Official Statistics

Farmer Opinion Tracker for England: April 2025

Published 30 July 2025

Applies to England

This report contains estimates from the Farmer Opinion Tracker providing a snapshot of views and opinions towards Defra’s vision for farming at this time. Farmers were asked questions about business planning, relationships with farming organisations and Defra, new schemes and the future of farming.

A time-series comparing the results from each survey from September 2019 to date can be found on GOV.UK as well as a dataset providing a more detailed breakdown of each question’s responses for farm ownership, size, type and region.

Key messages for April 2025

• Farmers on 56% of holdings said that they either fully (7%) or roughly (49%) understand Defra’s vision for farming, reflecting the continued downward trend observed in recent surveys.
• Farmers on 35% of holdings indicated that they are making changes to their farm business and a further 41% said they will need to make changes to their farm business in the next five years. This is consistent with responses in recent surveys.
• Farmers on 33% of holdings said that they would be making changes to their agri-environment scheme agreements within the next year.
• Farmers on 84% of holdings said that Defra paying for environmental outcomes will be very (66%) or moderately (18%) important to their business in the future. This has remained broadly similar over the period the survey has run.
• Farmers on 72% of holdings are not at all confident that changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future for farming. This has remained consistently high during the lifetime of this survey.
• Farmers on 33% of holdings feel positive about their future in farming (4% very positive; 29% somewhat positive), continuing the downward trend seen in recent years.

Farmers had the opportunity to share their thoughts on farming (i.e. what was on their mind at the time of the survey). The open text comments analysis in section 2 provides context around the statistics.

Section 1 - Detailed Results

1.1 Vision

Defra is setting out what they think the future for farming would look like. In this vision, England’s farmers improve the health of our environment and animals as part of a sustainable, productive agricultural sector. In April 2025, when asked if they know what Defra’s vision meant for farming, farmers on 56% of holdings said that they either fully (7%) or roughly (49%) understood Defra’s vision (see Figure 1), indicating a continued moderate downward trend in recent findings. A further 39% said they didn’t know but would be interested to know more. Farmers on the remaining 5% of holdings didn’t need to know what the future vision meant for farming.

Figure 1: Proportion of holdings that understand Defra’s vision for farming, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

1.2 Changes

In 2021, Defra started the transition away from the EU Common Agriculture Policy which will involve changes to the payments farmers receive and the regulations their businesses must follow. Farmers were asked whether they had all the information they needed at this point to help with their business planning (see Figure 2). In April 2025, farmers on 43% of holdings said they had all (8%) or most (35%) of the information they required. In April 2025, a further 18% indicated that they didn’t have any information but knew where they could find it. Farmers on 29% of holdings said they didn’t have any of the information they needed for their business planning and were unsure where to find it. The remaining 10% of all holdings didn’t know if they had all the information they needed.

Figure 2: Proportion of holdings that have the information they need to inform business planning, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

In April 2025, farmers on 76% of holdings said that they are currently (35%) or that they will need to make changes (41%) to their business in the next five years. This is consistent with responses in previous surveys (Figure 3). A further 9% of farmers on all holdings indicated that they don’t need to make any changes to their farming business and the remaining 15% don’t know what changes they need to make, the highest proportion since October 2022.

Figure 3: Proportion of holdings that need to make changes to their farm business in the next five years, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Farmers who answered that they are making changes or will need to make changes to their farm business in the next five years were then asked what changes they are making or will need to make (see Figure 4). In April 2025, farmers on 39% of holdings said they would stay farming but diversify business into non-farming areas. Around 26% of farmers said they will stay farming but increase productivity and a further 20% said they will stay farming and grow the business. A number of farmers indicated that they would leave farming, as 11% are planning on retiring or passing the farm onto the next generation and 6% would leave farming for other reasons. These proportions are broadly consistent with previous surveys. Farmers on 9% of holdings stated other changes they plan to make to their farm business which included waiting for new government policy and cost cutting.

Figure 4: Changes to farm business, October 2024 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. Only respondents who answered “I am making changes to my business” or “I will need to make changes to my business” to the previous question (“Do you feel you will need to make changes to your business in the next 5 years?”) were shown this question in the survey.

