Continuing Professional Development (CPD) system in Tier 4 of the Agricultural Reform Programme – Partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment – August 2026

Section 3: Costs, impacts and benefits

As noted, Scottish Ministers have not made any decisions on the CPD system.

Quantified costs to businesses

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

Costs

The expected direct costs to businesses of a CPD system are:

CPD portal

No direct cost to the business to use the CPD portal.

There would be staff time costs associated with uploading information on the portal (such as completed activities that contribute to CPD). It is expected that setting up an account and uploading information would be a straightforward process and would not be time-consuming. Information to update the CPD portal would be undertaken throughout the year as activities are completed and ready to record in the portal.

CPD activities

Costs would depend on the CPD activities that are undertaken. These would range from zero upwards where options for costed activities are selected for CPD.

A range of free of charge knowledge transfer and exchange activities are provided by the Farm Advisory Service to individuals throughout agriculture and crofting. It is expected that these free of charge activities would continue to be provided and can be used to contribute towards CPD.

Free of charge activities that can contribute towards CPD are available throughout the agriculture sector. They may include farm visits and demonstrations, farm walks, meetings, seminars, annual conferences etc. It is assumed that as these activities have been provided in the past they would continue to be provided.

There would continue to be some funds available to support CPD, whether through the Practical Training Funds for specific groups, or other schemes provided throughout the agriculture and crofting sector. They would be able to support costs for formal courses that have been identified by applicants.

There would continue to be a range of formal courses and activities made by specialist providers in the agriculture and crofting sectors, as well as outwith them. They would continue to charge fees for their formal courses and activities.

There would be time costs associated with undertaking the CPD activities. If 30 hours of CPD is to be undertaken within a year, there would be a cost to an individual or a business of 30 hours of staff time, excluding any travel time to a CPD activity, per individual included within the scope of the CPD system.

As with CPD systems in different occupations, it would be the responsibility of an individual to complete their CPD, not their employer. An employer would not required to release a staff member for time to complete their CPD. It would not be the responsibility of the employer to purchase expensive training courses for their employees. An employer may decide that a particular costed course represents the best training needs of a member of staff, and supports them by letting them participate on it, as part of their work.

Different sectors in agriculture would each have their own development needs.

The costs of CPD would therefore vary according to activities undertaken, number of persons employed or otherwise in a business, whether the activities are undertaken in work time or personal time.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

CPD portal

There would not be a CPD portal and therefore no costs associated with recording CPD on the portal.

CPD activities

If there was not a CPD system there would be no CPD activities associated with it. This means that there would be no costs associated with CPD activities.

However, by not engaging in CPD activities, individuals and businesses would not be able to experience the benefits that are associated with undertaking CPD. These could have a negative impact on individuals and businesses, such as not being up to date with the latest developments, having the right knowledge and skills, being adaptable to change within the workplace, having a motivated and competitive workforce which are confident in their work, business and individual reputation, as well are retention of the workforce.

Scottish firms’ international competitiveness

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The CPD system could help to positively affect Scottish businesses in agriculture and crofting to compete internationally as it would enable businesses to invest in the personal and professional development of their employees and others connected with them. This would ensure that they have up to date, knowledge and skills which could help businesses to compete internationally.

A CPD system could provide evidence that individuals and businesses were investing in their personal and professional development. This would provide evidence that they were interested in their development. By having up to date knowledge and skills, businesses would be better able to compete internationally. This could also positively affect their attractiveness - and that of the Sector – as a destination for global investment.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

There would be no CPD system. Therefore individuals and businesses throughout different occupational groups in agriculture and crofting would not undertake a range of activities that can help them to develop personally and professionally through this system.

This could give the impression that the sector is not investing in its businesses and employees in terms of knowledge and skills which ensure that they have the ability to compete internationally, and that therefore it is not an attractive destination for global capital investment.

Benefits to business

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The intention is that the CPD system would apply equally across occupational groups in agriculture and crofting, such as farmers, crofters, land managers and persons who provide relevant advice to these groups of people as well as other specified persons providing advice or services in or for rural communities. It would be designed to do so in a way that is non-discriminatory in terms of what the system does, its availability (e.g. irrespective of locale) and who it applies to.

