Policy Making And Legislation, Government Must Engage Farmers

Farmers can sometimes do influence policy and regulation all over the world. If we as farmers and our supporting organisations do not present solutions, others will - as has happened in the Netherlands where the Phosphate Reduction Plan has imposed a forced reduction in livestock numbers on dairy farms.

Good regulation makes it easier for people to do the right thing. The best policy and regulation outcomes are produced when Government works closely with those on the ground who will be most affected by the regulation as well as taking into account academic research.

The realities and complexity of our farming systems and the effect they have on the surrounding countryside and nature means that farmers should not try and oversimplify the messages to the government by presenting one solution: they should present more complex and location specific solutions which will require more adaptable policy and regulation.

There needs to be a recognition that different language is used by the different groups involved in policy making. There is often misunderstanding so this must be recognised by every group when communicating between farmers, government officials, researchers and academics.

A willingness to change is needed by everyone involved in discussions creating more effective policy and regulation. This means not just that farmers need to change but that government needs to engage with famers in a different way and be willing to change its processes in engaging with those whose lives will be most affected by the altered policy and regulation. Academic institutions also need to change their approach and deliver science which can be applied on the ground.

It is therefore, of paramount importance that farmers engage with the public, politicians and the government in a positive and proactive way. They need to engage through charismatic leaders and great speakers from all walks of life who will support farmers. They must provide them with positive messages, innovative approaches and solutions so that from their positions of influence they are promoting the best policy and regulation to create a sustainable future for the next generation of farmers to come.

Aspects to take into account in policy and regulation
Governance is a word which switches most people off from listening, yet it affects everything farmers do and influences many of their decisions. Governments have the carrot and stick levers to help achieve their goals and objectives. Good regulation – the stick – should make it easier for people to do the right thing.

Better informed and effective policy making needs firm evidence to build on. It requires taking views of many stakeholders into account and a range of ways to consult, change or support practices and make progress.

Farming concerns
Practices in agriculture which are perceived to have a detrimental effect on wider society will lead to tougher policies and regulation. It may be that there are loopholes in regulation which allow or even promote certain bad practices but if exploited they will come back to bite the industry. There are always going to be individuals in any walk of life who act irresponsibly and selfishly. Their behaviour in agriculture is picked up and used to beat the industry with. There is a need for mechanisms which stop those individuals from negatively affecting the greater proportion of conscientious and law-abiding farmers. Regulations need to be soundly crafted.

For farmers, as with any industry, being proactive in an approach to policy and regulation means that positive outcomes are more likely. If the industry sees a potential problem it is far more effective to show the government a better way forward before there is significant pressure rather than to wait until the pressure cooker effect happens when there can well be a political backlash; for example, activists and lobbyists will always take up issues like environment, labour etc with a lot of zeal. Government officials may wait for farmers to provide the solutions and that if they don’t, government will have to intervene. Farmers have the opportunity now to find the best possible solution for them rather than at a later date having a compromise influenced largely by lobbyists from the other side demanding retribution.

Farmers generally want to do the right thing. I have spoken with many farmers who are more than happy to change their farming practices to be more sustainable and environmentally sensitive but their business still needs to remain profitable.

Language
Often the three sectors that are key, namely government, farmers and academics, all speak a very different language. Some professors I met spoke of protectionist capitalism, bureaucratization and Tall Assemblage thinking in Agri-Environmental governance: these means very little to the farmer but is part of their familiar terminology. While the Government will talk of acronyms such as SMNR (Sustainable Management of Natural Resources) and PES (Payment for Ecosystem Services) as central to their working day but mean very little if anything to farmers. Farmers on the other hand prefer to talk and think in terms of practical on-farm implications, how something affects their bottom line and they want specific answers to questions on the exact nature of the outcomes they are being asked to deliver.

The difference in use of language is a barrier to better communication between farmers, government and academics. The same word can mean very different things to the different people. This shows the importance of making sure that the messages given translate to the audience with the meaning intended.