All farmers were asked whether a range of external factors led them to make changes on their farm, regardless of whether they intend to make changes to their business in the next five years. In April 2025, input price changes remained the most selected external factor that led farmers to make changes to their business with farmers on 69% of holdings selecting this option (see Figure 5). This was followed by output price changes (56%), weather / climate change (53%) and trade agreements with other countries (34%). For the first time ‘other’ and ‘none of the above’ were included as options for this question, with 15% of holdings selecting other factors.

Figure 5: Changes to farm business due to external factors, October 2024 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. This question changed in April 2025 as previously farmers weren’t given the options ‘Other’ or ‘None of the above’. Therefore, proportions of responses provided prior to April 2025 are not directly comparable to those in previous surveys.

In April 2025, farmers on 48% of holdings are either very (7%) or somewhat (41%) confident that they can respond to any changes that are needed. Farmers on 40% of all holdings are not at all confident they can respond to the changes needed and the remaining 12% are unsure (see Figure 6).

Figure 6: Proportion of holdings that are confident they can respond to changes, October 2024 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

1.3 Environmental Schemes

Defra offers Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes for farmers – these include Countryside Stewardship (CS), Environmental Stewardship and the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI). Details of the revised SFI scheme will be announced this summer and CS Higher Tier will roll out from later this year. Farmers were asked if they planned on making any changes to any agri-environment agreements they have on their farm in the next year (see Figure 7). In April 2025, farmers on 75% of holdings reported having an agri-environmental scheme agreement. Of these, 26% said they had no plans to make changes, a continuation of the steady upward trend observed since the question was first asked in April 2024. Of those who said they were planning on making changes, 20% said they were planning to do more (e.g. more options or more land), 16% were planning to do another scheme alongside and 9% were planning to replace their current scheme with another, and the remaining 4% would not renew their agreements. A number of farmers indicated that they did not have an agri-environment scheme agreement in place, of these 13% were planning to do one, this is broadly in line with previous surveys, whereas 12% did not plan on doing one.

Figure 7: Proportion of holdings that plan to make changes to their agri-environment agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. This question was added in April 2024

Farmers who answered that they were planning on making changes to their agri-environment agreements were asked what issues led to them planning these changes (see Figure 8). In April 2025, attractive financially was the most selected factor that led farmers to plan changes to their agri-environment agreements, with farmers on 54% of holdings choosing this option. This was followed by fit easily into the way the business is run (50%), benefit my farm’s environment (44%), flexible to my needs (36%), easy to apply for (34%) and needed as I have significantly changed the business (e.g. bought more land) (4%). Over time, there’s been some shift in the popularity of different options, with “other reasons” emerging as a more popular response this time compared to earlier surveys. In April 2025, farmers on 15% of holdings stated other factors led to them planning to enrol or make changes. Reasons included reduction in available schemes and uncertainty over future funding.

Figure 8: Factors influencing changes to agri-environment schemes/agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. This question was added in April 2024

3. Only respondents who answered they had an agri-environment scheme agreement already and were planning on making changes to the previous question (“In the next year, do you plan on making changes to any agri-environment schemes / agreements you have for your farm?”) were shown this question in the survey.

The subset of farmers who answered that they do not plan to enrol or renew agri-environment scheme agreements in the next year were asked what issues led them to making this decision (see Figure 9). In April 2025, not attractive financially was the most selected factor that led farmers to choose not to enrol or renew agri-environment agreements, with farmers on 31% of holdings selecting this option. This was followed by will not fit easily into the way the business is run (29%) and not easy to apply for (23%). Farmers on 21% of holdings stated other factors led to them not planning to enrol or renew agri-environmental agreements, an increase from previous surveys. This included not being eligible to qualify for any schemes and concern over changing government policy. A further 19% indicated that the option would not benefit their farm’s environment, while another 19% noted it was not viable due to plans to significantly change their business such as retiring or selling land.

Figure 9: Factors influencing non-enrollment or renewal in agri-environmental schemes/agreements within the next year

Download the data for this chart

Notes:

1. Farms could select more than one option.

2. This question was added in April 2024

3. Only respondents who answered “I have an agri-environment scheme agreement already but will not be renewing” or “I don’t have an agri-environment scheme agreement already but planning to do one” to the previous question (“In the next year, do you plan on making changes to any agri-environment schemes / agreements you have for your farm?”) were shown this question in the survey.