The CPD system could have a number of benefits. These would be for all individuals engaged in it and more broadly for individuals within a business as a whole, and businesses. It could encourage and facilitate personal and professional development, and improvement in practices, in agriculture, land management and other associated vocational fields. This could enable individuals to keep knowledge and skills up to date, provide ongoing personal development, help them manage change and transition, help businesses remain competitive and resilient, and contribute to the professionalisation of the sector.

Indirectly, it could help to promote the importance of ongoing development and learning, help provide evidence to enable an individual to continue to progress in their career, provide a better career structure in the sector, highlight how knowledge and skills can benefit a business.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

There would not be any positive benefits from CPD if a CPD system is not set up. Instead, occupational groups within agriculture and crofting may not be able to keep pace with the significant changes in farming and ensure that their knowledge and skills are up to date and relevant. In turn, this would affect their ability to run and manage businesses that remain competitive. By not keeping up to date, it becomes more difficult to do so when attempts are made to catch up. There would not be seen to be any formal investment in knowledge and skills investment.

Small business impacts

Scottish Government officials conducted interviews with representatives of businesses in the agriculture sector in 2025. The participants were selected from the following list of business types to understand the potential impact on their business:

• Monitor farm
• Tenant farmer
• New entrant farmer
• Woman farmer
• Smallholder
• Croft

The following questions were asked of participants:

1. Do you operate a business that would be affected by the proposals?

2. What are the potential impacts of the proposals on your business?

a. Are you able to outline the potential cost and/or resource implications of this?

b. Can you quantify the impact (e.g. cists, time, resource)?

3. Do you have a sense of which aspects of the proposals would have the most costs associated with them?

a. Would you be able, based on experience, to qualify the costs you would expect to be associated against the proposal?

4. Have you previous experience of similar changes that affected your business in the past?

a. If so, are you able to quantify those historic impacts i.e. resourcing, financial, business changes etc?

b. Would you expect cost and/or resource implications to be more than these historic impacts?

5. How else will these proposals impact on your business?

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 1

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

CPD was currently important in helping to develop the business. There was CPD activities undertaken as part of farm assurance and supply chain schemes relating to livestock activities in the business. This was in addition to ones that were also undertaken during off-farm employment within the wider agriculture sector.

The CPD activities helped contribute towards diversified income streams e.g contract rearing of pigs and to ensure that the business had knowledge of activities that were undertaken within these (eg welfare at slaughter for animals).

CPD was considered to be something that was beneficial as it kept the business fresh and relevant, and aids in its resilience. While the business had been developed with CPD, there was recognition that different age groups thought of it in different ways. For example members of an older age group had not always recognised its potential benefits, seeing it as something that they had to do to meet certain requirements. They could also see it as “teaching your granny to suck eggs” or take the approach that “I’ve done that”. CPD needed to be conveyed to them in a positive way so that they recognised that it could still be beneficial to them.

It was considered that CPD could help to bring about many efficiencies in agriculture, such as helping to reduce its carbon footprint. There was a significant lack of confidence in the industry in using data. CPD in this area would be beneficial. Cattle prices were currently very high and there could be benefits in investing in nutrition planning for the business and the wider climate.

Off-farm employment businesses paid for training as part of employment. This was important where a business had a lot of quality standards and provided validation for the business. It was also seen as investment.

There would be a definite cost to mandatory CPD. Supply schemes required mandatory training which was funded by the scheme to ensure take up and investment in the supply chain.

It was recognised that if a person had to contribute some money towards a CPD activity that they were more invested in it as they wanted to see a return from it and to go home with some knowledge. It was also important that if there was a cost investment in a course that there were seen to be benefits from it – it would not be good to have courses that were not of use to a business. They needed to be relevant. However those who are struggling financially, and may not be able to invest in CPD, arguably require it the most.

Some form of “carrot” was considered to be a good approach for the “I’ve done that” generation. There was an element of give and take. For example, undertaking activities within a farm assurance scheme helped to develop a business within it.

The people who needed help were probably the ones that could not afford to pay for courses and other activities. This had been highlighted by welfare of animal cases. There was often a financial reason for not participating. Businesses that were investing, for example in Integrated Land Management Plans, were used to contributing some finance towards them.

It was noted that the same people attended meetings all the time. They were not, however, the ones that probably needed to engage in CPD. It was considered that if there was to be a set amount of CPD undertaken (eg 30 hours), that only a small percentage of the sector would already be undertaking that amount.

