFT project and informs EU policy anal-ysis as a whole. The innovation is that it collects primary qualitative and quantitative data at the farm level, but also that data will be comparable across a large geographical area, across different produc-tion sectors, as well as across different farming practices/systems. The survey aims at collecting infor-mation that is not available in existing data sources, and that will be used in the analyses of the project.

The industrialisation of agri-food systems and the demise of home-grown legumes in Europe P.P.M. Iannetta1,*, ±, B. Balázs2, G. Begg1, M. Debeljak3, K.T. Hamann4, B. Howard5, E. Kelemen2, A. Kolmans6, H. Maaß6, G. Ntatsi7,8, N. Quesada1, F. Tran1, A. Trajanov3, D. Savvas7, S. Shrestha9, D. Styles10, L. Toma9, M.W. Vasconcelos11, R. Vickers5, M. Williams12 and G.R. Squire1 1 Ecological Sciences, James Hutton Institute, Dundee, Scotland, UK 2 Environmental Social Science Research Group, Budapest, Hungary 3 Department of Knowledge Technologies, The Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia 4 Institute for Food Studies & Agroindustrial Development, Hoersholm, Denmark 5 PGRO, The Research Station, Great North Road, Thornhaugh, Peterborough, England, UK 6 Research Centre Global Food Security and Ecosystems, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany 7 Agricultural University of Athens, Department of Crop Science, Athens, Greece 8 Institute of Plant Breeding and Genetic Resources, ELGO-DEMETER, Thermi, Thessaloniki, Greece 9 SRUC, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH93JG, Scotland, UK 10 SNS, Bangor University, Bangor, Wales, UK 11 Universidade Católica Portuguesa, CBQF Laboratório Associado, Escola Superior de Biotecnologia, Porto, Portugal 12 Department of Botany, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland ∗ Speaker ± Corresponding author: pete.iannetta@hutton.ac.uk 1 Introduction The multiple benefits of well-managed legume-supported agri-food systems are known and include provision of: nutritious feed and food; natural nitrogen cycling; improved soil qualities; lowered greenhouse gas emissions; protection of biodiversity; and good-food culture and literacy. Yet, these benefits are all-but forfeited since the vast majority of the legume grains used in Europe are not home-grown, and only rarely (knowingly), consumed directly by humans. Legume grains are mainly imported in the form of soybean for use as animal feed. Consequently, European farmed systems are characterised by specialised and intensive approaches using crops dependent on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and pesticide inputs - again mainly routed to meat production. Harmonising of ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability’ (‘social’, ‘environmental’ and ‘economic’: Passet, 1979), demands that greater functional understanding (Figure 1) is applied and with respect to legumes. Figure 1. (see slide 21) An illustrative model (opposite) which aims to help re-define ‘The Three Pillars of Sustainability’, in functional- or relational-terms, Each www.true-project.eu Work Package (WP) will define indicators of new sub-pillar components. WP8 Transition Design (not shown), is developing a Decision Support System to identify indicators of sustainable function for each pillar individually, and collectively. 2 Materials and methods New insight was gained from knowledge sources, including: 1, the multi-stakeholder European Legume Innovation Network (LIN) workshops (www.true-project.eu/lin-workshops/); 2, the ECs report on, “Market developments and policy evaluation aspects of the plant protein sector in the EU” (https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/plants_and_plant_products/documents/plant-proteins-study-report_en.pdf); 3, abstracts and outputs made during the European Plant Protein Plan launch (https://ec.europa.eu/info/events/development-plant-proteins-europe-opportunities-and-challenges-2018-nov-22_en); 4, recent articles such as Eyhorn et al., (2019); and 5, the public Deliverable, ‘Coproduction of policy assessment’ (https://www.true-project.eu/publications-resources/deliverables/), published by the EU H2020 funded project TRUE. 3 Results Modern day agri-food systems in Europe are characterised by high input dependency and a low level of environmental and societal safeguarding. However, the rejection of legume-based cropping systems preceded the global trade in grain legumes and the introduction of synthetic nitrogen fertilisers by several decades. This coincided with a period of increasing specialisation and intensification of production units to serve high-throughput processing units which demanded the highest possible yields - which could not be provided by grain legumes. These local market challenges have been exacerbated by current day global trade trends whereby political decisions permit the importation of soya and other legume-based protein products to the EU. These imports are allowed at low rates in exchange for low export-tariff rates on cereals and oilseeds. If sustainable agri-food systems are to be enabled in Europe, effective policies and capacities must recognise these historical, and forfeited socio-ecological contexts. 