1.4 Groups

Farming organisations and advisors have a role in helping farm businesses to adapt to the changes needed. In April 2025, farmers on 36% of holdings agreed that these organisations were helping them to make changes, with an additional 8% strongly agreeing. Approximately 36% neither agreed or disagreed and a further 16% said they either disagreed (9%) or strongly disagreed (7%) that these organisations were helping them to make changes (see Figure 10). This is broadly in line with the results of previous surveys.

Figure 10: Proportion of holdings that agree farming organisations and advisors are helping them make changes to their business, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

The future vision for farming involves farm businesses responding to both existing and new market demand for produce. In April 2025, farmers on 72% of holdings said that producing for the end market would currently be very important for their farm business with a further 20% indicating that it would be moderately important (see Figure 11). Only 4% said that it was not at all important.

Looking to the future, producing for the end market was said to be very important by 75% of holdings and 15% indicated that it would be moderately important and only 3% said it was not at all important. Farmers on the remaining 7% of holdings were unsure. This is broadly similar to the results from previous surveys.

Figure 11: Proportion of holdings that believe producing for the end market is important for their business, April 2025

Download the data for this chart

1.5 Environment

Defra’s vision for farming involves providing environmental outcomes. In April 2025, farmers on 84% of holdings said Defra paying for environmental outcomes was currently very (62%) or moderately (22%) important for their business (see Figure 12). A further 10% said that it was currently not at all important.

In April 2025, when asked how important it will be in the future for Defra to pay for environmental outcomes, farmers on 66% of holdings said it would be very important, an increase in the trend seen in recent surveys. A further 18% believed it would be moderately important and only 8% said that Defra paying for environmental outcomes in the future was not at all important.

Figure 12: Proportion of holdings that believe Defra paying for environmental outcomes would be important for their business, April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Environmental safeguards and standards in farming are maintained by both enforcing regulations and empowering individual responsibility. In April 2025, farmers on 39% of holdings either agreed (33%) or strongly agreed (6%) that the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility (see Figure 13). Farmers on 38% of holdings neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. A further 10% disagreed that the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility and 8% strongly disagreed. Farmers on the remaining 5% of holdings were unsure.

Figure 13: Proportion of holdings that agree the current approach balances enforcement with individual responsibility, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Regulations protect the environment, farmed animals and public health. In April 2025, farmers on 89% of holdings are either very (29%) or somewhat (60%) confident that they understand which regulations apply to their farm. A further 9% are not at all confident and only 2% don’t know which regulations apply to their farm (see Figure 14).

Figure 14: Proportion of holdings that are confident they understand which regulations apply to their farm, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Farmers were asked to consider the regulations that apply to their farms and 37% of all holdings indicated that they fully understood the purpose of the rules in April 2025. Farmers on 58% of all holdings say that they roughly understood the purpose of the rules which apply to their farm. A further 4% don’t understand the purpose but want to know and only 1% said that they don’t need to know (see Figure 15).

Figure 15: Proportion of holdings that understand the purpose of the regulations which apply to their farm, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

1.6 Relationships

Farmers were asked how confident they were that changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future for farming and 72% of holdings said that they are not confident at all (see Figure 16). Whilst this is higher than the most recent surveys, the overall trend has remained relatively stable, and the proportion has been consistently high during the lifetime of this survey. In contrast, around 20% of holdings indicated that they are either very (2%) or somewhat (18%) confident in the changes to the schemes. The remaining 8% of farmers on all holdings don’t know if the changes to schemes will result in a successful future for farming.

Figure 16: Proportion of holdings that are confident the changes to schemes and regulations will lead to a successful future in farming, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Defra and Defra agencies such as the Rural Payments Agency and Natural England are working together to deliver planned changes to schemes and regulations. In April 2025, farmers on 65% of holdings are not at all confident in Defra and Defra agency’s ability to deliver planned changes to schemes and regulations (see Figure 17), a higher proportion than most recent results but comparable to October 2021. A further 28% of holdings are either very (2%) or somewhat (26%) confident in Defra and Defra agency’s ability to deliver planned changes to schemes. Farmers on the remaining 7% of holdings are unsure.