The mandatory element of the Beef Efficiency Scheme was seen to have been a positive step. There was a turnout of a large number of people that did not normally go to events. There were mixed feelings at having to attend these events, but a recognition that people had to go. Participants would have received new information.

Now with a challenge of labour on farms, If there were to be for example 30 hours of CPD it would be more difficult to undertake and go away from the business for a whole day. Activities such as business breakfasts, webinars, that involved a smaller amount of time would be easier to undertake. The development of new technologies such as podcasts, and being able to listen to them while working in the tractor were considered to be valuable.

It was important that the CPD activities and the subject matter were relevant to the farm business and the experience of the farm. It would not be useful to have an arable requirement for a stock farm, or a basic requirement on stock nutrition where the farmer was highly experienced in this area. It needed to be set at the right level of expertise; there were varying levels of expertise across the industry

CPD should not only apply to the business owner or partner. It could have an important role in upskilling and empowering staff and be a big asset to a business and the wider industry.

There were significant succession issues in the sector. There was a generation within the industry that had never had the opportunity of holding the accounts on a business and knowing how it worked. It would be valuable if they were given business training.

The costs to a business related to labour resources. It was not always possible for a business manager or partner to go to an event and they would have to send another member of the business. Travel time to an event needed to be considered as this could add on a significant amount of time to a training event. It was also important to recognise the cycle of the agricultural year and to ensure that any required activities were not to be undertaken at the busy times (such as calving or potato harvesting). While labour was a cost, it was important that there was a cost-benefit in the CPD activity.

There was some CPD that was regularly undertaken, such as discussing plans with a nutritionist, agronomist or an consultant and taking the business forward with their advice.

There are some systems that included CPD points for reading the agricultural press e.g. NROSO, BASIS, etc. For some farmers this would be the main way that they would get their CPD in a year. The Farmers Weekly website includes some online courses with CPD points for schemes such as BASIS and FACTS.

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 2

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

The business was already undertaking events and seminars which could be seen as CPD, but was not recording the learning from them in a formal way. The recording of these CPD activities would be a new requirement.

There was further understanding needed on what CPD was about. There was some recognition that it included undertaking practical courses (there had been ones undertaken by the Agricultural Training Board some years ago) as well as the Rural Leaders Programme or engaging with Farmstrong. It was noted that there used to be practical training courses through the Agricultural Training Board which included shearing and welding. However, it felt like it was now more difficult to get access to practical training courses. It was considered that it would be beneficial for young people and teenagers in agriculture if courses could be heavily subsidised and a person could tick a box on their SAF to indicate that they had completed some learning.

The application of CPD to other family members and employees – and not just business owners – would have a huge and very positive impact. This was something that the Scottish Government was currently looking at and had been suggested by the Scottish Parliament. This would have time implications for everyone.

Farm Advisory Service (FAS) events were considered to be good with a number of them having been attended, both in person and online. A question was raised as to whether all the CPD would need to be undertaken through FAS. It was confirmed that this would not be the case.

IT accessibility was considered to be important as not everyone had good IT skills. It was noted that this was being looked at and consideration was being given as to how this was being dealt with in other CPD systems.

If CPD was to be compulsory, it was asked how would it be incentivised and what penalties would there be. It was suggested that in the future it could be linked to support payments. There could be links to specific materials to help deliver sustainable agriculture.

Time to participate in CPD activities was considered to be the biggest cost to the business. The availability of time was also an issue. There was recognition that participation in some meetings required time and effort, but that in the longer term this was seen to be beneficial and rewarding.

A lot of the same people attended meetings and events. Those that did so were seen to want to improve themselves and their businesses. There were, however, a lot of people that did not want to. There was a part of the sector that said that they already “knew it” and did not need to learn something again. There were some people that said that they knew more than the “experts” and that they would not be told by them.

If events were seen to be beneficial and relevant they were not considered to have a financial cost in pounds and pence.

Webinars in the evenings were considered to be beneficial as they did not take out time during the working day.

Farmers “loved” farm visits as they learned more than if they were sitting alone in a room. If they were on-farm or in a group with others they engaged in peer to peer discussion, which was considered to be a good way to learn. This also had a social element. This was also the case for retired farmers attending marts.

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 3

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

There was already CPD being undertaken in the sector. The question was raised as to how this would be taken into account in respect of the proposed Scottish Government’s CPD system.

