Supporting Scotland's transition - land use and agriculture: consultation analysis report

5. Monitoring and evaluating

Measuring progress of the long-term outcomes

Q12: The draft indicators provide a good basis to measure progress towards the jobs, skills and economy outcomes. Do you:

Option	Total	Percent
Strongly agree	4	10.26%
Mostly agree	19	48.72%
Mostly disagree	6	15.38%
Strongly disagree	3	7.69%
Not Answered	7	17.95%

24 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Job quality and economic viability

Many respondents stressed that indicators should go beyond counting jobs to assess job quality, security, and sustainability. Concerns were raised about the seasonal, part-time, and family-run nature of rural employment, which are not well captured by high-level metrics. There were also calls to include Fair Work outcomes such as union recognition, collective bargaining, and the real Living Wage.

Skills development and education

Respondents highlighted the need for indicators that track vocational training, rural skills, and higher education participation. Specific mention was made of agroecology, organic farming, agroforestry, and regenerative practices as areas needing better representation. Other suggestions included tracking the uptake of schemes like the Land-based Pre-apprenticeship Scheme and monitoring student participation in rural and urban areas.

Rural infrastructure and local economies

It was suggested indicators should record the availability and quality of local infrastructure such as abattoirs, transport, and broadband. The viability of small-scale enterprises and local supply chains was seen as essential to economic resilience. In addition, community-led approaches and participatory monitoring were recommended to ensure indicators reflect lived experiences.

Sector-specific metrics

Forestry was flagged as underrepresented, with suggestions to include timber production and employment in forestry. Additionally, the red meat supply chain was highlighted for its economic contribution, with calls to track processing capacity, Gross Value Added (GVA), and export performance. The historic environment and heritage sectors were proposed as valuable contributors to rural economies, deserving their own indicators.

Environmental and social sustainability

Respondents thought indicators should reflect biodiversity, carbon storage, and local economic impact. High Nature Value Farming (HNVF) was recommended as a key metric, especially for extensive livestock systems, and concerns were raised about urban sprawl, over-tourism, and second homes displacing local residents.

Governance and indicator design

Several responses criticised the indicators as too high-level and lacking connection to Just Transition goals. There was also a perception that indicators tended to be designed based on available data, rather than what is meaningful or reflective of policy objectives. Finally, questions were raised about the relevance and clarity of some indicators, such as those tracking crofter support or natural capital value.

Q13: Are you aware of other data that could be used to monitor progress towards the jobs, skills and economy outcomes?

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	12	30.77%
No	14	35.90%
Not Answered	13	33.33%

Contributions were received from 19 respondents about sources of data and specific indicators that could be considered for monitoring progress in this area:

Sector-specific and contextual data

• Rural Scotland Business Panel Survey: Recruitment barriers, training access, and business confidence.
• Soil Association Exchange (SAX): Whole-farm data on environmental and social impact, including job quality and financial resilience.
• Food for Life Scotland: Skilled catering jobs and local food system employment.

Vocational pathways and skills development

• Land-based Pre-apprenticeship Scheme and National Sheep Association (NSA)Next Generation programme.
• Skills Development Scotland (SDS) Skills Hub and Lantra Training Funds.
• Knowledge transfer and peer-led learning (e.g. Farm Advisory Service).

Infrastructure and economic resilience

• Data on abattoirs, broadband, transport, and local supply chains.
• Timber production statistics from Forest Research, to look at import dependency.

Sustainable jobs and environmental metrics

• Employment in “good green sustainable jobs”, such as plant-based food production.
• Training in agroecological and regenerative practices.
• Suggested sources: AgriCalc, Scottish Agricultural Census, Quality Meat Scotland (QMS) statistics.

Crofting and land tenure

• Metrics on active grazing committees, croft subletting and multiple holdings.
• Tenanted land area and organic farming area from the June census.

Job quality and fair work

• Indicators for job security, pay, progression and collective bargaining coverage.
• Migrant and seasonal worker data.
• Total income from farming, to contextualise profitability.

Governance and policy alignment

Concerns were expressed about unclear policy objectives and indicator relevance.

There was also a perceived risk around relying on readily available data that may not reflect Just Transition goals. Indeed, it was suggested there may be a need to start collecting new data sets specifically for Just Transition, and potential for considering comparable data from other nations.