Figure 17: Proportion of holdings that are confident in Defra and Defra agency’s abilities to work together to deliver changes to schemes and regulations, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

The April 2025 survey showed that as part of delivering the changes, farmers on 54% of holdings are not at all confident that their relationship with Defra and Defra agencies (such as the Rural Payments Agency and Natural England) will develop positively in the future. This is the highest proportion since the survey began in 2019. In April 2025, approximately 34% of holdings are either very (3%) or somewhat (31%) confident that their relationship with Defra will develop positively in the future. Farmers on the remaining 12% of holdings said that they were unsure (see Figure 18).

Figure 18: Proportion of holdings that believe their relationship with Defra and Defra agencies will develop positively in the future, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

In April 2025, when asked to consider the changes to existing payments and regulations as well as the new schemes that will be available, farmers on 24% of holdings feel either very (1%) or somewhat (23%) positive about the future of farming (see Figure 19). In April 2025, farmers on 69% of all holdings are not at all positive about the future of farming. The remaining 7% are unsure.

Figure 19: Proportion of holdings that feel positive about the future of farming, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

In April 2025, farmers on 33% of holdings felt positive about their own future in farming (very positive 4%; somewhat positive 29%). In April 2025, approximately 57% indicated that they are not at all positive and the remaining 10% are unsure how they feel about their own future in farming (see Figure 20). This continues to show the decline in optimism seen in previous surveys.

Figure 20: Proportion of holdings that feel positive about their own future in farming, October 2023 to April 2025

Download the data for this chart

Section 2 - Open Text Comments

424 out of the 1,417 respondents provided a comment. Below is a summary of the comments, focusing on those relevant to Defra and the Agricultural Transition.

Sentiment in the open text section was generally negative, with a lack of trust in Defra and the government being a cross-cutting issue. Most often this negative sentiment was caused by respondents feeling that government policies were potentially detrimental to farming and farm business viability. The most commonly mentioned policies were changes to inheritance tax, and other measures announced in the Autumn 2024 Budget. The rapid closure of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) scheme for new applications was of particular note in creating negative sentiment. This was in the context of a sector that already feels under pressure from challenges such as low output prices, competition from imports, and adverse weather.

It should be noted that people with strong views are more likely to comment. This can result in negative comments appearing more prevalent than might be the case i.e., respondents who are relatively content are less likely to provide comments. The survey was open for a set period and the comments reflect issues that are particularly salient at the time of completing the survey. Potential salience bias may impact on responses, with those issues that received significant media attention attracting more references and respondents being less likely to comment in detail on issues that were less salient but nonetheless important. It also means that policy updates made since the survey period will not have been accounted for in responses. The survey was open for responses during the period immediately before and after the closure of SFI for new applications.

2.1 Dissatisfaction and falling farmer trust

Trust was a cross-cutting issue in April 2025. A number of respondents indicated that recent policy decisions such as changes to inheritance tax, SFI closure to new applications, and increased speed of BPS withdrawal have damaged trust in Defra, Arms Length Bodies (ALBs), and the government as a whole. Respondents talked of “feeling let down”, a “lack of trust”, and a “need for transparency”. There was a sense that it would take a long time to rebuild this trust, and overall, a feeling of dissatisfaction with current policy.

Others had issues with Defra delivery or believed that there is a lack of understanding of how farming works in practice. A couple of farmers felt that Defra should be standing up to changes to planning regulations in defence of farming, as well as focusing less on the environment and more in favour of production.

Some mentioned ALBs specifically, with issues around their operational delivery. For example, feeling that they take too long to respond to queries, and finding it too difficult to speak to a person. There was also some concern about the number of regulations farmers are expected to follow, with a feeling that incentivisation is needed to encourage nature friendly farming rather than more regulation.

There were a couple of comments which showed optimism for the future of farming and pointed to the positive benefits of the farming way of life, as well as the benefits of no till, low input, low energy farming.

2.2 Food security, production, and imports

A large number of farmers made comments relating to food security, with a general inference that current policy does not consider food security highly enough. This is a continuation of a view expressed in past opinion trackers. Some comments expressed a concern that too much land is being taken out of production for environmental schemes or other uses such as solar farms. There were also some that felt food security would be at risk due to farms closing because of polices such as making some farm businesses subject to inheritance tax.