Geography, or the distance from a farm to a training course or activity, was a key consideration for farm staff becoming qualified or undertaking courses. For example, the nearest chain saw course was around 80 miles away from the farm. Although around half of the people in the district were qualified to use a chain saw and had the official certification, the others were not. This was especially noted following the recent gales when large numbers of trees had blown over. An 80 mile drive to a course was considered to be a large time commitment. Courses such as chain saw competence were popular and there could be collective need for them in an area. Sprayer licences training, a statutory requirement, was undertaken in the district by the good will of some farmers who arranged for it to be brought there.

A lot of activities were now available online. This was considered to be helpful. However, recorded materials could be posted for only a month and it could be easy to miss the short window of opportunity to look at them.

There were some parts of the country that were very remote and required ferry access. There were also farms that were very small, being run by one person, who by their nature of activity were not able to easily leave the farm to undertake training, though they may have some scope to undertake activities in the evening. This was noted for the dairy sector. The larger farms were able to get their family members to help if the farmer needed to go on business.

The largest impact of the proposal on the business was time. This included time for re-organising activities when away from the farm. Costs for obtaining a spraying licence were around £300-400 in training, time away from the farm and a practical assessment. There were also costs for the BASIS agronomist qualification which took nearly a week in time to complete every year. This, however, provided opportunity costs for the farm. Years ago it had to be undertaken in person in centres such as Edinburgh, Aberdeen, and in Northern Ireland. The ability to be able to undertake online activities for this qualification made a large difference.

The farm and others in the district made use of Teagasc, an all-encompassing resource, in the Republic of Ireland. It was considered to be a very farmer-friendly service with events throughout the country and colleges, research and advice providing a one-stop shop. Irish farmers did well out of it. Other providers such as AHDB did not provide activities in this district. It was considered that membership of the IFA (the Irish equivalent of NFUS) was compulsory and that maybe farmers were more used to undertaking compulsory activities in the Republic of Ireland.

It was considered that CPD would be a good thing to do as long as it was accessible and was not seen as a disadvantage in remote areas.

Quality assurance activities were also undertaken in relation to livestock. They included a number of audits. One specialist activity on the farm required specialist skills and its wider livestock sector was not able to attract people into it. As there were specialist skills required there were barriers to entering into this sector. Employees stayed for a number of years before being attracted by breeding companies. It could be difficult to replace them, and new employees had to be sought from an ever wider geographical area. That sector was not always attractive as other jobs, such as working a digger, which attracted a premium rate.

There were challenges with getting trained staff in rural areas. The wage rate was very important in attracting employees. There was a lot of competition, for example, with the forestry sector. Sometimes workers would change employment sector for an additional £1 per hour or a shorter commute.

It was important that CPD was accessible and relevant and recognised time constraints. In the dairy sector some of the best farmers had not been to college. They had grown up with working with cows, dairying and living the job; they had been rarely out of the county. Although it was difficult to know how to provide CPD for them, they all employed nutritionists for technical advice, and that could be used. A way to improve efficiency could be for farmers to get an agronomy qualification. As the farm agronomist visited at fortnightly intervals, things could be missed between visits and the farmer could pick up on these.

Organisations could help in training young people to give them practical skills. If it was set up in the right way it could be attractive and provide valuable skills.

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 4

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

The introduction of CPD would have positive and negative impacts. CPD was considered to be something that was positive, especially if it was made widely available.

The business had been involved in developing its own training courses which could be considered as delivering CPD. It also participated in wider sector activities and in providing training support through them. It was very positive about them.

The sector was constantly changing. It was therefore good to have an opportunity to be able to develop and do things better. Sometimes it was good to get an affirmation that what the business was doing was also being undertaken by others; it was good to get validation. This could be positive, especially if the business was run by only one person.

It was considered that social media had a role in knowledge exchange. However it raised the question of how good the information was.

Time was always an issue. This was especially important if a business was run by only one person. Cover could be needed to ensure that there was someone at the business. It was considered that this would be an issue for a lot of people.

Accessibility to courses was also an issue. There could be travel costs in addition to the time spent on a course. A three day course could mean time away from the business for a week, especially if it was held some distance away. This made it expensive for time.

Some small farmers also had regular jobs (other paid employment) and that further limited their opportunity to be away from the farm. This meant that the impacts of the proposal were greater for these businesses. The costs would also be proportionally higher to those of a larger farm. It was also considered that it would be easier on a larger farm to get staff cover.