4 Discussion and Conclusions Consumers are no longer passive recipients in a global protein market and wish to realise more-sustainable consumption. They question the nature of their food, such as its nutritional value, environmental impact of production plus authenticity and provenance. Demitarianism is increasing and specific types of carbohydrate are sought to help offset obesity and diabetes. The diversification of cropping systems and good agronomy will not by themselves realise more-sustainable legume supported food- and feed-chains. Greater cooperation among all supply chain actors is essential to establish a more-effective policy environment to help realise consumers’ desires for access to the most-nutritious of food, affordably, and which is produced in a manner that ensures protection of the environment and biodiversity. Acknowledgments This research is supported by the European Union Horizon-2020 project ‘TRansition paths to sUstainable legume-based systems in Europe’ (TRUE, www.true-project.eu), Grant Agreement 727973; and the Scottish Government’s Strategic Research Programme. The James Hutton Institute (www.hutton.ac.uk) is supported by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services (RESAS), a division of the Scottish Government. References Eyhorn et al., (2019). Sustainability in global agriculture driven by organic farming. Nature Sustainability, 253. Passet, R. (1979). L'économique et le vivant [The economic and the living] 23, Payot., For Figure 1 see slide (page) 21

Addressing both climate and biodiversity emergencies requires support for transitions to more ecological and climate friendly farming practices. Key to this will be the practices already adopted by Scottish farmers but also the incentives we offer to support change in our current farming practice. Key to this will be the underlying attitudes and perspective of farmers towards adopting ecological approaches. This briefing note outlines the results of a survey of Scottish farmers on their attitudes and perspectives towards ecological practices. It is part of the EU funded LIFT project looking at farming across Europe. We compare Scottish farmer perceptions to those of counterpart farmers in mainland Europe. This allows us to identify whether there are stronger or weaker levels of agreement towards these statements and whether they are significantly different from a mainland European perspective. We find that Scottish farmers have higher levels of agreement in a number of areas towards positive external influence, namely supply chain acceptability of ecological approaches and social acceptance of ecological approaches. Conversely, we find lower levels of agreement to more internal influences such as farmer outlooks towards ecological approaches and some farming goals. This suggests they identify less as an ecological farmer compared to those on mainland Europe. Nevertheless, agreement is still high with Scottish farmers towards some of these statements. Overall, the surveyed Scottish farmer perspectives are positive towards ecological approaches, when compared against other European farmers. Raising favourable outlook outlooks towards these practices may be enabled by a policy direction which embeds these approaches within a replacement to the CAP as a means to promote more mainstreaming of practices.&nbsp

This document presents the results of Task 3.2 (farm technical-economic performance) in workpackage (WP) 3 (farm performance of ecological agriculture) of the LIFT project. The overall aim of Task 3.2 is to assess and compare technical-economic farm performance across the European Union (EU) depending on the degree of ecological approaches adopted by farms and analyse drivers, affecting their performance. This requires an approach, which allows to consider regional specifics, while still allowing comparisons between different regions and countries. The deliverable thus consists of several academic papers, focussing on a range of different case studies, applying a wide range of methods, which can most generally be divided into empirical econometric approaches and bio-economic models. At the same time, all case studies follow a similar structure and include some common elements in terms of the applied methods, in particular a set of common indicators of technical-economic farm performance was implemented in several papers. Various approaches to differentiate farms according to the degree of ecological approaches adopted were explored, including the LIFT farm typology developed in WP1 and other strategies. Overall, our results show that the wide variety of farm types and biophysical, socio-economic and political framework conditions present in the EU matter: results of comparing technical-economic farm performance depending on the degree of ecological approaches adopted, as well as with respect to drivers of farm technical-economic performance, are heterogenous and vary between the different analyses. Therefore, this heterogeneity needs to be considered by policy makers and can most likely best be addressed by providing a policy framework, which provides the necessary flexibility to adjust measures to region-specific framework conditions in order to foster economic viability of farms in the context of an ecological transition of EU agriculture. Building on the results of this deliverable and the other deliverables within WP3, Task 5.1 will in a next step undertake an integrative assessment of all performance dimensions jointly (technical-economic, environmental and private-social performance as well as employment effects at the farm level), uncovering associated trade-offs and synergies of an increasing uptake of ecological approaches in the EU farming sector, while WP6, in particular Task 6.2 and Task 6.3, will further investigate the role of policies in the development of ecological agriculture.

