Farmer Opinion Tracker for England: April 2024 (2024)

This report contains estimates from the Farmer Opinion Tracker providing a snapshot of views and opinions towards Defra’s vision for farming at this time. Farmers were asked questions about business planning, relationships with farming organisations and Defra, new schemes, and the future of farming.

The April 2024 Opinion Tracker survey was open to farmers from late April to early June 2024, prior to the 2024 General Election results announcement.

The survey coverage relates to holdings that exceed specific farming activity thresholds. Therefore, all results given in this statistical report reflect just over 60 thousand holdings that exceed these thresholds out of the total English population of almost 107 thousand commercial holdings. For further information please go to Section 4.1, Methodology.

A time-series comparing the results from each survey from September 2019 to date can be found on GOV.UK as well as a dataset providing a more detailed breakdown of each question’s responses for farm ownership, size, type and region.

Key messages for April 2024

• Farmers on 64% of holdings said that they either fully (9%) or roughly (55%) understand Defra’s vision for farming, no change from 64% in October 2023 and April 2023.
• Farmers on 44% of holdings indicated that they are making changes to their farm business and a further 38% said they will need to make changes to their farm business in the next 3 to 5 years.
• Farmers on 53% of holdings said that they would be making changes to their agri-environment scheme agreements within the next year.
• Farmers on 84% of holdings said that Defra paying for environmental outcomes will be very (63%) or moderately (21%) important to their business in the future.
• Farmers on 64% of holdings are not at all confident that changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future for farming.
• Farmers on 40% of holdings feel positive about their future in farming (6% very positive; 34% somewhat positive).

Farmers had the opportunity to share their thoughts on farming (i.e. what was on their mind at the time of the survey). The open text comments analysis in section 2 provides context around the statistics.

Section 1 - Detailed Results

1.1 Vision

Defra is setting out what they think the future for farming would look like. In this vision, England’s farmers improve the health of our environment and animals as part of a sustainable, productive agricultural sector. In April 2024, when asked if they know what Defra’s vision meant for farming, farmers on 64% of holdings said that they either fully (9%) or roughly (55%) understood Defra’s vision (see Figure 1). This is no change from 64% in October 2023 (fully understand 6%; roughly understand 58%). A further 31% said they didn’t know but would be interested to know more. Farmers on the remaining 5% of holdings didn’t need to know what the future vision meant for farming.

Figure 1: Proportion of holdings that understand Defra’s vision for farming, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

1.2 Changes

In 2021, Defra started the transition away from the EU Common Agriculture Policy which will involve changes to the payments farmers receive and the regulations their businesses must follow. Farmers were asked whether they had all the information they needed at this point to help with their business planning (see Figure 2). In April 2024, farmers on 59% of holdings said they had all (10%) or most (49%) of the information they required. This proportion is an increase from 51% in October 2023 and an increase from 44% in April 2023. In April 2024, a further 20% indicated that they didn’t have any information but knew where they could find it. Farmers on 14% of holdings said they didn’t have any of the information they needed for their business planning and were unsure where to find it. The remaining 7% of all holdings didn’t know if they had all the information they needed.

Figure 2: Proportion of holdings that have the information they need to inform business planning, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

In April 2024, farmers on 82% of holdings said that they are currently (44%) or that they will need to make changes (38%) to their business in the next 3-5 years. This is an increase from the proportion reported in October 2023 (Figure 3) with a higher proportion of farmers now making changes to their business. A further 8% of farmers on all holdings indicated that they don’t need to make any changes to their farming business and the remaining 10% don’t know what changes they need to make.

Figure 3: Proportion of holdings that need to make changes to their farm business in the next 3 to 5 years, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Farmers who answered that they are making changes or will need to make changes to their farm business in the next 3 to 5 years were then asked what changes they are making or will need to make (see Figure 4). In April 2024, farmers on 38% of holdings said they would stay farming but diversify their business into non-farming areas. This proportion is little changed from 40% in October 2023. Around 26% of farmers said they will stay farming but reduce the size of the business and a further 24% said they will stay farming but change core agricultural enterprises. A number of farmers indicated that they would leave farming, as 10% are planning on retiring or passing the farm onto the next generation and 4% would leave farming for other reasons. Farmers on 4% of holdings stated other changes they plan to make to their farm business which included cutting costs and participating in environmental schemes.