Online activities were considered to be helpful. FAS TV had some good programmes, though it was felt that they were often geared towards large farms. It felt like it included “big stuff” that had been rebranded. The Scottish Crofting Federation had developed helpful knowledge activities.

Courses for women, especially practical ones, were considered to be good and helpful. It gave them an opportunity to have their own space, also away from any discrimination. Women would need to have access to materials and other learning resources out of normal working hours. Webinars were helpful as were also videos especially for factual information. This could be accessed at any time that suited them.

It was not considered that having a CPD portal would help in its own right to encourage small farms to undertake CPD. There was a need to incentivise small farms and ensure that CPD had more of an impact. There could be disincentives if CPD was made compulsory. What would be the penalty – reduced support payments or no payments at all? The question was raised as to how CPD would be verified and ensure the accuracy of the activities undertaken. It was considered that it would be easier for employers to record what was being undertaken (eg for health and safety training).

A requirement to undertake CPD would have helped when the business was running a number of short courses throughout the year. There was a rate at which it was not viable to run them (a specific head count was needed).

There was awareness from social media that people who were raising questions on topics should have attended a course when they entered the sector. Social media could be unhelpful and provide misinformation on basic things, leaving people confused or in a mess.

There was a need to make better use of the professional people such as veterinary practices for advice and training. One local vet provided advice and practical training courses. Food suppliers could also provide help, for example through their representatives and their newsletters.

There was an issue within the agriculture sector of trusted advice. There was concern at the “I’ve done it” sector that said that they knew better than others. It was considered that grandad was not always the best CPD provider. There were a lot of young people coming into agriculture and ones that did not have an agricultural background. They were able to bring in a lot of different perspectives. They were aware of wider issues around climate change and biodiversity and were looking for professional development.

It was difficult to get people to embrace change. People lacked confidence that they would be able to change and adapt to new circumstances. A number of years ago one employer who was undergoing significant change offered training opportunities to their staff in order to give them confidence to learn. It demonstrated to the employees that they had the capacity to learn and do things differently.

There was a need to ensure that there was a balance in approach between incentivising and disincentivising people (the so called carrot and stick approach). People needed to be able to undertake activities and engage in subject matter that were relevant to them.

Training courses did not need to be long. In some cases they did not need to be half a day in length. People were usually able to only concentrate for shorter periods of time. There was a limit to how long people could engage online. For in-person events the trainer played an important role in keeping people engaged and focused.

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 5

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

The business was undertaking a range of innovative projects, in terms of land and livestock management. This had involved a number of specialist advisors visiting the farm and providing advice and working with the farm business to achieve change. The business had certification and was looking to develop into other schemes.

In addition to the husband and wife and three young children, there was one employee; use was made of a large number of local specialist contractors throughout the year. The young children had a significant impact on decisions made in the business. There was no local childcare outwith the state run nursery and primary school and there were no family members to provide assistance. If one of the members of the family was off the farm then the children had to be looked after by the partner. Childcare also affected the attendance at events of women with young families. They appeared to attend in smaller numbers than other age groups.

There was a significant amount of learning and knowledge exchange undertaken in the business. There were different learning preferences and types of activities. These included peer learning, formal courses, farm events, participation with agricultural organisations, including committee membership, videos, podcasts, books and advisors. Time was spent with a range of advisors as they undertook their monitoring and other activities. Around 4-5 hours were spent on training or knowledge activities each week.

Online training was beneficial as it could be fitted around the working day and children. There were also courses that included both online and in-person components. Bursaries as well as funding, such as Women in Agriculture, was important to support training. These could make the difference between attending and not being able to.

The business hosted a number of events with farmers and farming and nature organisations to demonstrate their activities, achievements and benefits, and suggest potential policy changes. If an event was being hosted at the farm, this meant that unless there was a payment made to it, that they would not be earning money for its duration. The business was also involved with a number of sector organisations.

The business considered that it had a lot of knowledge to share with others in the sector and how they could help to introduce new practices. It was seen to be important to bring policy development together with farmers as this could help to make policies more effective and consider the financial impacts.

Time and costs were both constraints. Childcare had an impact, especially if it was not available. When there were costs for attending an event it was easier to decide to invest in the training. Distance from events was also a key issue. This could add on a lot of time and make attendance more difficult. It could be preferable to attend an online meeting. There needed to be sufficient notice of events being held so that schedules could be arranged, including childcare. It was important to build in flexibility into events so that there was access in the evening and at other times.