Q14: The draft indicators provide a good basis to measure progress towards the environment and adaptation outcomes. Do you:

Option	Total	Percent
Strongly agree	4	10.26%
Mostly agree	17	43.59%
Mostly disagree	7	17.95%
Strongly disagree	3	7.69%
Not Answered	8	20.51%

24 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Limitations of current indicators

Many respondents felt the draft indicators were too narrowly focused on carbon emissions and land area metrics, (e.g. woodland creation or peatland restoration), and that these do not reflect the quality or ecological value of restoration efforts. It was suggested they fail to capture equity in environmental outcomes, especially for small-scale producers, and that the indicators risk incentivising large-scale projects that may not benefit biodiversity or local communities.

Biodiversity and ecosystem health

There was strong consensus that biodiversity indicators are missing or underrepresented, with the farmland bird index, soil health, and habitat-specific biodiversity suggested as useful metrics. Concerns were expressed about “empty forest syndrome”, where habitat creation does not guarantee species recovery. There were also calls to distinguish between native woodland and industrial conifer plantations, which have vastly different ecological impacts.

Agricultural emissions and land use

Respondents highlighted flaws in current greenhouse gas accounting as the metrics do not differentiate between biogenic methane and long-lived gases, with GWP* ^[2] proposed for more accurate livestock emissions accounting. There were also concerns about the lack of recognition for low-input systems, rotational grazing, and carbon sequestration in grasslands and hedgerows.

Circular economy and waste

Recommendations included adding indicators for construction waste, food waste, and asset/site reuse, and a call for more emphasis on local circularity and community wealth building.

Water and soil management

Respondents proposed indicators for water quality (e.g. diffuse pollution from agriculture), flooding and water scarcity. Also, for soil health tests and carbon audits under Whole Farm Plans.

Agroecological and regenerative practices

There was strong support for tracking organic conversion rates, agroforestry, and adoption of agroecological practices. It was also suggested that peer-to-peer learning, advisory support, and community-led initiatives should be monitored.

Livestock and consumption metrics

In line with Climate Change Committee recommendations, respondents suggested tracking livestock numbers, meat and dairy consumption, and emissions intensity.

It was also argued there needs to be greater recognition of the role of livestock in managing species-rich grasslands and climate adaptation.

Community land management

It was suggested that indicators should reflect the area of land under community management, and that there should be monitoring of collaborative governance and inclusive decision-making in action.

Policy alignment and Just Transition

Respondents felt the indicators were not clearly linked to Scotland’s biodiversity and climate ambitions, that there was lack of clarity on how indicators reflect a ‘just’ transition, and a need for indicators that show local impact, diversity, and specificity.

Q15: Are you aware of other data that could be used to monitor progress towards the environment and adaptation outcomes?

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	17	43.59%
No	12	30.77%
Not Answered	10	25.64%

Contributions were received from 21 respondents about sources of data and specific indicators that could be considered for monitoring progress in this area:

Biodiversity and ecosystem monitoring

• Standard biodiversity metrics such as Terrestrial Breeding Birds Index and Terrestrial Insect Abundance.
• Wildlife counts including deer, birds, and livestock.
• Condition of Protected Sites and Terrestrial Species Indicator.
• Crop diversity and pollinator presence in agricultural landscapes.

Soil health and carbon sequestration

• Indicators for soil organic matter, compaction, biological activity, and erosion.
• Above-ground and below-ground carbon sequestration.
• Carbon audits and Whole Farm Plan soil tests.
• Use of GWP* for methane accounting.

Water quality and riparian management

• Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) waterbody monitoring for diffuse pollution and freshwater quality.
• Indicators for agricultural runoff and riparian woodland planting.

Land use and habitat restoration

• Differentiation of woodland types (native versus conifer plantations).
• Tracking peatland restoration accessibility and funding distribution.
• Monitoring land under agri-environment schemes and landscape change.

Food systems and local initiatives

• Data from Food for Life Scotland projects linking food systems to environmental goals.
• Scotland’s food import/export balance and food self-sufficiency.
• Average meat and dairy consumption metrics.

