« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
2. Methodology
In order to meet the project objectives, a combination of qualitative and quantitative research was carried out, in a series of work packages. The research framework broadly included:
- Desk research to establish details of all key contacts for the five Monitor Farms to be studied, and details of the individual Monitor Farm programmes and objectives.
- Telephone interviews with key stakeholders, including funders.
- Telephone interviews with 10 Monitor Farmers with existing or previously operating programmes and also with their associated 10 facilitators.
- Collection and analysis of financial data collected through visits to 5 host farmers, to be studied in detail in order to measure financial impact and value for money of the programme.
- Workshops with the Monitor Farm community groups of the 5 farms studied in detail. The workshops assessed the views of members and collected physical and financial data used to estimate impacts.
- A Postal Survey of Non-members of the Programme
The five Monitor Farms programmes selected for detailed analysis were agreed in consultation with SG- RD and QMS. The criteria were: that they had been established for at least 2 years, and that they provided a cross section of farm types and coverage of the Scottish Regions. The 2 years limit was to give the group time to become effective and be able to identify how the activity had affected farming performance physically and financially. Of the 5 chosen 4 were live and 1 completed its activities in 2007. The farms studied in detail were located at, Ayrshire, Bute, North Argyll, Highlands, and Wigtownshire.
2.1 Desk Research
After the initial project plan was agreed, desk research was undertaken to indentify and collate contact details of farmers, facilitators and funders participating in the programme. These individuals were contacted to obtain basic data on the selected monitor farms, including farm type, nature of the programme, contact details of group members, any funding and activities that had been carried out on that farm in order to identify major management and technical changes that have been implemented and monitored. This data was then used to create sample lists for interviews and content of discussion guides.
A brief review of research and evaluation of other Monitor Farms or similar programmes was undertaken to inform the development of discussion guides and other aspects of the research.
2.2 Stakeholder Research
Five funders of the programme other than the Scottish Government, namely: Quality Meat Scotland, Dairy Co, HGCA, The Highlands Council, Scottish Enterprise Borders and SOPA were interviewed by telephone
Telephone interviews also took place with ten group Facilitators and ten Monitor Farmers all from active farms or from where the programme had been completed. Through these interviews, ADAS gathered views on key issues such as what benefits the programme had achieved, what had worked well and not so well and future funding. ADAS developed a structured discussion guide for all stakeholder interviews, with similar questions asked of each interviewee. The discussion guides are included in Appendix 3 of this report. In common with most qualitative interviewing, the consultant adopted a flexible approach to pursue appropriate lines of questioning according to how the discussion progressed.
The structure of the discussion guide followed the Attitude - Knowledge - Behaviour - Results investigation framework. The areas the topic guide focused on included:
- Perceived value of the Monitor Farm Programme to Monitor Farm business and the wider community
- Areas that have and have not worked well within the programme and areas that could be improved.
- Intended and actual changes to farm practices and the role of the Monitor Farm in encouraging these changes,
- Role and value of the facilitators, experts and group members, how this worked and the relationships that were built up
- Potential value of the programme on a longer term basis and how its value and effectiveness could be improved.
2.3 Farm Visits
The five Monitor Farms studied in detail were contacted to inform them of the data collection process. A proforma was created to ensure that the relevant physical and financial data was collected, including examination of the farms audited accounts and available gross margin and physical performance data. Farm visits were conducted by ADAS partner Buccleuch FBR of Kelso. A calculation of imputed rent for tenants and unpaid labour was made.
The information that was collected allowed the calculation of Net Farm Income ( NFI) 3 at the start and, for 4 of the 5 farms the 2007 position was established. The remaining farm with a December year end did not have the latest relevant accounts available. The change in the farms' NFI from the start of the programme was adjusted for any change seen in similar farm types 4. This removed any benefits resulting from the general trend of similar farms (Deadweight). This deadweight calculation was based on financial year 2005-7 except one farm (who had fully completed the programme) which was 2004-7.