CPD was considered to be positive, However, it was recognised that it could have negative impacts as a result of things outwith the control of the individual, such as the weather. It would be difficult to have to attend a course which ended up being held on the only sunny day during a period of inclement weather.

It would be helpful to give farmers a payment for their time in hosting events.

BRIA – Small Business Impacts – Interview 6

The business would be affected by the CPD proposals.

The individual, a new entrant tenant crofter in the Western Isles, already undertook CPD as part of their work and volunteering activities.

It was considered that CPD would be helpful especially for new entrant crofters, even those who have been around crofts and crofting all of their lives. Even with a crofting background it could be difficult to know where to start to get information and deal with practical issues. The Scottish Crofting Federation had undertaken education days. These had been well attended by young crofters though not by older ones. It could be hard trying to get older crofters to meet with younger ones. Most crofters were working full-time in non-crofting occupations and were working the croft after their “day job”. There were some exceptions of full-time crofters.

The CPD policy would impact on the business in a number of ways. These were considered to be: time; access to resources; distance from opportunities on the mainland; lack of professional infrastructure from veterinary practices to meet face-to-face for advice; internet and connectivity. There were also cost implications from travelling to events. Attendance at some island events could involve long travel distances. Weather could also impact on being able to attend events.

The CPD policy also brought positive benefits. It was good to be able to be up-to-date with knowledge and to know what resources and funding were available to provide assistance. There would be a need to cross a barrier that CPD was seen to be another thing that people had to undertake.

A number of sources were used to acquire knowledge. These included the internet, family members, neighbours in the crofting township and the common grazings committee, RPID officers (at the local area office) or the RPID website, word of mouth, as well as locally-organised training from SAC. There was an awareness of the Farm Advisory Service though it was not currently used. This included mentoring. The Crofting Commission was not used for information.

The Carbon Audits and soil analysis testing required by the Scottish Government had posed a number of challenges. They were more difficult to undertake on the Western Isles. The interviewee had looked up on how to undertake Carbon Audits and understand it but had to go to SAC. SAC “did everything”. There was a feeling that everyone says “go to SAC”. There was a need to understand the results of the Carbon Audits and the soil analysis.

The local area office was helpful in providing assistance for filling out forms, for example from CAGS. There was a need to acknowledge that a lot of people could fill in forms themselves than spend a lot of money getting specialists to undertake that for them. This could also be the same for CPD.

It was considered that the impacts to the business would become disproportionate if CPD was to become mandatory. If they were voluntary or part voluntary they could be beneficial. The CPD needed to be relevant to the business and the type of activities in it, as well as wider issues that were relevant to crofting. There were some topics that could help crofters become more engaged in CPD. These included CAGS access to housing, and support for some of the bigger issues in crofting.

The term “CPD” was not known in crofting but in other sectors. The phrase “learning and development” could be a helpful term. The term “CPD” made the learning sound formal.

There were a lot of older people in crofting who were also Gaelic speaking and were not used to writing in English. This was seen to be a big stumbling block. There was a need to be able to access CPD in Gaelic.

The Whole Farm Plan had been a lot for people to take on and introduce. There was a need to time the introduction of these new policies so that they were manageable.

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The intention is that the CPD system would apply equally across occupational groups in agriculture and crofting, such as farmers, crofters, land managers and persons who provide relevant advice to these groups of people as well as other specified persons providing advice or services in or for rural communities. It would be designed to do so in a way that is non-discriminatory in terms of what the system does, its availability (e.g. irrespective of locale) and who it applies to.

We considered whether small businesses should be required to undertake a smaller amount of CPD in a given year. After looking at how CPD is provided across agriculture in other countries and in other sectors, we became aware that none of these provided dispensation for them. The amount of CPD given in a sector did not vary according to the size of a business. Rather, it could do so by different occupations within them. We could decide to use the approach taken by other sectors to require the same amount of CPD per business regardless of size. This could also be the same for other types of activities that involve learning, including securing “tickets” for example quad bike driving. An individual could have to complete the same course respective of whether they would use it on a small sized agricultural holding or a larger one.