Closely linked to food security, a number of respondents felt that food production should be prioritised. For several, this resulted in a conflict between a need for food security and protecting the environment, with a feeling that environmental interests had been prioritised through environmental schemes. There was a belief that Britain should be self-sufficient and less reliant on imports from other countries and should be an important goal in “these very uncertain times”.

As with past trackers, respondents often brought up a perceived lack of fairness in competing with imported goods, which they believe to be produced at lower standards and in some cases, with state subsidies, meaning they can undercut British farmers. There was a feeling that imports should be subject to the same regulations as food produced in the UK. Some felt that farming has been sacrificed in recent trade deals, with bio-ethanol imports from the US being a specific example mentioned, amongst general concern about the additional competition these deals may bring. There was no mention of the increased market access these deals could bring in turn.

2.3 Environmental Land Management schemes

Many respondents left negative comments relating to ELM and other schemes.

Negative comments about ELM schemes commonly raised issues such as payment rates being too low, the aims of the schemes being too focused on the environment and not enough on production, and the complexity of applying. There was also a belief amongst a few respondents that payments would go to landlords or farmers that had not been “forward thinking” in farming in a more nature friendly way without the need for incentive.

Whilst the above issues have been commonly raised in past trackers, there were a number of issues raised in April 2025 specifically relating to the rapid closure of SFI for new applications. For many, the way in which the scheme was closed had caused issues of trust for farmers. Some comments expressed general discontent, and they could not understand the decision. Others were more specific, for example, stating that SFI payments had been built into their business plans, and they now felt their businesses were at risk. Some felt they could no longer plan for the long term if other schemes could close unexpectedly. Some specifically stated that this put their ability to farm in a nature friendly way at risk, leaving them feeling like they have no option but to pursue more intensive high input farming models. The issue of a lack of notice given before the closure was a big issue for many, leaving them feeling that they could not rely on the government or Defra to keep their word.

Some mentioned their dissatisfaction in the context of Basic Payment Scheme reductions, which had negative financial implications for their businesses, particularly its ability to help manage any shortfall caused by poor yields due to external factors such as the weather. For some, the increased rate of BPS withdrawal combined with the closure of SFI to new applications left them feeling unsupported.

A few farmers commented positively on the Countryside Stewardship Scheme, such as the increased payment rates for Higher Tier options and the way in and the benefits it provides holistically to bring nature and farming together. A few respondents were positive about SFI citing reasons such as the way in which it supports taking advice, reducing fertiliser use, and the payments fitting in well with their farming system.

2.4 Business viability

Business viability was an issue for many. Some spoke of a general lack of profitability in farming, even for farms that have relatively high asset values. A number of reasons were given for this poor profitability within the sector. Supply chain fairness was an issue for a number of respondents who felt that, through the supply chain, they were offered prices that are too low by those they believed wielded too much power over farm gate prices.

Others flagged the difficulty of “balancing the books”, with rising input costs and lack of control over output prices cited as particular issues. Diversification was seen by some as the only way to remain profitable, but others noted that they could not diversify further and were still not making a profit. Diversification was seen by some as a necessity that they did not want to pursue if possible, as it would take land out of production.

Inheritance tax was mentioned in the context of poor profitability, with a belief that profits would be too low to pay for inheritance tax despite the asset value of the farm. This would therefore make already struggling businesses unviable. For many, this meant they were less likely to invest in their farms as they felt that it would be lost rather than staying in the family.

Some spoke of the need to ensure that nature friendly farming is encouraged through profitability, and that nature damaging farming should not be allowed to be profitable. It should be noted that not all felt that nature friendly farming is currently being properly incentivised. A few said that due to changes to inheritance tax they would drop nature friendly farming practices and “extract as much value” from their farms as possible before selling up and retiring to live off the proceeds. The uncertainty over the future of the SFI further encouraged this view.

