Brexit: How Will <scp>UK</scp> Agriculture Fare?

Hubbard, Carmen; Davis, John; Feng, Siyi; Harvey, David; Liddon, Anne; Moxey, Andrew; Ojo, Oluwaseun; Patton, Myles; Philippidis, George; Scott, Charles E.; Shrestha, Shailesh; Wallace, Michael

doi:10.1111/1746-692x.12199

Cited by 27 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, 60% of UK exports, and 70% of its imports, of food, feed and drink are with the EU (Downing & Coe, ). Hence, the nature of the future trading relationship and the levels of tariff and non‐tariff barriers that the UK is exposed to after Brexit (see Box 1) will have significant implications for jobs, profitability and the continued operation of those sectors (Hubbard et al, ; Jafari & Britz, ; Lightfoot et al, ). Recent economic modelling suggests that across different Brexit scenarios, from various free trade agreement options to no deal, social welfare losses from −2.63% to −4.78% are incurred (Jackson & Shepotylo, ).…”

Section: Results and Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Making Brexit work for the environment and livelihoods: Delivering a stakeholder informed vision for agriculture and fisheries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The decision of the UK to leave the EU has far-reaching, and often shared, implications for agriculture and fisheries. To ensure the future sustainability of the UK's agricultural and fisheries systems, we argue that it is essential to grasp the opportunity that Brexit is providing to develop integrated policies that improve the management and protection of the natural environments, upon which these industries rely.2. This article advances a stakeholder informed vision of the future design of UK agriculture and fisheries policies. We assess how currently emerging UK policy will need to be adapted in order to implement this vision. Our starting point is that Brexit provides the opportunity to redesign current unsustainable practices and can, in principle, deliver a sustainable future for agriculture and fisheries.3. Underpinning policies with an ecosystem approach, explicit inclusion of public goods provision and social welfare equity were found to be key provisions for environmental, agricultural and fishery sustainability. Recognition of the needs of, and innovative practices in, the devolved UK nations is also required as the new policy and regulatory landscape is established. 4. Achieving the proposed vision will necessitate drawing on best practice and creating more coherent and integrated food, environment and rural and coastal economic policies. Our findings demonstrate that "bottom-up" and co-production approaches will be key to the development of more environmentally sustainable agriculture and fisheries policies to underpin prosperous livelihoods. 5. However, delivering this vision will involve overcoming significant challenges. The current uncertainty over the nature and timing of the UK's Brexit agreement hinders forward planning and investment while diverting attention away from further in-depth consideration of environmental sustainability. In the face of this uncertainty, much of the UK's new policy on the environment, agriculture and fisheries | 443 People and Nature STEWART ET Al.

show abstract

Section: Results and Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Making Brexit work for the environment and livelihoods: Delivering a stakeholder informed vision for agriculture and fisheries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model maximizes farm net profit which is the sum of gross revenues from all farm activities and farm support payments such as Basic Payments Scheme and Less Favorable Area Scheme (25,26), minus fixed costs (FC). Farm net profit is measure that is used widely to measure farm's financial performance (18,19,27). The general mathematical formulation of maximizing farm net profit was as follows:…”

Section: Methodology Scotfarm Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are substantial differences in profitability between farms in Scotland where many farms rely heavily on farm support payments to stay profitable (18). This makes them vulnerable to any type of changes in support payment policies especially in recent times when the UK agricultural policies are undergoing some significant changes bringing in uncertainties associated with support payments in future (17,19). This paper used farms' reliance on farm support payments to be an indicator of farm economic vulnerability and explored changes in the number of vulnerable farms under the disease scenarios.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Impacts of Liver Fluke on Livestock Farms Under Climate Change–A Farm Level Assessment

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liver fluke infection (fascioliasis) is a parasitic disease which affects the health and welfare of ruminants. It is a concern for the livestock industry and is considered as a growing threat to the industry because changing climatic conditions are projected to be more favorable to increased frequency and intensity of liver fluke outbreaks. Recent reports highlighted that the incidence and geographic range of liver fluke has increased in the UK over the last decade and estimated to increase the average risk of liver fluke in the UK due to increasing temperature and rainfall. This paper explores financial impacts of the disease with and without climate change effects on Scottish livestock farms using a farm-level economic model. The model is based on farming system analysis and uses linear programming technique to maximize farm net profit within farm resources. Farm level data from a sample of 160 Scottish livestock farms is used under a no disease baseline scenario and two disease scenarios (with and without climate change). These two disease scenarios are compared with the baseline scenario to estimate the financial impact of the disease at farm levels. The results suggest a 12% reduction in net profit on an average dairy farm compared to 6% reduction on an average beef farm under standard disease conditions. The losses increase by 2-fold on a dairy farm and 6-fold on a beef farm when climate change effects are included with disease conditions on farms. There is a large variability within farm groups with profitable farms incurring relatively lesser economic losses than non-profitable farms. There is a substantial increase in number of vulnerable farms both in dairy (+20%) and beef farms (+27%) under the disease alongside climate change conditions.

show abstract

“…Meanwhile, the Brexit vote has initiated a significant period of uncertainty as politicians figure out the future agri-food landscape. This is not likely to be sorted quickly ( Hubbard et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Towards ‘Tense’ Policy Post-exceptionalism?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Muck, brass and smoke: Policy post-exceptionalism in the agri-food sector

Attorp

McAreavey

2020

Journal of Rural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governance is well recognized as shifting boundaries of responsibilities for doing things among key partners. What is less clear is how exactly power relations are altered and where power is concentrated as new forms of governance emerge. In our article we use the concept of policy post-exceptionalism to critically assess ‘Going for Growth’, a strategic action plan that, until the recent past, underpinned the Northern Ireland agri-food industry. The agri-food sector has an important and prominent role in the Northern Ireland economy. The Going for Growth strategy illustrates how particular interests within the sector are supported by government, as demonstrated through the Renewable Heat Initiative and a scheme promoting anaerobic digestors. Using policy post-exceptionalism to scrutinize the strategy, our research shows what can go wrong when a transition to post-exceptionalism occurs. While Going for Growth purported to represent the wider interests that one might expect to find in a post-exceptionalist approach to agri-food governance, in fact the concentration of power with corporate actors left little space for the inclusion of wider interests. We conclude that this strategy represented a move towards tense post-exceptionalism, creating at least one political scandal, raising questions of legitimacy and transparency and fundamentally undermining political viability of wider government. It is an extreme case of what can happen when post-exceptionalist policymaking goes wrong.

show abstract

Brexit: How Will UK Agriculture Fare?

Abstract: Further ReadingWe might expect to see pressure from UK citizens for the application of British standards to imports from elsewhere.

Cited by 27 publications

References 4 publications

Making Brexit work for the environment and livelihoods: Delivering a stakeholder informed vision for agriculture and fisheries

Making Brexit work for the environment and livelihoods: Delivering a stakeholder informed vision for agriculture and fisheries

Financial Impacts of Liver Fluke on Livestock Farms Under Climate Change–A Farm Level Assessment

Muck, brass and smoke: Policy post-exceptionalism in the agri-food sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About