This does not mean that there would be a disproportionate amount of cost for the small businesses. It would be for the individuals in these businesses and the businesses to decide what CPD activities and subjects are relevant to them and where they want to source activities from. As noted, there are already a wide range of knowledge activities that are available free of charge, for example through the Farm Advisory Service and provided throughout the agriculture and crofting sectors.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

There would not be any positive impacts to small businesses if a CPD system is not set up. Instead, small businesses within the different occupational groups within agriculture and crofting may not be able to keep pace with the significant changes in farming and ensure that their knowledge and skills are up to date and relevant. In turn, this would affect their ability to run and manage businesses that remain competitive. By not keeping up to date, it becomes more difficult to do so when attempts are made to catch up. There would not be seen to be any formal investment in knowledge and skills investment.

Investment

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The CPD system could help to positively affect Scottish businesses in agriculture and crofting to attract global investment as it would enable businesses to invest in the personal and professional development of their employees and others connected with them. This could ensure that they have up to date, knowledge and skills which could help businesses to compete internationally and be seen to be globally attractive. By investing in businesses, they could be seen to be interested in investment and would be more able to attract it.

A CPD system could provide evidence that individuals and businesses are investing in their personal and professional development. This could provide evidence that they are interested in their development. By having up to date knowledge and skills, businesses could be better able to compete internationally and attract international investment. This could also positively affect their attractiveness - and that of the Sector – as a destination for global investment.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

There would be no CPD system. Therefore individuals and businesses throughout different occupational groups in agriculture and crofting would not undertake a range of activities that could help them to develop personally and professionally through this system.

This could give the impression that the sector is not investing in its businesses and employees in terms of knowledge and skills which ensure that they have the ability to compete internationally, and that therefore it is not an attractive destination for global investment.

There are CPD systems in other countries such as Wales. It could be said that countries that have introduced one have a greater interest in the personal and professional development and investment of the agricultural sector, and are more open towards investment.

Workforce and Fair Work

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The CPD system would apply to particular groups of people (and individuals within them) including farmers, crofters, land managers, persons who provide relevant advice to them, as well as others who provide advice or services in or for rural communities throughout Scotland. All of these groups would be directly affected by the CPD system. So too would businesses which employ these individuals. Also affected would be ones that provide a range of activities that can count as and contribute as CPD.

A CPD system could help to support inclusive recruitment or job satisfaction. For example, for the individuals undertaking it, it could help to:

• Reflect and review their, knowledge, learning and skills;
• Ensure that they are up to date with their knowledge and skills in their current job;
• Identify gaps in knowledge and skills;
• Identify possibilities for future development;
• Provide an overview of their professional development to date;
• Remind them of their achievements and progress;
• Provide evidence to help them apply for a new job and secure it;
• Help with career development or movement into a new career.

The CPD system could also help to motivate staff and ensure that they have higher job satisfaction. This is because they have the appropriate knowledge and skills to undertake their job.

As the CPD system would be applied equally to all persons within occupational groups, it would ensure fairness of opportunity to all individuals who are included within it.

The CPD system could help to deliver the Fair Work First Principles. This is especially in regard to investment in workforce development, and through this development the creation of a more diverse and inclusive workplace. For the former, this means employers providing opportunities for their staff at all levels of the organisation, with a shared responsibility and shared commitment between the employer and workers, and everyone be able to engage in lifelong learning.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The absence of CPD would not help the agriculture and crofting sector to meet the Fair Work First principles, especially those in regard to investment in workforce development, and through this development the creation of a more diverse and inclusive workplace. A CPD system could be seen as one of the key ways for the sector to meet these principles.

There are CPD systems in other countries such as Wales and the Republic of Ireland. It could be said that these countries have a greater interest in the personal and professional development of their workforce in the agricultural sector.

Climate change/ Circular Economy

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The CPD system could help to positively contribute to both the climate and circular economy targets of individual businesses and the Scottish Government. Individuals within the CPD system could choose to or be required to keep their knowledge and skills up to date through learning about these subject areas. They could then use their knowledge and skills to bring about positive developments in climate change and contribute to the circular economy within their jobs or in wider businesses.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The absence of CPD would not help businesses or the Scottish Government meet their targets on climate exchange and the circular economy.

Competition Assessment

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

• Will the measure directly or indirectly limit the number or range of suppliers? No.
• Will the measure limit the ability of suppliers to compete? No.
• Will the measure limit suppliers’ incentives to compete? No.
• Will the measure affect consumers’ ability to engage with the market and make choices that align with their preferences? No.
• Will the measure affect suppliers’ ability and/or incentive to introduce new technologies, products or business models? Not directly. CPD could be used to learn about new technologies, products or business models. It would be for the individual who is learning on these subjects to take that knowledge and use it to introduce these.