This deliverable D2.1 of the LIFT project presents the conceptual framework on farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches across the supply chain. The framework combines behavioural theories on individual decision-making with drivers and methodological considerations related to economic decision-making. Furthermore, deliverable D2.1 presents a systematic map of previous literature related to farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches. The purpose of D2.1 is to guide data collection through the LIFT survey to farmers and interview studies in WP (workpackage) 2 of LIFT. The theoretical part of the framework departs from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) for understanding individual decision-making, extended by integrating the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Furthermore, the framework distinguishes between endogenous, as well as exogenous factors such as: (i) motivational factors; (ii) farmers’ self-identity; (iii) farm characteristics; (iv) supply-chain characteristics; (v) institutional conditions (including policy framework); and (vi) consumers’ preferences and demands. Factors serve to identify the main drivers of farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches, and to enable comparison of different dimensions of up-take across territories. The decision to implement the up-take of ecological approaches is approached across four different dimensions, according to their: (i) timing; (ii) intensity/extensity; (iii) size of change, and (iv) type of practices adopted. These dimensions are important since the factors that affect the decision to adopt have been found to differ across them. The deliverable continues by presenting a systematic map of previous literature related to farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches. Two methodological approaches for understanding the drivers of farmers’ up-take of ecological approaches are suggested: psychometric methodology and qualitative interviews, using the means-end chain and laddering approach. The deliverable ends by concluding on implications for the LIFT farmers’ survey.

Social performance is the pillar of sustainability that is the most often neglected, compared to the evaluation of environmental and economic performances of farming systems. Farmers’ working conditions are rarely studied. To understand farmers’ working conditions and to assess them, it is necessary to develop a multicriteria approach including not only quantifiable dimensions (e.g., the length of working days) but also dimensions that can explain how working conditions are experienced by workers (e.g., by understanding farmer’s reasons for acting). Multiple factors contribute to determine farmers’ working conditions such as the composition of the workforce, the region, but also the degree of uptake of ecological practices. This deliverable contributes to knowledge on this issue, explaining the work carried out in task 3.3 of the LIFT project. The main objectives of task 3.3 were: i) to describe farmers’ and farm workers’ working conditions in different farming systems characterised by different degrees of uptake or ecological practices and; ii) to identify factors explaining these working conditions (degree of uptake of ecological practices, workforce composition, country, etc.). To achieve these objectives, a set of indicators on working conditions was selected in a two-step approach: firstly, a theoretical basis from the literature, and, secondly, expert knowledge in the LIFT partners. Primary data was collected during interviews with 160 farmers in five European Union (EU) regions (Brittany in France, Puy-de-Dôme in France, Crete in Greece, Ireland, Salzburg area in Austria, Umgebung Steyr-Kirchdorf in Austria). Statistical analysis was conducted to describe the diversity of indicators (working conditions, workforce composition and farm structure) within the whole sample and in the different case study areas. A principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out on working condition indicators, using farms with complete data (123 farms). Farm characteristics and workforce composition indicators were shown on PCA factorial plans to explore relationships between working conditions and farm/workforce characteristics. Main outcomes of this comparative analysis were identified. First, an overall positive feeling expressed by the farmers may seem contradictory at first sight with some of the results