Whole-farm and integrated data sources

• Soil Association Exchange (SAX) tracking forty-two environmental and social metrics.
• QMS and Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) Environmental Baselining Pilot using LiDAR^[3] and soil sampling.
• SAC Consulting and AHDB datasets for life-cycle analysis and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions modelling.

Historic and cultural environment

• Integration of Historic Environment Scotland’s Climate Action Plan.
• Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO): Scotland Strategy for sustainable management of the historic environment.

Community and equity-focused metrics

• Tracking uptake of funding schemes by farm size and location.
• Monitoring community land management and access to restoration funding.

Public engagement and wellbeing

• Indicators for visits to the outdoors, attitudes to climate change, and satisfaction with green/blue spaces.

Q16: The draft indicators provide a good basis to measure progress towards the communities and place outcomes. Do you:

Option	Total	Percent
Strongly agree	10	25.64%
Mostly agree	10	25.64%
Mostly disagree	4	10.26%
Strongly disagree	5	12.82%
Not Answered	10	25.64%

20 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Limitations of current indicators

Many respondents felt the draft indicators were too general and failed to reflect the lived realities of rural communities. There were concerns that indicators focus on population and employment figures, but not on quality of life, community agency, or structural inequalities. Metrics are seen as cherry-picked and disconnected from the Just Transition’s goals.

Land ownership and reform

A dominant theme was the need to address Scotland’s entrenched land ownership patterns, in particular the concentration of land ownership and low levels of community ownership. There were calls for targets to reduce land concentration, lower thresholds for public interest tests and guaranteed funding for community acquisitions. Also, for legislation to prevent generational land accumulation and to empower the Scottish Land Commission.

Community empowerment and participation

Respondents stressed the importance of community management of land, not just ownership. They suggested there is a need for indicators that reflect collaborative governance, local decision-making, and community-led initiatives, and a necessity to measure how communities shape their future, not just what assets they hold.

Rural infrastructure and viability

Respondents proposed the inclusion of key indicators to reflect rural resilience including access to affordable housing, transport, and broadband. They also highlighted the importance of monitoring local processing capacity (e.g. abattoirs critical to crofters and island producers) and demographic resilience (e.g. population retention in fragile rural areas).

Local food systems and economic participation

Respondents highlighted the need to measure the strength of local food networks, producer hubs, and community-led processing. In addition, the uptake of agroecological practices and local economic impacts. Importance was also placed on equitable access to resources for small farms, crofts, and market gardens.

Structural barriers to community wealth building

It was felt the indicators do not reflect barriers to land access, scale, or cost, with current support systems disproportionately benefitting large landowners. It was also suggested there was a lack of focus on hyper-local decision-making mechanisms.

Cultural and social dimensions

Respondents suggested a need for indicators that reflect a sense of place, community dignity, and long-term viability. The role of sheep farming in cultural identity and landscape management was given as an example of how land use impacts on place.

Q17: Are you aware of other data that could be used to monitor progress towards the communities and place outcomes?

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	11	28.21%
No	15	38.46%
Not Answered	13	33.33%

Contributions were received from 16 respondents about sources of data and specific indicators that could be considered for monitoring progress in this area:

Community empowerment and participation

• Local Place Plans, Rural Land Use Partnerships, and Regional Spatial Strategies as indicators of place-based decision-making.
• Community land ownership initiatives and benefit-sharing from natural assets.
• Track attempted but unsuccessful community buyouts or asset transfers, including reasons for failure.

Social cohesion and inclusion

• The Scottish Household Survey, (highlighted for its indicators on ‘sense of belonging’ and ‘ability to influence decisions’), to help assess whether communities are genuinely empowered, not just passive recipients of policy.

Demographic and housing data

• Population trends, especially in remote and island areas.
• Demographic structure: age, ethnicity, gender, household income, permanent residency, and return migration.
• Housing access and affordability, including second homes, holiday lets, and cash buyers.
• Scottish Government Rural and Islands Housing Action Plan as a key data source.

Local economies and food systems

• Local food networks; community-supported agriculture schemes; farmers markets.
• Processing capacity and throughput trends (e.g. QMS Market Intelligence).
• Community renewable energy projects and other community-led initiatives.