Figure 4: Changes to farm business, October 2023 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. Only respondents who answered “I am making changes to my business” or “I will need to make changes to my business” to the previous question (“Do you feel you will need to make changes to your business in the next 3-5 years?”) were shown this question in the survey.

All farmers were asked whether a range of external factors led them to make changes on their farm, regardless of whether they intend to make changes to their business in the next 3 to 5 years. In April 2024, input price changes remained the most commonly selected external factor that led farmers to make changes to their business with farmers on 83% of holdings selecting this option (see Figure 5). This was followed by weather / climate change (69%), an increase from 55% in October 2023, output price changes (56%) and trade agreements with other countries (29%). The least commonly selected external factor leading farms to make changes to their business was food security and supply (23%).

Figure 5: Changes to farm business due to external factors, October 2023 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

In April 2024, farmers on 54% of holdings are either very (6%) or somewhat (48%) confident that they can respond to any changes that are needed. This is little changed from 56% in October 2023 (very confident 6%; somewhat confident 50%). Farmers on 35% of all holdings are not at all confident they can respond to the changes needed and the remaining 11% are unsure (see Figure 6).

Figure 6: Proportion of holdings that are confident they can respond to changes, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

1.3 Environmental Schemes

Defra offers a range of environmental schemes for farmers, these agri-environment schemes include Countryside Stewardship, Environmental Stewardship and the Sustainable Farming Incentive. For the first time, farmers were asked if they planned on making any changes to any agri-environment agreements they have on their farm in the next year (see Figure 7). In April 2024, farmers on 70% of the holdings covered by this survey* said they already had an agri-environmental scheme agreement. Of those, 17% said they were not planning on making changes. Of those who said they were planning on making changes, 25% said they were planning to do more (e.g. more options or more land), 17% were planning to do another scheme alongside and 9% were planning to replace their current scheme with another, and the remaining 2% would not be renewing their agreements.

See section 4.1 Methodology for more information on the coverage of these results.

Figure 7: Proportion of holdings that plan to make changes to their agri-environment agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:1. This question was added in April 2024

Farmers who answered that they were planning on making changes to their agri-environment agreements were asked what issues led to them planning these changes (see Figure 8). In April 2024, attractive financially was the most selected factor that led farmers to plan changes to their agri-environment agreements, with farmers on 66% of holdings choosing this option. This was followed by fit easily into the way the business is run (58%), benefit my farm’s environment (48%), easy to apply for (40%), flexible to my needs (40%) and needed as I have significantly changed the business (e.g. bought more land) (4%). Farmers on 4% of holdings stated other factors led to them planning to enroll or make changes which included adverse weather and replacing income from Basic Payment Scheme (BPS).

Figure 8: Factors influencing changes to agri-environment schemes/agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. This question was added in April 2024

3. Only respondents who answered they were planning to enroll or make changes to environment schemes to the question (“In the next year, do you plan on making changes to any agri-environment schemes / agreements you have for your farm?”) were shown this question in the survey.

Farmers who answered that they do not plan to enroll or renew agri-environment scheme agreements in the next year were asked what issues led them to making this decision (see Figure 9). In April 2024, not attractive financially was the most commonly selected factor that led farmers to choose not to enroll or renew agri-environment agreements, with farmers on 56% of holdings selecting this option (see Figure 8). This was followed by will not fit easily into the way the business is run (37%), not flexible to my needs (37%), will not benefit my farm’s environment (32%), not easy to apply for (23%) and not an option as I plan to significantly change the business (e.g. retire, sell land, etc) (16%). Farmers on 16% of holdings stated other factors led to them not planning to enroll or renew agri-environmental agreements, this included not having enough land to qualify for any schemes and concern over productivity.

