Scottish Government

Key Messages for Scottish Government Rural directorate

• The programme has been effective in bringing about physical and financial improvements on the farms involved in the Community groups and through the promotion of the programme activity to farms who are not actively engaged in the programme.
• We estimate a benefit of £6.5:£1 of the value of improvements over the costs of the programme taking account of the deadweight of general industry improvements on the case study farms and Community Groups studied in detail. We believe this is an underestimate as it was not possible to estimate the financial benefit of the range of improvements identified on group members' farms and in the wider farming population.
• The degree of penetration of the programme has been high with 78% of those with no direct involvement being aware of the programme and 9% having identified business improvements as a result of knowing about the programme.
• The farming press is a key mechanism for communicating the programme and it is significant that most farmers still like to receive information in written form. Improvements to promotion and the synergy of the programme with other initiatives could be achieved through a coordinated presence on the internet coupled with a strategic approach to planning publicly funded advisory programmes through a regional forum of agencies.
• There is a clear need for a structured management process for each farm based on a farmer chairman, small committee of members as well as the Monitor Farmer and Facilitator.
• There is a need to set clearer specific, measurable, achievable, result focused and time bound objectives for the improvements to be achieved. These should be on the basis of the whole farm as well in terms of enterprise specific physical and financial targets. In this way the impact of the programme can be monitored using a Net Farm Income approach through comparison with the industry and taking account of deadweight. This will require more groundwork in the start up period.
• Improved objective setting for the programme could be translated into better criteria for monitoring improvements on group members' farms; this will require additional inputs that might in part be supplied from farm secretarial type services.
• The current approach to facilitation could be enhanced through developing a structured framework for a facilitator's network to stimulate the sharing of experience and provide a platform for skill development.
• The approach could be used to deliver public policy objectives in relation to the environment if handled sensitively. The benefits to farm businesses will need to be clearly articulated to both farmers and facilitators. The approach is not suitable in general for promoting diversification objectives.
• Social benefits of the programme have resulted and there is some evidence of co-operative activity. This could be built upon for the future.
• There is evidence that farms selected as Monitor Farms could be drawn from wider range of performance criteria and achieve as good or greater performance improvement provided the selected farms were respected in their peer groups.
• Selection of facilitators should include evidence of knowledge and practice of communication and group facilitation skills.