Land ownership and reform

• Data on land concentration and ownership changes.
• Use of resources like “Who Owns Scotland” and the Land Reform Futures project.
• Longitudinal research to track the benefits of community land ownership over time (economic, social, environmental).

Integrated and holistic data sources

• The Soil Association Exchange (SAX) was suggested for its 42 metrics across soil, carbon, water, biodiversity, animal welfare, and social impact.
• Evaluation of financial sustainability and funding access.
• Ability to link environmental outcomes with economic and social impacts.

Infrastructure and accessibility

• Local authority datasets on transport, broadband, and depopulation.
• Scottish Agricultural Census for crofting and small farm distribution.

Q18: The draft indicators provide a good basis to measure progress towards the people and equity outcomes. Do you:

Option	Total	Percent
Strongly agree	5	12.82%
Mostly agree	16	41.03%
Mostly disagree	4	10.26%
Strongly disagree	3	7.69%
Not Answered	11	28.21%

19 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Mental health and wellbeing

A recurring theme is the need for indicators that reflect the mental health challenges faced by rural and agricultural communities. This includes the psychological toll on farmers, especially livestock farmers, including moral distress and trauma. The importance of embedding mental health support within broader transition programmes was stressed. Indicators that were suggested include the prevalence of mental ill-health among farmers and uptake of wellbeing initiatives.

Equity and inclusion

Concerns were raised about whether the indicators adequately reflect equity across land tenure. For example, it was suggested crofters and tenant farmers face limited access to capital and opportunities. With respect to farm size and type, respondents felt indicators should differentiate between small-scale and large-scale producers. When considering the workforce, it should be noted that the dependency on non-UK nationals in sectors like abattoirs is not captured. Nutritional equity, especially for women and children, was flagged as under-represented.

Access and empowerment

Respondents called for indicators that measure metrics such as access to support schemes, (e.g., Farming Opportunities for New Entrants and NSA Next Generation), satisfaction with rural infrastructure and the uptake of sustainable practices.

Data gaps and indicator limitations

It was thought the indicators are too high-level and may not show clear correlations with Just Transition actions. Respondents pointed out that existing datasets on landownership and rural inequality are omitted, and that indicators fail to capture the effectiveness of community-led initiatives and peer-to-peer knowledge exchange.

Governance and structural concerns

Respondents felt the Plan should be more action-oriented with clear roles, timelines, and key performance indicators. They suggested the indicators should be better aligned with outcomes, especially regarding food production and sustainability, and that area-based indicators (e.g. peatland restoration) may obscure social impacts and equity concerns.

Food systems and nutritional equity

There were concerns as to whether the food supply chain is future-proofed. Respondents felt there is a need to reflect the full spectrum of a sustainable diet beyond just fruit and vegetables, and that indicators should include consumption patterns and diet-related health outcomes.

Q19: Are you aware of other data that could be used to monitor progress towards the people and equity outcomes?

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	11	28.21%
No	13	33.33%
Not Answered	15	38.46%

Contributions were received from 15 respondents about sources of data and specific indicators that could be considered for monitoring progress in this area:

Mental health and wellbeing

• National Sheep Association (NSA) member surveys, the Royal Scottish Agricultural Benevolent Institution (RSABI), Farmstrong Scotland and the National Rural Mental Health Forum.
• Seek data on access to support services, wellbeing, and mental ill-health prevalence among farmers and crofters.
• National Health Service (NHS) Scotland rural health data as a key source.

Employment and economic resilience

• Full-time employment in agriculture, off-farm income, and diversified income streams.
• Soil Association Exchange (SAX) metrics on job numbers and financial resilience.
• Pay, conditions, and workforce demographics across food supply chains.
• Seasonal and migrant labour data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Food access and nutrition

• Tracking meat and dairy consumption (Scottish Health Survey, Intake24).
• Monitoring diet-related ill-health costs (Food, Farming and Countryside Commission).
• Data on micronutrient deficiencies, especially iron (Scottish Health Survey).
• Food for Life Scotland initiatives and Good Food Nation Plans as models for equitable food access.

Community empowerment and participation

• Community-led initiatives.
• Community Wealth Building Plans.
• Land collaboration initiatives: farmer clusters; landscape partnerships; and community land ownership.
• Knowledge sharing opportunities and support for decision-making.