Figure 9: Factors influencing non-enrollment or renewal in agri-environmental schemes/agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. This question was added in April 2024.

3. Only farmers who answered “I have an agri-environment scheme agreement already but will not be renewing” or “I don’t have an agri-environment scheme agreement already but planning to do one” to the question (“In the next year, do you plan on making changes to any agri-environment schemes / agreements you have for your farm?”) were shown this question in the survey.

Comparisons of responses between surveys are not available because the questions for this section were added in April 2024.

1.4 Groups

Farming organisations and advisors have a role in helping farm businesses to adapt to the changes needed. In April 2024, farmers on 35% of holdings agreed that these organisations were helping them to make changes, with an additional 6% strongly agreeing. Approximately 42% neither agreed or disagreed and a further 15% said they either disagreed (8%) or strongly disagreed (7%) that these organisations were helping them to make changes (see Figure 10).

Figure 10: Proportion of holdings that agree farming organisations and advisors are helping them make changes to their business, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

The future vision for farming involves farm businesses responding to both existing and new market demand for produce. In April 2024, farmers on 69% of holdings said that producing for the end market would currently be very important for their farm business with a further 22% indicating that it would be moderately important (see Figure 11). Only 5% said that it was not at all important.

Looking to the future, producing for the end market was said to be very important by 68% of holdings and 18% indicated that it would be moderately important in April 2024 and only 5% said it was not at all important. Farmers on the remaining 9% of holdings were unsure.

Figure 11: Proportion of holdings that believe producing for the end market is important for their business, April 2024

Download the data for this chart

1.5 Environment

Defra’s vision for farming involves providing environmental outcomes. In April 2024, farmers on 82% of holdings said Defra paying for environmental outcomes was currently very (56%) or moderately (26%) important for their business (see Figure 12). A further 12% said that it was currently not at all important.

In April 2024, when asked how important it will be in the future for Defra to pay for environmental outcomes, farmers on 63% of holdings said it would be very important. A further 21% believed it would be moderately important and only 9% said that Defra paying for environmental outcomes in the future was not at all important.

Figure 12: Proportion of holdings that believe Defra paying for environmental outcomes would be important for their business, April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Environmental safeguards and standards in farming are maintained by both enforcing regulations and empowering individual responsibility. In April 2024, farmers on 35% of holdings either agreed (32%) or strongly agreed (3%) that the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility (see Figure 13). This is little changed from 34% in October 2023 and an increase from 30% in April 2023. Farmers on 44% of holdings neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. A further 10% disagreed that the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility and 7% strongly disagreed. Farmers on the remaining 4% of holdings were unsure.

Figure 13: Proportion of holdings that agree the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Regulations protect the environment, farmed animals and public health. In April 2024, farmers on 86% of holdings are either very (19%) or somewhat (67%) confident that they understand which regulations apply to their farm. This is little changed from 86% in October 2023 (very confident 21%; somewhat confident 65%). A further 11% are not at all confident and only 3% don’t know which regulations apply to their farm (see Figure 14).

Figure 14: Proportion of holdings that are confident they understand which regulations apply to their farm, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Farmers were asked to consider the regulations that apply to their farms (outside the rules associated with any payment schemes) and 28% of all holdings indicated that they fully understood the purpose of the rules in April 2024. Farmers on 61% of all holdings say that they roughly understood the purpose of the rules which apply to their farm. A further 7% don’t understand the purpose but want to know and only 4% said that they don’t need to know.

Figure 15: Proportion of holdings that understand the purpose of the regulations which apply to their farm, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

1.6 Relationships

Farmers were asked how confident they were that changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future for farming and 64% of holdings said that they are not confident at all in April 2024 (see Figure 16). Approximately 26% of holdings indicated that they are either very (1%) or somewhat (25%) confident in the changes to the schemes. This is little changed from 27% in October 2023 (very confident 0%; somewhat confident 27%). The remaining 10% of farmers on all holdings don’t know if the changes to schemes will result in a successful future for farming.