In addition we examined the annual reports of these Monitor Farms looking for trends in farm profit, enterprise margins and physical performance. In each report physical data and gross margin information was available. However, a feature of this was that there was no common approach to providing baseline information against which to track changes and improvements financially or physically. In some reports this baseline information was not present.
2.4 Focus Groups with Community Group Members
Workshops were held with Community Group members of each of the five farms studied in detail. The aim was to explore the extent to which the Monitor Farm concept resonated in the wider community group and also to collate details of specific changes/improvements made to farms within the groups as a result of their improvement.
All recruitment for the workshops and booking of locations was conducted from contact lists collated earlier. ADAS consultants designed a topic guide, similar in layout to those used for previous interviews with funders, Facilitators and Monitor Farmers. Also a data collection form, requesting details of financial change experienced as a direct result of participating, was created for each Community Group to use in the second section of the workshop ( Appendix 9). Farmers were alerted to this aspect and asked to bring records and information where available.
The workshops consisted of two sections:
- First a discussion was held on member's attitudes, feelings and perception of the programme on their farms.
- Second, following the attitudinal discussion, the members with the assistance of ADAS farm business consultants, collected data using a proforma.
2.5 Financial Analysis of Focus Group Data
The aim of the data gathering in the workshops was to obtain as much information as possible regarding any changes to the physical nature of the farm (e.g. herd size, amount of land) pre and post the Monitor Farm programme, including increases or decreases in costs (e.g. feed, fertiliser, contractors) and any investment that had been made or planned to be made were recorded. In gathering this data on improvements it was made clear to them that only changes which they felt arose directly from being a Monitor Farm group member should be recorded.
Actual figures were recorded where possible and farmers own estimates used where hard data was not provided. Where enterprises had increased in size as a result (e.g. 50 more breeding ewes or better grassland management) the benefit was expressed using published gross margins.
The information gained from both the open discussion and the physical and financial data was extracted, calculated and summarised. The 2007/8 SAC Farm Management Handbook was used as the standard source for gross margins where for example changes in stock numbers and crop areas were influenced by the programme. Other benefits that the farmers could clearly identify were also taken into account, for example actual values of extra income, costs saved or extra costs incurred. The pro forma also asked about investment made as a direct result of being in a community group.
For each focus group the average of the financial progress of participants was calculated and then multiplied by the Community Group farmer membership size as an assessment of the progress of each Community Group. The results were then expressed as total progress over the time of the project at that farm, having adjusted for Net Farm Income deadweight as defined in Section 2.3.
A wide range of other benefits were reported as attributable to the Monitor Farm programme and noted ( Appendix 6). However these were not included in the financial calculation. e.g. "my grassland management improved"
Value for money was estimated from the progress in financial performance pre and post the Monitor Farm Programme obtained from both the Monitor Farms and the Community Group farmer members.
2.6 Quantitative Research with Non-group Members
The aim of the non-members survey was to assess the reach of the programme to the wider farming community in Scotland. ADAS consultants drew up a questionnaire covering the areas:
- Knowledge of the Monitor Farm approach
- Awareness of particular farms
- Rating of their knowledge of the approach
- Subject areas heard about though the programme, changes implemented and impact on their business performance
- Information they would like to receive in future about the programme and preferred channels
A sample of 3000 farmers was provided by the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Research and Analysis Directorate in discussion with ADAS. The sample was designed to reflect the distribution of farm sizes and types across Scotland. To focus the sample on the anticipated target groups a Standard Labour Requirement cut off point of 0.5 SLR5 was used and any solely horticultural and pig or chicken farms were excluded. In addition the Scottish Government screened these for known Community Group members. In all 538 replies were received, a response rate of 18%. Of these 512 (95%) were useable, the majority of those excluded from the analysis were those who identified themselves as being part of Monitor Farm group at some time.
Data collected from the completed questionnaires was entered into the specialist market research software package SNAP, for analysis.
2.7 Reporting
Key members of the team were brought together to review the key findings from work packages. This has enabled a range of views from differing perspectives of the project to come together to help with the overall understanding of the conclusions and recommendations made.
« Previous | Contents | Next »