2.5 Specific farm types

Specific types of farms, and the challenges faced by them, were mentioned by some respondents. These included; small farms, tenant farms, livestock and dairy farms, and farms on less favourable land. Small, particularly “family farms”, were the most mentioned specific farm type. There was a mix of issues, with some feeling that payments were more aimed at large farms, or that large farms were the only ones that could afford the time and advisors to fill in the additional paperwork. Others felt that there was a lack of government understanding of the benefits that small farms bring to the environment and the rural community. They also felt that government policies such as changes to inheritance tax would make small family farms unviable.

A few respondents felt that tenant farms are not eligible for many schemes, and that the money from schemes goes to landowners, rather than the tenant farmers themselves, when they can apply. There was also a feeling that schemes do not work for short term tenancies due to length of the agreements.

Some comments referenced upland grazing livestock farms as being disproportionately affected by environmental actions or felt that environmental schemes were not targeted towards upland grazing farms. Similarly, a few livestock and dairy farmers felt that they are not catered for by new schemes or that they are unfairly blamed for greenhouse gas emissions.

2.6 The future of farming and mental health

Several respondents were concerned about the future of farming for the next generation. Some expressed relief that their children do not intend to enter the sector, whilst others stated that they would not encourage younger people into farming due to the uncertainty and low margins they have experienced. Many respondents felt that the agricultural sector as a whole, including food, farming and farmers themselves, is not supported by the government. This was often as a result of changes to inheritance tax and to the rapid closure of SFI to new applications. This had led to many being unsure of the future direction of scheme payments, with a lack of certainty for future planning. There was also a feeling of being underappreciated by government and wider society.

Linked to the long-term future of farming and the general dissatisfaction and issues of trust discussed above, farmer wellbeing was raised in several comments. These took the format of direct references to farmer wellbeing and mental health as well as comments associated with stress and difficulties experienced on farm. Others felt that Defra and wider government had an impact with the role of Defra/government on farmer wellbeing and this was a key theme within wellbeing-related comments. There was mention of feeling at “crisis point” or being “put over the edge” by the current situation.

2.7 What’s Different Now? (Comparison to previous results)

A higher proportion of respondents chose to provide comments compared to the previous survey, although the total number of responses and comments were slightly lower. There were some notable differences to previous trackers.

In the October 2024 Opinion Tracker, the Autumn 2024 budget was mentioned by a majority of respondents, in particularly the impact of changes to inheritance rules, National Insurance employer contributions and BPS withdrawal. These were all still mentioned heavily by respondents in April 2025, but with the added issue of the closure of SFI to new applications. These issues were linked to a cross-cutting theme around trust. Compared to past Opinion Trackers, there was a much greater feeling in April 2025 that farmers could not trust Defra and the government to support them, or to continue to fund ELM schemes. This survey was live shortly after the closure of SFI to new applications, so it is perhaps unsurprising that it featured heavily in respondent comments and impacted on their views.

A number of comments referred to confidence being at an all-time low with many feeling that their businesses were becoming increasingly unviable. Respondents again mentioned challenges in relation to business viability such as high input costs, low output prices, competition from imports, challenging weather. However, in April 2025 there was a sense that the biggest challenges to viability were around SFI closure to new applications and changes to inheritance tax, with an uncertain future outlook and belief that farming is not a priority for government. This was linked to a higher number of farmers mentioning poor wellbeing and mental health.

Since the tracker recorded these results, Defra have provided more information on strategic policy direction. For example, following the Spending Review, Defra has secured a multi-year funding commitment from HM Treasury, and an exemption made for those that started an SFI application on or after 12 January 2025, but had not submitted it before applications closed on 11 March 2025. In July, the Secretary of State confirmed details on the reformed SFI offer will be available later in the summer and announced the re-opening of the Capital Grants offer (Environment Secretary Steve Reed: Groundswell Show speech - GOV.UK). The Defra farming blog Farming (blog.gov.uk) contains information on the new application windows for capital grants such as the Farming Equipment and Technology fund (FETF), environmental capital grants, including those for hedgerow planting and habitat restoration. Animal Health and Welfare Pathway options such as vet visit funding are also detailed.

Section 3 - What you need to know about this release

3.1 Contact details

Statistics

Responsible statistician: Will Drabble

Team: Farming Statistics - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Email address: Farming-Statistics@defra.gov.uk

Telephone: 03000 600170

Social Research

Responsible social researcher: Peter Smith

Team: Future Farming Insights and Evaluation - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Email: Farming.Research@defra.gov.uk

3.2 Official statistics status

Our statistical practice is regulated by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR). OSR sets the standards of trustworthiness, quality and value in the Code of Practice for Statistics that all producers of official statistics should adhere to. You can read about how Official Statistics in Defra comply with these standards on the Defra Statistics website.

