As the UK reshapes agricultural policy following its exit from the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) it is replacing area-based payments with a new “public money for public goods” approach. In England, this shift is being delivered through the Environmental Land Management schemes (ELMS), including the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI), which pay farmers for adopting practices that improve soil health, biodiversity, water quality and climate resilience.
But too often, sustainability ambitions are undermined by siloed systems, fragmented data and outdated operating models.
We spoke to Ronan Laffan, Agriculture and Environment Specialist at Version 1, and Ali Bovis, Digital advisor for UK Government at Version 1, about where AgriGov departments are going wrong — and what practical steps can help them move from compliance-driven schemes to truly sustainable system transformation.
Q: From your perspective working with AgriGov departments, where are organisations most commonly going wrong on sustainability?
Ronan Laffan: The biggest issue is treating sustainability as a scheme-by-scheme compliance exercise rather than as a whole-system transition.
We often see environmental schemes and sustainability initiatives with growing uptake. But when you look at the aggregate pathway, the sector can still risk missing environmental ceilings unless there’s deeper systemic change such as shifts in land use and farming practices. That requires integrated data, delivery and incentives, not just more schemes.
The second major issue is fragmented data and slow feedback loops. Departments struggle to stitch together scheme data, inspection data, control data and outcome indicators into a single consolidated view. Without that, you can’t manage adaptively.
Farmers interact with multiple parts of government. If each service is designed in isolation, you create silos. But farmers experience government as one entity. Sustainability outcomes depend on understanding the farm business as a whole – and joining up the data accordingly.
Ali Bovis: I’d add that sustainability is often treated as an add-on – something considered after the architecture and delivery model are already defined.
By then, it’s too late. Sustainability needs to be embedded from the start – in the baseline data, in the KPIs, and in the way programmes are structured. Many departments now have sustainability leads or teams, but they’re often separate from delivery and digital teams. That separation reinforces the problem.
Q: How much of the challenge is legacy technology and long-term outsourcing? How are those systems holding departments back?
Laffan: Materially. Since EU and CAP exit, the focus of agricultural policy has changed significantly – but system architectures are only beginning to shift.
Legacy stacks and old contract models hinder modern process design. We want to make it easy to apply, comply and verify. We expect automated eligibility checks, near-real-time processing and immediate feedback. But siloed systems and rigid outsourcing contracts make that difficult.
The real symptoms of legacy technology are disconnected processes and scheme-first thinking. Too often systems are designed around organisational boundaries – ALBs or individual schemes – rather than around the farmer’s lifecycle.
That mindset has to change. Design thinking needs to be farmer-centric, not scheme-centric.
Bovis: Exactly. Legacy isn’t just the technology – it’s the mindset.
We often see departments lift-and-shift legacy systems into the cloud without re-architecting them. They don’t realise the expected elasticity or efficiency gains.
And digital by default is hard when fixed-scope, long-cycle outsourcing makes change expensive and slow. If every modification triggers contract negotiations, you can’t adapt at pace.
Q: If you were advising an AgriGov department today, what realistic steps could improve sustainability in day-to-day operations?
Laffan: It starts with clarity of policy. What do we mean by “sustainability”? That definition must be clear enough to translate into measurable KPIs and operational evidence.
Then consider enterprise architecture – what services, digital capabilities and datasets do we already have? How do they align with policy objectives?
Operations must become data-driven. That means defining sustainability in terms that allow KPIs and provable evidence using joined-up data across services. And it means consolidating sustainability KPIs into one live dashboard. For example, Ireland’s Food Vision 2030’s dashboard approach provides a concise operational view spanning emissions, water quality, inspections and payments. That enables weekly performance conversations grounded in data.
KPIs must be made visible to the people you want to influence – farmers, delivery teams, digital teams. Sustainability must be everyone’s scorecard.
And target quick wins tied directly to sustainability outcomes – such as emissions or water quality. For example, create a small analytics product squad focused on one priority area – selected sustainability KPIs. Prove the model works, build trust, move forward at pace.
Bovis: I’d emphasise shared accountability. Data transparency only works if accountability is distributed across policy, operations and digital.
A standing monthly “Sustainability & Service” board bringing together policy, CIO, finance and analytics can align outcomes with user experience. That’s practical and low-regret.
.
Q: What can UK AgriGov learn from Ireland and from devolved administrations such as Scotland??
Laffan: Cross-jurisdiction learning accelerates maturity.
In Ireland, we have treated digital channels and data platforms as core delivery infrastructure for agri-environment policies.
For example, the Area Monitoring Scheme integrates continuous satellite imagery with scheme administration and farmer mobile tools. But the real innovation isn’t the satellite imagery – it’s the feedback loop. When an anomaly is detected, farmers can see it and respond via mobile tools. That inverts the traditional inspection model. It changes trust dynamics and speeds up resolution.
Another example is the Agfood.ie portal, which provides a unified view of the farm business across schemes and services. It reflects enterprise architecture thinking: start with the farmer lifecycle, not with internal boundaries.
There’s a lesson for Defra’s “Future of Farming” agenda: outcome-linked dashboards create shared direction.
Scotland is mid-transition under the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024, with a strong “public money for public goods” direction. Agriculture plays a larger economic role in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland than it does in England. But rural England is incredibly diverse – land types, farm sizes, ownership structures, nature of agricultural activity undertaken. One size doesn’t fit all. Farmers in many parts of England will have more in common with devolved regions than with peers in other English regions.
Q: What are the practical opportunities for AI – even where legacy systems remain?
Bovis: AI provides two main opportunities.
First, modernisation without waiting for full system replacement. You can stand up AI services via APIs around legacy systems to access and interpret data in new ways. That allows acceleration while core platforms are gradually modernised.
Second, citizen-facing improvements: intelligent document triage, eligibility checking, better inspection targeting and faster payments.
Laffan: In Ireland, AI supports such improvements in many ways, including eligibility monitoring through the Area Monitoring Scheme, risk prediction for disease and in supply chain analysis. AI’s role isn’t just about large language models – machine learning models trained on years of manual decisions can reduce overhead, improve targeting and make services more cost-effective.
Governance is critical. Human-in-the-loop oversight and Data Protection Impact Assessments must be embedded from day one – transparently and fairly transforming our services.
Q: Looking ahead five to ten years, what does “good” look like for a sustainable AgriGov department?
Laffan: Technologically, it’s going to be driven by responsive and agile delivery underpinned by robust, well-understood data foundations, with AI-enabled scheme design and AI-led digital delivery.
You will see a unified geospatial and casework fabric where applications, inspections, lab results and payments act as one platform – even if built as modular microservices – all centred on the farm business.
There would be a catalogue of validated analytics models – eligibility, nutrient risk, disease risk – each monitored with clear human override.
And open dashboards, refreshed near real time, accessible to ministers, delivery teams, farmers and the public, surfacing the KPIs that track sustainability policy outcomes.
Bovis: Ultimately, good looks like this: sustainability isn’t a bolt-on. It’s embedded in policy, architecture, procurement and culture.
Departments move from fragmented schemes to coherent systems. From lagging indicators to adaptive management. From compliance to collaboration.
That’s when digital government genuinely supports sustainable outcomes – not just administrates them.