Figure 16: Proportion of holdings that are confident the changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future in farming, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Defra and Defra agencies such as the Rural Payments Agency and Natural England are working together to deliver planned changes to schemes and regulations. In April 2024, farmers on 58% of holdings are not at all confident in Defra and Defra agency’s ability to deliver planned changes to schemes and regulations. This proportion is little changed from 57% in October 2023 (see Figure 17). In April 2024, a further 34% of holdings are either very (1%) or somewhat (33%) confident in Defra and Defra agency’s ability to deliver planned changes to schemes. Farmers on the remaining 8% of holdings are unsure.

Figure 17: Proportion of holdings that are confident in Defra and Defra agency’s abilities to work together to deliver changes to schemes and regulations, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

The April 2024 survey showed that as part of delivering the changes, farmers on 45% of holdings are not at all confident that their relationship with Defra and Defra agencies (such as the Rural Payments Agency and Natural England) will develop positively in the future. This proportion is little changed from 48% in October 2023. In April 2024, approximately 42% of holdings are either very (2%) or somewhat (40%) confident that their relationship with Defra will develop positively in the future. Farmers on the remaining 13% of holdings said that they were unsure (see Figure 18).

Figure 18: Proportion of holdings that believe their relationship with Defra and Defra agencies will develop positively in the future, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

In April 2024, when asked to consider the changes to existing payments and regulations as well as the new schemes that will be available, farmers on 35% of holdings feel either very (3%) or somewhat (32%) positive about the future of farming (see Figure 19). This is little changed from 32% in October 2023 (very positive 2%; somewhat positive 30%). In April 2024, farmers on 59% of all holdings are not at all positive about the future of farming and the remaining 6% are unsure.

Figure 19: Proportion of holdings that feel positive about the future of farming, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

In April 2024, farmers on 40% of holdings felt positive about their own future in farming (very positive 6%; somewhat positive 34%). In April 2024, approximately 51% indicated that they are not at all positive and the remaining 9% are unsure how they feel about their own future in farming (see Figure 20).

Figure 20: Proportion of holdings that feel positive about their own future in farming, October 2022 to April 2024

Download the data for this chart

Section 2 - Open Text Comments

280 out of the 1,129 respondents provided a comment. Below is a summary of the comments, focusing on those relevant to Defra and the Agricultural Transition.

Environmental Land Management schemes were mentioned most often. However, there was also a cross-cutting theme of food security linked to the prioritisation of food production, a reliance on imports, and business viability that ran through many comments.

It should be noted that people with strong views are more likely to comment. This can result in negative comments appearing more prevalent than might be the case i.e., respondents who are relatively content are less likely to provide comments. The survey was open for a set period and the comments reflect issues that are particularly salient at the time of completing the survey. Potential salience bias may impact on responses, with those issues that received significant media attention attracting more references and respondents being less likely to comment in detail on issues that were less salient but nonetheless important. It also means that policy updates made since the survey period will not have been accounted for in responses. This survey was undertaken after an exceptionally wet winter. The 2024 General Election was called whilst the survey was open and the survey closed before the election result was known.

2.1 High level vision and clarity of future direction

A small number of respondents were positive of the Farming and Countryside vision and changes made through the Agricultural Transition. Others felt proud of their dual role in producing food and looking after the environment and felt the vision for sustainable farming from Defra is positive, if challenging.

Others were less positive about the vision. Some felt that the vision did not take food security seriously and others pointed to the external difficulties that farming faces, such as the weather, and a feeling that the Agricultural Transition makes it even harder to be a farmer in already challenging times.

As in past trackers, the issue of climate change having a negative impact on farming is mentioned by respondents, but the farming vision to move to more sustainable farming is not seen as the answer by many of them. Some expressed a view that farmers are being unfairly blamed for environmental issues and there was a perception of a lack of leadership on food production and food security from government and Defra.

2.2 Food security, production, and imports

Food security was mentioned by a large number of respondents. This was a cross-cutting theme that encompassed food production and imports, as well as touching on business viability.

