On Thursday 20th November, during general questions at Scottish Parliament, Douglas Ross (of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party, MSP for Highlands and Islands) asked the Scottish Government whether it will commit to providing full details of why each of the 3,537 (or 47%) of applications to the Future Farming Investment Scheme (FFIS) were deemed ineligible, as well as asking whether ministers were concerned when presented with this figure.
The FFIS in Scotland is a capital grant scheme for farmers and businesses that supports improvements in environmental practices, efficiency, and sustainability. It offers funding for investments that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance biodiversity, and mitigate climate change.
Applications for this grant were open from July 14th to August 22nd, 2025, with a budget of £14 million. Applicants had to be active farmers or crofters who had declared more than 3 hectares of land on their 2025 Single Application Form (SAF). The Scottish Government plans to monitor investments for a period of six years to ensure that recipients of the FFIS are putting the grant to proper use.
Minister Jim Fairlie, responded to Mr Ross’s question by stating that it is a matter of routine for the Scottish parliament not to provide individual responses to agricultural grant applications to explain why they may have been unsuccessful. He also added that the broad reasons why applications may have been rejected “will be published shortly…”. He also said, “I will write to the member concerned to provide more information on the criteria.”
Mr Ross found this answer to be unsatisfactory, saying:
“Surely routinely 50% of applications aren’t rejected. Something has gone badly wrong here. Why is there not a duty to tell each and every one of them why they are ineligible”
Jim Fairlie concluded by stating that the scheme was co-designed alongside the National Farmers Union of Scotland (NFUS). It was designed to help eligible active farmers and crofters to improve environmental performance. Applications are assessed through a standardised framework that is cross-checked to ensure consistency, transparency and audit defensibility.
Thousands of farmers invested time and money into the scheme, with many now saying the process felt more like a lottery than a fair assessment. The main point of discontent comes from the fact that despite appearing to meet the criteria prioritised for the funding (new entrants, tenants, small farms, organic farms, young farmers, etc), many farmers and crofters received no funding or even an explanation as to why their applications were ineligible.
The main demand is for transparency. Farmers want to know exactly why their application failed – especially if they feel as though they met the criteria.
Following these criticisms, Fairlie announced specific changes to the scoring model. These changes include an increased budget from the initial £14 million to over £21.4 million, and the reopening of applications, with approximately 60 going to island-based crofters who were notably unsuccessful in the initial FFIS design.
Overall, the Future Farming Investment Scheme has highlighted both the appetite among farmers and crofters to invest in sustainable, protective agriculture and the deep frustration caused when an opaque system leaves many without answers. Despite later increases to the budget and adjustments to the scoring model, the experience of thousands of applicants has underlined that any future rounds must be built on clear criteria, consistent decision-making and meaningful feedback for every unsuccessful bid. To restore trust and ensure that priority groups are genuinely supported, ministers now face a crucial test: delivering a funding process that is transparent, accountable, and demonstrably fair to farmers and crofters across all of Scotland’s regions.