One solution might be using intermediaries to translate between each sector, but another might include such awareness skills in the training and education of each sector and very importantly the coming generations in every walk of life.

The Role of Science and Evidence
There are many different types of evidence from the scientific peer reviewed science which is considered to be indisputable to anecdotal evidence taken from someone’s experience which is important but not scientifically proven. I believe that we expect that policy and regulation to be based on scientific evidence however there seems to be a current movement throughout the world that evidence is being overruled by public perception of ethics and morality.

What value should be set on opinion polls as opposed to scientific evidence? Social science would be welcomed but polls can be misleading as demonstrated during the Brexit polling where a remain outcome was expected.

Farmers will rarely put in writing that which they know to be true from generations of observation and experience. NGOs and others involved in conservation work claim expertise which is taken into account when developing policy while sadly all the knowledge known to the farming community is unheard.

An exception to farmers not documenting their knowledge are some export farmers and other broad acre farmers. These provide a readily accessible library of papers on a wide variety of topics written by agriculturalists with experience and knowledge of their subjects, but it is to be questioned how many get sent to government or are read by policy officials to inform a view.

Public Perception
Public perception of farming certainly influences policy. On my working with flower growers, these are exclusive farmers who are paid some loyalties on observing some environmental and labour laws.

Farmers’ Approach
Farmers, including my own family, feel indispensable as they can see the importance of food security. They believe that they have a large part to play in feeding the nation but in this new world of global mobility politicians and retailers see other options available to feed the nation.

Though it would seem highly risky and unnecessary to farmers, there is the option of importing all the food. As most countries in the world inject funds into their food production systems then it may seem cheaper to import food rather than produce it. There is no current commitment in our Government’s policy as to how much food we as a nation should produce for ourselves.

In a world that measures success with growth in GDP without taking into account environmental and social costs, how can we be certain that a greater percentage of our food will not be imported rather than produced at home? Politicians may focus on a move towards a countryside which is a playground for our nation and for visitors through tourism with no regard to the production of food.

It is therefore, of paramount importance that farmers engage with the public, politicians and the government in a positive and proactive way.

Collaboration
Collaboration produces greater strength particularly to smaller farmers and can produce landscape scale action.

There should be a great deal of focus on providing assistance in knowledge. There should be a good knowledge transfer system in place where groups of farmers work with their local facilitator/government officer feeding information back to research institutions which pursue issues and find solutions. The research centres host farmer group visits led by their local government officer and technicians and there are incentives to use best practice.

Culture
In Kenya, language and culture play a very important role particularly in rural communities. We all agree there is a genuine desire to keep farmers in the rural areas. Land tenure play a big part with limits and that this could play a significant part in the difference to the public perception of farmers.

Trust
Farmers don’t trust government: But equally, do the public trust farmers? It is public knowledge that academics don’t trust government and therefore don’t put their ideas forward. It is essential to build relationships and trust between all involved in order to communicate effectively.

Sustainability
In Kenya we there is need to think of the Well-Being of Future Generations. This requires all policy and regulation to consider the longer-term effect for future generations. This is potentially a great tool for farmers who generally aim to create a long-term business and asset for future generations.

Summary
However clear-cut evidence may seem, the husbandry, economic, social, cultural and environmental factors make the context in which farmers operate in a complex area where each farm may need different levers and actions to meet the same objectives. This makes the whole area of influencing policy and regulation very complex and unpredictable.

The lack of practitioner evidence being adopted, lack of trust and the different language used by different groups are real barriers to creating effective policy and regulation. Change is needed by everyone involved to develop better exchange of information to take the farming industry forward into a more sustainable future.

Generally, morals and ethics are now put forward as a priority which seems to override science. These make it harder to make effective decisions which deliver the intended outcomes. For that reason, there is need to work closer with social scientists to see how to present evidence so that the general public can understand more about the impacts of different demanded solutions.