Some respondents were concerned that there wouldn’t be enough food to feed the population in the near future due to a lack of focus on food security. Some specifically stated that they believe there is not enough of a plan from Defra or the government on food security. There was recognition from a few that concern for the environment is important, but they still felt it was not as important as food security.

Strongly linked to food security was the issue of prioritising food production over the environment. The majority of respondents felt that food production should be the priority, with a general feeling that it was not being prioritised now. Many expressed concern that reducing food production is not a good outcome for the future and that relying on imported food is a flawed strategy.

Many respondents voiced frustration about the discrepancy between British and international standards of production. There was particular concern that cheap imports would undercut farmers and their businesses. Some respondents felt that cheap imports were a result of wider issues such as the power of large organisations to determine wholesale prices. Planning barriers were also felt to be hindering agricultural development and leading to an increased demand for imported food. There was a feeling that food imported from abroad was produced using cheaper, less safe, methods as well as a view that the environmental costs of agricultural production should not simply be exported elsewhere. This included greenhouse gasses emitted through production, as well as transport of produce. Similarly, respondents felt that the UK should not compromise on animal welfare by importing from countries with lower standards.

Food security was linked to a lack of profitability in the farming sector. There was a feeling from some that the general population do not understand or appreciate food production and farming, and that the price offered for produce does not match the cost of production. Some respondents said they can’t make enough money to survive or that they will need to use schemes such as Sustainable Farming Incentive to fill the gap left by the Basic Payment Scheme. There was a view that, as a result, food producers would reduce food production to pursue more nature friendly options such as the planting of trees and wildflowers.

A smaller number of respondents were more positive about prioritising environmental benefits. A couple of them talked about the environmental steps they had taken and the benefits those steps bring to their farms such as encouraging a healthy population of birds around their farm. Another acknowledged the negative impacts of climate change on farming and felt it was something “we must all address” to live well and farm productively in the future. Others warned of the need for farmers to be brought along voluntarily to the aim of protecting the environment and the danger of a negative reaction if too much enforcement and regulation. There was acknowledgement that farms still need to be profitable to take environmentally friendly actions.

2.3 Business Viability

Business viability was mentioned by a large number of farmers with several sub-themes such as Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) withdrawal, diversification, output prices, scheme payments, market uncertainty, wet weather, and input costs.

A couple of respondents mentioned diversification and the fact that it is often more profitable than the farming side of the business. Several farmers talked about the risk relative to the reward they have to take on, with low output prices meaning it was very difficult to make a profit. A few mentioned the general uncertainties of farming and this winter’s heavy rainfall specifically as having negative impacts on their businesses. Some said that the ability to find labour and staff was making it difficult for their businesses. Input costs were mentioned by a few farmers as being high and a difficult factor to manage in ensuring profitability.

Those that mentioned BPS withdrawal tended to feel negatively about it. There was a question of how British farmers can compete with European countries that still receive basic payments. A couple of responses said that BPS acted as an insurance against bad years. There was some dissatisfaction that BPS had been cut before new schemes were fully available and feeling that the new schemes don’t replace BPS financially.

2.4 Specific farm types

Several respondents highlight the disproportionate burden of the agricultural transition on certain farm types, and the need for Defra to avoid a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach for its policies. Some of the most commonly mentioned farm types which were seen as being disproportionately affected by the agricultural transition were small farms, tenant farms, livestock and dairy farms, and farms in less favourable areas.

There was mention of the specific challenges faced by tenant farmers and the impact of Defra’s policies on their business viability. Challenges mentioned include perceived barriers to accessing Defra schemes. For some there was a belief that there could be unintended consequences for tenant farmers as some landlords might move tenants off their land in order to take advantage of environmental schemes, rather than produce food.

2.5 Environmental Land Management schemes

Some respondents were positive about Environmental Land Management schemes (ELMs) such as Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI), having adopted them on their farms, pointing out the resilience low input farming will bring their farm. Others highlighted the profitability that the schemes can bring farms in a sector they see as struggling. It should be noted, responses indicated that this is not always seen by farmers as something they want to do, but something they feel they have to do to remain profitable.

