Independent analysis comparing farm assurance schemes in various parts of the world, has concluded that Red Tractor is the “most prescriptive and detailed scheme” which currently exists.

Commissioned by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) and undertaken by Dungannon-based Birnie Consultancy, the work has involved a series of four detailed studies published between April and November 2024.

Each study has compared farm assurance programmes from around the world against the beef and lamb standards in the English Red Tractor scheme (similar standards operate across the UK).

A consistent approach was used throughout, with schemes scrutinised across 14 different categories, including the likes of animal medicines, livestock transport and environmental protection.

Scores were awarded to each scheme based on how well it addressed questions relating to these categories, with a system of weightings used when assigning overall scores as not all 14 categories are of equal importance. The findings were scrutinised by a panel of independent experts.

Australasia and EU

The first report looked at schemes available to farmers in Australia and New Zealand.

In the overall analysis, Red Tractor was well ahead, with the New Zealand Farm Assurance Programme out-performing its Australian counterpart.

The second Birnie report, published in July 2024, compared Red Tractor with farm assurance schemes in key European countries, including the Sustainable Beef and Lamb Assurance Scheme (SBLAS) run by Bord Bia in the Republic of Ireland.

The Irish scheme achieved similar scores across many areas, although it did fall behind in biosecurity and disease control, as well as animal transport.

However, across all of the countries considered by the Birnie consultants, SBLAS is the one that came closest to matching Red Tractor.

Also of note in this second study was the limited number of farm assurance type schemes that actually operate in mainland Europe – where they do exist, they tend to concentrate on specific issues such as improving animal welfare on farms.

North America

A similar scenario played out in the third study, published in October 2024, which assessed assurance schemes in the US and Canada.

Six different schemes were considered across the two countries, with the main focus in these schemes tending to be on animal welfare and food safety, rather than the breadth of issues covered in Red Tractor. As a result, some of the North American schemes did outscore Red Tractor in specific areas such as husbandry procedures and youngstock management.

However, in general they did not score well against Red Tractor when it came to standards relating to the likes of animal traceability, livestock transport, management of fallen stock or environmental protection.

In 10 of the 14 categories, Red Tractor achieved the highest marks and when these were combined into an overall average score, the English scheme was significantly out in front.

In their conclusions, the Birnie consultants noted that there are “learnings for Red Tractor within these other schemes”, but “overall, Red Tractor performs at least adequately in each category”.

South America

That leaves the final report, which compared against standards in three assurance schemes used on beef and sheep farms in Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina.

Two of the schemes (Certified Humane and Global SLP) are not “home-grown”, but operate internationally, with the main focus on animal welfare.

The third scheme was that run by INAC in Uruguay, which certifies farms on issues mainly relating to animal health and food safety.

In 12 of the 14 individual categories assessed by Birnie consultants, Red Tractor came out with the highest score.

Only in two areas – Feed and Water and Animal Health and Welfare was it placed second and behind the standards set out in Certified Humane.

Overall, Red Tractor had the highest average score across all 14 categories, with Global SLP second, followed by Certified Humane in third and the INAC scheme a distant fourth.