Section 4 - About these statistics

4.1 Methodology

The Farmer Opinion Tracker provides a snapshot of views and opinions towards Defra’s vision for farming as at April 2025. Farmers were asked questions about Defra’s vision for farming, business planning, relationships with farming organisations and Defra and the future of farming.

The survey was open for responses during the period the UK government closed new applications to the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) scheme on 11th March 2025. This decision was made because of the record number of applications and the allocated budget for the scheme been successfully allocated.

The results provided in this report are based on surveys sent to a representative sub-sample of the farming community in England, approximately 6,000 holdings. The survey was voluntary and 1,417 responses were received (including some partial responses), resulting in a response rate of around 24%.

To be included in the main sample, holdings had to have at least 50 cattle, 100 sheep, 100 pigs, 1,000 poultry or 20 hectares of arable crops or orchards. Therefore, all results given in this statistical report reflect just over 60 thousand holdings that exceed these thresholds out of the total English population of almost 107 thousand commercial holdings.

4.2 Data analysis

Results have been analysed using a standard methodology for stratified random surveys to produce national estimates. With this method, all of the data are weighted according to the inverse sampling fraction.

4.3 Accuracy and reliability of the results

We show 95% confidence intervals against the results for this survey (statistical release and time series). These show the range of values that may apply to the figures. They mean that we are 95% confident that this range contains the true value. They are calculated as the standard errors (se) multiplied by 1.96 to give the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The standard errors only give an indication of the sampling error. They do not reflect any other sources of survey errors, such as non-response bias.

4.4 Uses and Users

The survey was set up to collect farmer opinion on the future for farming in England prior to, and during, the Agricultural Transition. The aim is to be open and transparent about what we are hearing from the farming community and then acknowledge and respond to areas where we need to improve. The data collected via this survey will be used to create a baseline dataset of farmer opinion which can then be monitored over time to see how it is changing as we move through the agricultural transition period.

4.5 Definitions

Region

This refers to the ITL1 regions in England, for the purposes of this analysis we have combined the South East with London.

Farm type

This refers to the “robust type”, which is a standardised farm classification system. Farms are split into Dairy, Grazing Livestock Less Favoured Areas (LFA), Grazing Livestock Lowland, Mixed, Other crops, Cereals and Pigs & Poultry (Specialist Pigs and Specialist Poultry combined).

Farm sizes

This is based on the estimated labour requirements for the holding, rather than its land area. The farm size bands used within the detailed results tables which accompany this publication are shown in the table below. Standard Labour Requirement (SLR) is defined as the theoretical number of workers required each year to run a holding, based on its cropping and livestock activities.

Farm size	Definition
Small	Less than 2 SLR
Medium	2 to less than 3 SLR
Large	3 or more SLR

Farm ownership

This is based on data from the June Survey of Agriculture and Horticulture. The types are split into:

• Owned - all area on the holding is owned
• Tenanted - All area on the holding is rented under a Full Agricultural Tenancy, Full Business Tenancy, Other agreement or is seasonally rented in (364 days or less)
• Mixed - area on the holding is a mixture of owned and tenanted

4.6 Future publications

The Farmer Opinion Survey for England was first run in Autumn 2019. The survey was set up to collect opinions prior to, and during, the agricultural transition, which is the period of the Future Farming and Countryside Programme.

The survey was initially run every six months, except for 2020 when a single survey was carried out in response to disruption caused by Covid-19. From April 2025, the survey will run once annually. Maintaining the survey once a year allows us to track long term trends, monitor gradual shifts in farmer sentiment and compare results to a single point in time, whilst reducing survey burden on farmers and improving government efficiency.

The next survey is planned to run in April 2026, and the final survey in April 2027 (the end of Transition). Results are expected to be published at the end of July each year and exact publication dates will be announced on the research and statistics webpage on gov.uk.

To view previous statistical releases and the full breakdown of results, please visit the Farm Opinion Tracker collection.