There were a much larger proportion of comments that were negative about ELMs and other new schemes and grants. These fell into a number of sub-themes: Some felt that the schemes are too complicated, requiring help from farm advisors and experts to fill them in correctly. The complexity was blamed on the schemes themselves and the way multiple schemes interact. Others had issues with the administration of the schemes, such as receiving payment for actions, and the way payments are run e.g. preferring a flat rate payment for land. The payment and scheme announcement schedules were criticised by some as not matching up to cashflow requirements.

A few respondents felt that they did not understand all the SFI options or that options had not been fully thought through. There were calls for certainty from a number of farmers that felt there were too many changes and alterations to new schemes stopping them being able to plan into the future. A couple of respondents said that the scheme agreement lengths were too short to commit to, or that the application windows were too short.

Some respondents didn’t believe that ELMs would deliver on environmental objectives for a number of reasons, such as not investing enough in new technology, reducing food production and leading to a reliance on imports and increasing carbon emissions, or being the inappropriate options to provide food for wildlife.

A large proportion of those dissatisfied with ELMs cited payment rates being too low. They felt that the payments would not replace the shortfall of BPS removal, and will make it hard for farm businesses to survive. Others felt that they wouldn’t be eligible for schemes due to their types of farms or the schemes they were already enrolled in.

2.6 Working with Defra

Several respondents reported a lack confidence in Defra’s ability to deliver for farmers and suggested Defra do not have the right expertise, as well as feeling Defra don’t really care about farmers. Others report to have lost trust as they do not feel that Defra and the government have delivered on past promises, becoming “sceptical” of future promises.

Whilst there was a high degree of negativity expressed about the relationship between Defra and farmers in this tracker, there was acknowledgement that bad weather had caused difficulties for most farmers in the months before the tracker. Although some saw weather as largely out of Defra’s control, it will likely have coloured the outlook of some respondents.

There was a feeling of uncertainty for some around the future direction of Defra priorities and farming schemes mentioned in later comments due to the 2024 General Election announcement and opinion polls at the time showing a likely change of administration.

What’s Different Now? (Comparison to previous results)

Fewer responses were received than usual in this tracker. The tracker was live at the time that the 2024 General Election was announced and pre-election rules meant that a final reminder was not sent to respondents resulting in a lower than usual volume of response. There were some notable differences to the previous tracker.

Food security concerns have been a growing issue for respondents. In October 2023 food security became the most mentioned topic with a desire to prioritise food production also being very commonly mentioned. In this tracker, food security was not the most mentioned topic itself, but it should be noted that the issue was spread across a number of themes such as production priorities, imports, and business viability. When combined, these show food production and food security is still very much a priority for the largest proportion of respondents.

Input costs continued the downward trend of mentions in the comments, and whilst some felt that inputs were still too expensive, far fewer expressed this view than in the past reflecting the easing of inflation seen in the wider economy.

There continued to be a number of comments relating to rivers and waterways, with some still mentioning pollution from sewage release, but with more mention of drainage and a desire to dredge rivers to lessen flood risks, which is reflective of the high levels of flooding seen over the winter and the difficulties it caused farmers in their ability to plant crops as well as the damage done to crops that were already planted.

Comments were generally less positive in this survey period which may be reflective of a difficult winter for farmers across the country.

Since the tracker recorded these results, a number of policy announcements were made in the period before the general election was called. These included new initiatives and also details of this year’s Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) offer along with information on Countryside Stewardship (CS) Higher Tier. It should be noted that since the survey closed the 2024 General Election has resulted in a change of administration which will likely lead to further policy announcements in the near future.

Section 3 - What you need to know about this release

3.1 Contact details

Statistics

Social Research

3.2 Official statistics status

Our statistical practice is regulated by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR). OSR sets the standards of trustworthiness, quality and value in the Code of Practice for Statistics that all producers of official statistics should adhere to. You can read about how Official Statistics in Defra comply with these standards on the Defra Statistics website.