showing long working hours, little time for holidays and day off, etc. Second, the comparative analysis highlighted that farmers’ working conditions differ across European regions. Working conditions in Ireland and Greece differ significantly from farms in other study areas. In the five European case studies, workers were mainly men (64.6%), and only 18.75% of farm managers were women. There was a broad diversity among case studies: female farm managers were most often present in both Austrian and in French Puy-de-Dôme case studies than in France Brittany, Greece and Ireland Third, the degree of uptake of ecological practices, defined here as organic farming practices or the livestock density, do not discriminate working conditions in the sample composed by the five European case studies. Two main factors considered in the comparative analysis explain the variability observed on farmers’ working conditions: the case study area and the production system. Considering a more homogeneous sample - the dairy farms - other factors seem to explain the variability in working conditions, such as the level of education of farmers and the workforce composition. Fourth, another contribution of this comparative analysis in five European case studies is to propose a list of indicators to analyse farmers’ working conditions based on different dimensions (work duration, work organisation, quality at work, work complexity, self-identity and attitudes, stress, satisfaction, social relations). In some case studies (Brittany in France, Puy-de-Dôme in France, Crete in Greece), a more in-deep analysis was performed. Main results were that farmers experienced an impact of the adoption of ecological practices on their working conditions. Farmers indicated various impacts on workload, work organisation and the need for special equipment, depending on the nature of the production systems and the applied ecological practices. They all expressed a positive effect with an improvement of the workload and their own perception of their job. The Scottish case study highlighted that the relationship between farm organic status and efficiency scores of labour used for both ‘traditional’ and ‘diversification’ outputs, emphasises that organic production is not only environmentally oriented but has a clear economic reasoning.

This deliverable (D2.3) of the LIFT project presents the results of a series of investigations around up-take of ecological approaches across the value chain. We use primary and secondary data collected utilising a number of methods, built on conceptual frameworks developed within LIFT and elsewhere. This provides a range of empirical investigations for an overview of farming, supply chains and consumption drivers which may constrain or enable uptake of ecological approaches. Both exogenous and endogenous drivers were considered for these studies. The report is presented as a set of summaries from academic paper outputs - to show the individual exercises across farmers, value chains and consumers – and to understand both the barriers and enablers for transition to more ecological approaches within European farming. A summary table is provided to show these investigations, as well as the approach used and the type of data collected. Specifically the following sets of studies are presented: Typologies of farm activity and farmer perceptions towards ecological practices.This allows us to partition a large scale farmer dataset (from the LIFT large-scale farmer survey) with multiple variables of interest [papers 1,2]. Examination of the exogenous and endogenous drivers behind ecological uptake, such as gender, the farm family life-cycle, neighbouring farms and supply chains.These papers take either a quantitative approach, through the application of behavioural models, or a qualitative approach to understand what drives this decision to adopt ecological practices [papers 3,4,5,6]. Examination of the value chain, collaboration and cooperation.These are explored through quantitative and qualitative routes to understand how value chains operate for ecological practices, compared to conventional practices, and how actors engage within specific value chains [papers 7,8,9,10,11]. Finally the role of consumption is explored, through market segmentation, labels or specific traits of food products that offer opportunities to promote ecological practices [papers 12,13,14]. Overall, we find much heterogeneity in both practice and attitudes towards production and consumption of ecological approaches. The investigations presented here provide illustrations of how these approaches and perceptions are driven by both personal, informal and formal institutional influences, such as the support from local market conditions or sharing of knowledge. This leads to us understand the relationships between economic and non-economic goals, which are key to eventual uptake of ecological approaches. Incentives were considered to balance the conflicts between endogenous and exogenous drivers, such as labelling and support for social incentives, but also as a means to overcome perceived or real barriers through mechanisms which support further collaboration between farmers.

