Public Attitudes and Preferences for Upland Landscapes - Defra

1. Introduction
1.1. Background
There is no statutory definition of the English uplands but a regularly adopted definition is that
of land categorised as “Less Favoured Areas (LFA)”, the EU classification for socially and
economically disadvantaged agricultural areas. The 9 upland regions on which Defra have based
this categorization are described (from an agricultural perspective) and mapped geographically in
Defra’s statistical notice on the uplands and other LFAs 1 . Research 2,3 indicates that upland
farming is facing real pressures and a reduction or significant change to the nature of upland
agriculture could therefore have a major impact on what upland landscapes look like in the future,
as well as on the other benefits delivered. The visual quality of the landscape requires
sustainable land management but this is dependent on an informed understanding of what the
public value.
The special status of upland regions - most have separate local governance
arrangements (National Parks), landscape protection status (e.g. Areas of Outstanding Natural
Beauty), special conservation designation (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest) - means that
they are a resource of national significance. Although there is distinct variation between different
upland regions, farming is a key feature associated with the uplands and has considerable
cultural and environmental significance. This is because of the interdependence between farming
and food production, wider management of land and ecosystems, recreation and tourism 4 . Some
upland regions also feature unique tenure and land-management systems (e.g. commons and
grouse moor management) which have an impact on the landscape and add to the complexity of
upland farming systems. The non-production goods which upland farming provides (e.g. the
maintenance of the landscape for recreational use etc.) are often cited as justification for the
continued financial support of upland farmers (see discussion in Hodge, 2000). However, as
Harvey (2003) proposes, in order to ensure that agricultural activities provide the optimal level of
public goods, it is not only necessary to separate financial support for broader public goods from
payments for agricultural production but it is also important to identify the attributes of public
goods and to determine their value to members of the public that benefit from them. Importantly,
Harvey emphasises the need to recognise different public preferences in the design of rural
policy land-use.
The Ecosystems Approach is an increasingly common approach to valuing all of the
services delivered in any given area. Ecosystem services can be categorised into 4 overarching
groups 5 :
• Regulating services: the benefits derived from the way ecosystem processes are
regulated such as water purification, air quality maintenance and climate regulation.
• Provisioning services: the products obtained from ecosystems such as food, fibre
and medicines.
1 http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/enviro/farmpractice/documents/FPS2009uplands.pdf
2 http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/enviro/observatory/research/documents/uplands-indepth.pdf
3 http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/enviro/observatory/research/documents/UplandsFPS_report09.p
df
4 http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/enviro/observatory/research/documents/uplands2010.pdf
5 http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/policy/natural-environ/documents/eco-actionplan.pdf
3