Measuring the impacts of Scotland's agricultural support – a national level monitoring framework

Monitoring the impact of the Rural Support Plan

Reporting timeline

Impact monitoring of the Rural Support Plan will follow the reporting structure summarised below. It will track the impact of the plan and assess its contribution to the Strategic Outcomes over the plan period.

• Baseline set for 2025: Understanding progress made through the Rural Support Plan is contingent on establishing a baseline for future comparison. An initial baseline report for 2025 data will form the basis against which to measure progress over the plan period. Where possible, we will provide timeseries information on trends over the reporting period, but will work within the constraints of the data.
• Progress reports every 5 years in line with Rural Support Plan periods: A progress report will be published using 5-yearly data, which will allow us to inform policy decisions on how we support farmers and crofters.

This is the mechanism for monitoring the impact of the Rural Support Plan required under the ARC Act. Indicator updates may be made between cycles based on data availability and strategic relevance.

Impact indicators

Impact indicators provide specific, objective measures to track progress towards the Strategic Outcomes and sub-outcomes. They help answer the core question: are we achieving the results we expect? This report sets out the impact indicators selected to assess progress of the Rural Support Plan in delivering its objectives, and reflect the broader trends anticipated from agricultural reform in Scotland. These indicators have been selected because it is reasonable to assume that the Rural Support Plan will help influence them. Evaluation activities will assess this assumption alongside the other influencing factors, but it is important to report on progress against these indicators regardless, as they represent milestones in agriculture’s progress toward our strategic outcomes.

The indicators are assessed against an agreed trend direction, such as increasing, decreasing or stable, rather than fixed targets. This approach reflects the complex and interdependent nature of agricultural systems which is captured in the relationships that exist between the strategic outcomes in our framework. For example, increasing food production may require more intensive land use, potentially reducing habitat availability and slowing nature restoration. Conversely, some agricultural management practices can create progress across multiple outcomes, such as improvements in soil health that support productivity, biodiversity, and climate resilience simultaneously. Any attempt to design a holistic agricultural support system that simultaneously supports resilient food supply, nature restoration, and climate goals must recognise both the potential trade-offs and areas of mutual benefits between outcomes. These are better understood at geographically local or sector-specific scales, rather than at a national level, and so will be reflected within tier-level monitoring.

Because outcomes do not always move in the same direction, or at the same speed, a trend-based approach provides a more realistic basis for monitoring. Assessing progress against these trends helps us understand where strategic outcomes are diverging, where trade-offs have become more acute, and where additional policy intervention may be required.

At the same time, some indicators, particularly those relating to environmental condition, may only exhibit measurable change over longer timescales. Short‑term variability should therefore be interpreted with caution, and regular assessment should focus on the underlying direction of travel rather than over-interpreting rapid year‑on‑year shifts. Interpretation should also take account of data quality, measurement intervals, and uncertainty ranges associated with some indicators.

Where uneven progress emerges, we can consider if changes are required to rebalance priorities or to target resources and actions to areas that need greater attention. This adaptive approach helps ensure that the agricultural support system remains aligned with long term objectives, even as circumstances change.

In developing the framework, however, we will also be considerate of how to ensure that this flexible approach does not compromise transparency, accountability and learning opportunities. We are also working with academics to better understand these dynamics and potential challenges and opportunities within the monitoring framework.

The indicators presented here form a suite of measures that collectively represent aspects of Scotland’s agricultural sector. They should be interpreted together and in context, as no single indicator provides a complete picture. Where other monitoring and indicators exist that complement the chosen Rural Support Plan indicators, these are listed in the annex.

Establishing a robust baseline is dependent on the availability of good quality data. We know that for some sub-outcomes, we are lacking this data, and would benefit from further, more appropriate indicators, which may currently be excluded from this report because suitable data for 2025 baselining does not exist. As far as possible, baseline data will be drawn from data collected in 2025. Where that is not possible, we will use the most relevant possible data sources from within two years from that baseline year. Data older than two years from the baseline year will not be reported unless expressly referenced or required. Recommendations for further indicators and data sources are outlined in the final section of this report.

Development of impact indicators

The indicators for our sub-outcomes were developed collaboratively with input from analysts, policy leads and external stakeholders with agricultural, environmental and climate interests and expertise. This collaborative approach has been key to informing the identification and agreement of indicators to be included in the framework.

An initial desk-based data mapping exercise provided a long list of potential indicators and data sources for the sub-outcomes. These were further explored in a series of stakeholder workshops. The workshops focused on each of the five Strategic Outcomes, and involved a wide range of stakeholders. They were used to narrow down the long list into a shortlist of indicators, highlight existing data gaps, and identify data which could be used as proxies.

Proposed indicators from this shortlist were then assessed against a set of criteria to identify those for inclusion in the final monitoring framework. These criteria were:

• Relevance: Is there a clear relationship between the indicator and the sub-outcome?
• Representation: Is the indicator as representative as possible of the key characteristics of the sub-outcome?
• Availability: Is data readily available and accessible for use by Scottish Government?
• Sensitivity: Is the indicator sensitive enough to detect changes over time, particularly over the Rural Support Plan reporting period?
• Clarity: Is the indicator easily understood by a wide range of stakeholders, including non-experts, to ensure effective communication, or can it be made easily understood?
• Practicality: Is the indicator cost-effective to use, or can it be made so, and does it have low resource requirements for data collection and analysis?

We aim to publish a baseline report for the Rural Support Plan Monitoring Framework at the end of 2026. This will include a quality assessment of each indicator. When possible and applicable, we will provide a time series of historical trends.

The majority of indicators are measured on a national, sector-level basis. However, it is understood that some interventions will target only certain farm types, regions, or demographics. These will be considered as part of evaluation activities for the Plan.

Delivery monitoring and reporting

It is important to note that many desired changes, such as biodiversity improvements and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from new technologies, will occur over longer timescales than the five-year Rural Support Plan period. As such, monitoring of long-term programme-level outcomes will be supplemented by monitoring of schemes which we will structure around the policy support tiers outlined in the Agricultural Reform Route Map: base, enhanced, elective and complementary.

Monitoring of payment and delivery data will offer insights into how effectively interventions and schemes have been implemented, captured against a baseline of the good practices already undertaken. Delivery data will also inform evaluation processes and help assess the overall effectiveness of support provided. Impact indicators for individual schemes and tiers will be developed to provide a detailed picture of whether they are achieving what they set out to do, and their contribution to the strategic outcomes and sub-outcomes. These indicators will form part of the Tier and Scheme ex-post monitoring and evaluation reporting.

This strategy focuses on selecting indicators that provide consistent, reliable measures over time to track progress against intended outcomes. The evaluation framework will complement this by helping to interpret these indicators in the context of wider changes and the connections between these metrics.