Option 2: Do not set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

• Will the measure directly or indirectly limit the number or range of suppliers? No.
• Will the measure limit the ability of suppliers to compete? No.
• Will the measure limit suppliers’ incentives to compete? No.
• Will the measure affect consumers’ ability to engage with the market and make choices that align with their preferences? No.
• Will the measure affect suppliers’ ability and/or incentive to introduce new technologies, products or business models? No.

Consumer Duty

Option 1: Set up a CPD system for specific occupational groups within agriculture and crofting with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The introduction of a CPD system would have an impact on consumers who are described under the Consumer Scotland Act 2020 as “an individual or small business who buys, uses or receives goods or services in Scotland, or could potentially do so, supplied by a public authority or other public body.”

These are the individuals that use the CPD system (whether its portal or the CPD activities), as well those individuals that are providing knowledge and skills activities for the users of the CPD system. Indirectly, also affected would be the consumers of agricultural products who would benefit directly or indirectly from the knowledge and skills gained through the CPD system.

In developing the CPD system all of the responders to the consultation exercises have emphasised the needs of its users, or consumers. As noted elsewhere in the BRIA, these have emphasised the need for the importance of accessibility to all persons using the system, the affordability of activities, the need to consider barriers of entry, disability, the cycles of the farming year and activities in them, preferred methods of learning, monitoring, evaluation and review of the system.

What is the proposal trying to achieve?

The CPD system would provide specific occupational groups of people (and individuals within them) including farmers, crofters, land managers, persons who provide relevant advice to them, as well as others who provide advice or services in or for rural communities throughout Scotland with a framework to undertake CPD and participate in a range of CPD activities.

The CPD system is in essence a framework to support personal and professional development. While a CPD system has requirements that would need to be met by an individual, they also have some flexibility in how they can undertake aspects of their personal and professional development to meet their needs.

The outcomes of the CPD system could help to deliver the Vision of the Scottish Agriculture (delivered through Tier 4 of the Vision of Agriculture Support) as well as a number of key Scottish Government policies and outcomes.

What are the impacts on consumers?

There would be a number of impacts on consumers:

• The development of a fit for purpose CPD system (CPD portal and CPD activities) to be used by them (in essence a service);
• The CPD system would help all the individuals within the scope of the system to record their CPD activities, enable them to structure them, as well as develop their personal and professional continuing development. This would enable them to continually upskill and to help that their knowledge and skills do not become out of date.
• The use of CPD is well known to have a range of positive impacts for the personal and professional development of individuals using CPD systems. These include:
• Reflect and review their, knowledge, learning and skills;
• Ensure that they are up to date with their knowledge and skills in their current job;
• Identify gaps in knowledge and skills;
• Identify possibilities for future development;
• Provide an overview of their professional development to date;
• Remind them of their achievements and progress;
• Provide evidence to help them apply for a new job and secure it;
• Help with career development or movement into a new career.

There are not considered to be any negative impacts.

Is it likely that harm will be experienced by consumers as a result of this proposal?

No. CPD including the recording of activities that count towards CPD and the activities, are considered to be positive, and are used by many different sectors to develop individuals both personally and professionally.

The CPD system would be designed to ensure that there can be no harm experienced by consumers (eg to ensure the safe holding of personal information).

All activities arranged by the Scottish Government or its partners would ensure that no harm would be experienced by consumers (eg health and safety provisions factored into farm visits held by the Farm Advisory Service). The FAS is currently regarded as a trusted and well-respected provider and this service would be included within the CPD system.

What alternative proposals are there than can improve outcomes for consumers and/or reduce harm to consumers?

None. A CPD system is considered to provide the best way to enable individuals to take a structured and coordinated approach to their continuing personal and professional development.

How do these alternative proposals compare to the original proposal?

There are currently a wide range of knowledge and skills activities already provided in agriculture which are used by farmers, crofters and others across the sector. While these have some impact, they have less impact than systems which enable knowledge and skills activities to be brought together within a structured and co-ordinated way. The proposal to set up a CPD system could enable a structured and coordinated approach to knowledge and skills development and have greater benefits and impacts. A CPD system is considered to be the most effective way to structure personal and professional development and ensure that it is has the greatest impacts for individuals.