Social performance is the pillar of sustainability that is the most often neglected, compared to the evaluation of environmental and economic performances of farming systems. Farmers’ working conditions are rarely studied. To understand farmers’ working conditions and to assess them, it is necessary to develop a multicriteria approach including not only quantifiable dimensions (e.g., the length of working days) but also dimensions that can explain how working conditions are experienced by workers (e.g., by understanding farmer’s reasons for acting). Multiple factors contribute to determine farmers’ working conditions such as the composition of the workforce, the region, but also the degree of uptake of ecological practices. This deliverable contributes to knowledge on this issue, explaining the work carried out in task 3.3 of the LIFT project. The main objectives of task 3.3 were: i) to describe farmers’ and farm workers’ working conditions in different farming systems characterised by different degrees of uptake or ecological practices and; ii) to identify factors explaining these working conditions (degree of uptake of ecological practices, workforce composition, country, etc.). To achieve these objectives, a set of indicators on working conditions was selected in a two-step approach: firstly, a theoretical basis from the literature, and, secondly, expert knowledge in the LIFT partners. Primary data was collected during interviews with 160 farmers in five European Union (EU) regions (Brittany in France, Puy-de-Dôme in France, Crete in Greece, Ireland, Salzburg area in Austria, Umgebung Steyr-Kirchdorf in Austria). Statistical analysis was conducted to describe the diversity of indicators (working conditions, workforce composition and farm structure) within the whole sample and in the different case study areas. A principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out on working condition indicators, using farms with complete data (123 farms). Farm characteristics and workforce composition indicators were shown on PCA factorial plans to explore relationships between working conditions and farm/workforce characteristics. Main outcomes of this comparative analysis were identified. First, an overall positive feeling expressed by the farmers may seem contradictory at first sight with some of the results showing long working hours, little time for holidays and day off, etc. Second, the comparative analysis highlighted that farmers’ working conditions differ across European regions. Working conditions in Ireland and Greece differ significantly from farms in other study areas. In the five European case studies, workers were mainly men (64.6%), and only 18.75% of farm managers were women. There was a broad diversity among case studies: female farm managers were most often present in both Austrian and in French Puy-de-Dôme case studies than in France Brittany, Greece and Ireland Third, the degree of uptake of ecological practices, defined here as organic farming practices or the livestock density, do not discriminate working conditions in the sample composed by the five European case studies. Two main factors considered in the comparative analysis explain the variability observed on farmers’ working conditions: the case study area and the production system. Considering a more homogeneous sample - the dairy farms - other factors seem to explain the variability in working conditions, such as the level of education of farmers and the workforce composition. Fourth, another contribution of this comparative analysis in five European case studies is to propose a list of indicators to analyse farmers’ working conditions based on different dimensions (work duration, work organisation, quality at work, work complexity, self-identity and attitudes, stress, satisfaction, social relations). In some case studies (Brittany in France, Puy-de-Dôme in France, Crete in Greece), a more in-deep analysis was performed. Main results were that farmers experienced an impact of the adoption of ecological practices on their working conditions. Farmers indicated various impacts on workload, work organisation and the need for special equipment, depending on the nature of the production systems and the applied ecological practices. They all expressed a positive effect with an improvement of the workload and their own perception of their job. The Scottish case study highlighted that the relationship between farm organic status and efficiency scores of labour used for both ‘traditional’ and ‘diversification’ outputs, emphasises that organic production is not only environmentally oriented but has a clear economic reasoning.