You are welcome to contact us directly with any comments about how we meet these standards using the contact details above. Alternatively, you can contact OSR by emailing regulation@statistics.gov.uk or via the OSR website.

Section 4 - About these statistics

4.1 Methodology

The Farmer Opinion Tracker provides a snapshot of views and opinions towards Defra’s vision for farming as at April 2024. Farmers were asked questions about Defra’s vision for farming, business planning, relationships with farming organisations and Defra and the future of farming.

The April 2024 Opinion Tracker survey was open to farmers from late April to early June 2024, prior to the 2024 General Election results announcement.

The results provided in this report are based on surveys sent to a representative sub-sample of the farming community in England, approximately 6,000 holdings. The survey was voluntary and 1,129 responses were received (including some partial responses), resulting in a response rate of around 19%.

We have made changes to the survey since it was last run in October 2023. The new questions focus on the environment schemes and farmers were asked if they planned to make any changes to any agri-environment agreements on their farm in the next year and what factors might influence these changes. Farmers were also asked what factors might influence them either, not renewing or enrolling in agri-environmental agreements in the future. The results can be found in Section 1.3 of this statistical release and the dataset.

To be included in the main sample, holdings had to have at least 50 cattle, 100 sheep, 100 pigs, 1,000 poultry or 20 hectares of arable crops or orchards. Therefore, all results given in this statistical report reflect just over 60 thousand holdings that exceed these thresholds out of the total English population of almost 107 thousand commercial holdings.

4.2 Data analysis

Results have been analysed using a standard methodology for stratified random surveys to produce national estimates. With this method, all of the data are weighted according to the inverse sampling fraction.

4.3 Accuracy and reliability of the results

We show 95% confidence intervals against the results for this survey (statistical release and time series). These show the range of values that may apply to the figures. They mean that we are 95% confident that this range contains the true value. They are calculated as the standard errors (se) multiplied by 1.96 to give the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The standard errors only give an indication of the sampling error. They do not reflect any other sources of survey errors, such as non-response bias.

4.4 Uses and Users

The survey was set up to collect farmer opinion on the future for farming in England prior to, and during, the Agricultural Transition. The aim is to be open and transparent about what we are hearing from the farming community and then acknowledge and respond to areas where we need to improve. The data collected via this survey will be used to create a baseline dataset of farmer opinion which can then be monitored over time to see how it is changing as we move through the agricultural transition period.

4.5 Definitions

Region

This refers to the ITL1 regions in England, for the purposes of this analysis we have combined the South East with London.

Farm type

This refers to the “robust type”, which is a standardised farm classification system. Farms are split into Dairy, Grazing Livestock Less Favoured Areas (LFA), Grazing Livestock Lowland, Mixed, Other crops, Cereals and Pigs & Poultry (Specialist Pigs and Specialist Poultry combined).

Farm sizes

This is based on the estimated labour requirements for the holding, rather than its land area. The farm size bands used within the detailed results tables which accompany this publication are shown in the table below. Standard Labour Requirement (SLR) is defined as the theoretical number of workers required each year to run a holding, based on its cropping and livestock activities.

Farm ownership

This is based on data from the June Survey of Agriculture and Horticulture. The types are split into:

• Owned - all area on the holding is owned
• Tenanted - All area on the holding is rented under a Full Agricultural Tenancy, Full Business Tenancy, Other agreement or is seasonally rented in (364 days or less)
• Mixed - area on the holding is a mixture of owned and tenanted

4.6 Future publications

The Farmer Opinion Survey for England was first run in Autumn 2019. The survey was set up to collect opinion prior to, and during, the agricultural transition which is the period of the Future Farming and Countryside Programme. Therefore, it is expected the survey will run every 6 months until 2028. Please note, only one survey was run in 2020 as Covid disrupted data collection.

The next survey will be run in Autumn 2024. The publication date will be announced on the research and statistics webpage on gov.uk.

To view previous statistical releases and the full breakdown of results, please visit the Farm Opinion Tracker collection.