Demographics and inclusion

• Crofting Commission for tenure and demographic data.
• Scottish Land Matching Service for land demand and access.
• National Records of Scotland for life expectancy disparities.
• Data on housing, transport, and health access in rural/agricultural communities.

Land and wealth distribution

• Size and consolidation of landholdings, ownership patterns, and land prices.
• Agricultural subsidy distribution by holding size.
• Wealth distribution within communities, including profits from natural capital and renewables.
• Community benefit value versus overall project profits.

Education and opportunity

• Participation in schemes like NSA Next Generation and Land-based Pre-apprenticeships.
• Access to training and support for new entrants and small-scale producers.

Measuring progress of the short-term objectives

Q20: Using a combination of indicators and anecdotal evidence could measure progress towards the plan objectives. Do you:

Option	Total	Percent
Strongly agree	11	28.21%
Mostly agree	18	46.15%
Mostly disagree	3	7.69%
Strongly disagree	2	5.13%
Not Answered	5	12.82%

24 respondents provided reasons for their answer:

Value of mixed methods

Many respondents supported the use of both indicators and anecdotal evidence to provide a fuller picture of progress, arguing that quantitative data offers consistency and comparability whilst anecdotal evidence captures lived experiences and social impacts. Case studies, community feedback, and peer-to-peer insights were cited as valuable qualitative sources.

Concerns about anecdotal evidence

Some respondents cautioned against over-reliance on anecdotal evidence due to risks of bias and lack of representativeness. There were calls for clear mechanisms to validate and integrate anecdotal data, such as structured community-led monitoring and independent evaluation, and for emphasis to be placed on distinguishing between anecdotal and rigorously collected qualitative data.

Importance of contextual and local insights

Anecdotal evidence was seen as essential for understanding localised and sector-specific challenges. Examples included impacts of regulation on crofters, abattoir closures, and the cultural significance of land use. Respondents stressed the need for data that reflects community identity and empowerment.

Implementation and monitoring systems

Several responses highlighted the need for robust systems to collect and analyse qualitative data. Suggestions included regional forums, farmer-led reporting, and union engagement. The importance of public funding to support comprehensive monitoring frameworks was also highlighted.

Integration with quantitative indicators

Respondents pointed out anecdotal evidence should complement, not replace, measurable indicators, stressing that issues like climate change, land ownership and community participation require transparent data. It was felt combining both types of evidence enhances credibility and responsiveness of policy evaluation.

Q21: Are you aware of indicators or alternative evidence sources that could be used to measure progress towards the plan objectives?

Option	Total	Percent
Yes	10	25.64%
No	16	41.03%
Not Answered	13	33.33%

Contributions were received from 15 respondents about indicators or alternative evidence sources that could be used to measure progress towards the plan objectives, outlining:

Mental health and wellbeing

• Data from RSABI, NSA member feedback, and the National Rural Mental Health Forum to track mental health trends and service access.
• The importance of capturing emotional wellbeing and psychological support needs in farming communities.

Youth engagement and skills development

• Participation metrics from NSA Next Generation and the Land-based Pre-apprenticeship Scheme.
• Indicators on training uptake, retention, and peer-led initiatives.

Community-led and local initiatives

• Monitoring projects similar to those presented as case studies in the consultation (e.g. Glengarry Community Woodlands and Applecross Community Forum).
• Locally gathered data on housing, employment, and land use planning.
• Use of case studies and stories of change to reflect community empowerment.

Environmental and socio-economic metrics

• Soil Association Exchange (SAX) data covering forty-two metrics across environmental and social themes.
• Financial sustainability and funding access indicators for farm businesses.

Sector-specific and collaborative data sources

• QMS Red Meat Industry Profile and Eating Quality Study.
• Farmer case studies from QMS baselining pilots.
• Research partnerships with SAC Consulting, AHDB, and Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC).

Worker and union data

• Worker survey data from unions and Worker Support Centre.
• Agricultural Wages Board data on pay and conditions.

Integration with broader strategies

• Indicators aligned with the Agriculture Reform Programme, Biodiversity Strategy, and River Basin Management Plan.
• Need for sub-national data to reflect local progress.