By Bianca Forte, 23 September 2026

Yesterday, the second application window for England’s Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) opened at 10:00 am with a budget of £233 million. By 15:48, Defra announced that the call was closed for applications, having received enough applications to allocate the full budget.

That is a striking response. We do not yet know which actions farmers applied for, but we do know that demand for support to adopt sustainable farming practices exceeded the funding available on the day. For policymakers, the question is what happens next.

From environmental ambition to farm-level economics

If environmental practices are to become part of mainstream food production, farmers need a credible way to adopt them without putting the viability of their businesses at risk.

Public funding has an important role to play in supporting environmental outcomes and reducing the risk of adopting new practices. But sustainable farming cannot depend on incentives alone. For practices and technologies to become mainstream, and deliver the level of impact required, farmers need to see practical and financial value.

The same test applies to companies developing agricultural innovations. An environmental promise may attract interest, but it will not secure widespread adoption. A product must perform reliably under commercial conditions and make financial sense at the price farmers will pay for it.

Turning innovation into something farmers can use

The independent Farming Profitability Review, published in December 2025, called for a more coherent approach to food production, farm profitability and environmental policy in the UK. These priorities should not be viewed in isolation.

For example, technologies that help farmers increase yields while making better use of inputs could reduce the environmental impact of each tonne of crop produced. Technologies that help maintain yields when inputs are reduced could also improve efficiency.

In my earlier article on the Farming Profitability Review, I argued that biostimulants have the potential to bring these priorities together. But the word potential matters.

The evidence gap for biostimulants

The need for evidence is particularly relevant in the UK, where plant biostimulants do not yet have a specific regulatory framework. Farmers and agronomists are therefore left to scrutinise product claims and look for evidence gathered under conditions relevant to their farms.

With margins under pressure, farmers cannot be expected to carry the cost of establishing every new product’s value for themselves. For innovative ventures, the challenge is that building this evidence takes time, while investors may face shorter timelines.

What establishing value actually takes

At SugaROx, we know from experience how much work sits behind establishing value.

Our venture was launched in 2021 to develop third generation crop biostimulants using a platform technology developed by Oxford University and Rothamsted Research. Our products are based on natural molecules that boost key metabolic processes inside plant cells.

Since then, we have worked to refine the synthesis process for our molecules and to refine the concept for the first product in our pipeline. On wheat, for example:

• Replicated small-plot trials have helped us reduce the number of product applications from four to one and optimise the dose rate.
• With support from Innovate UK and Defra, we are working with UK farmers to evaluate product performance under commercial conditions across four cropping seasons.
• With potential partners who could bring the product to market, we are testing different application timings to fit existing spray programmes and reduce adoption costs.

Accelerating the adoption of truly scalable sustainable farming

Public funding has a role in rewarding environmental benefits. Industry has a responsibility to develop tools whose performance and financial value stand up to scrutiny. Investors need to see a credible path to commercial launch and adoption within their investment horizons.

The response to SFI26 shows that UK farmers are ready to engage with the sustainability agenda. They need support to adopt practices whose financial benefits have yet to be established consistently across farms.

The speed at which SFI26 funding was spoken for should prompt more than a discussion about the size of the next budget. It should encourage greater focus on the demonstration of sustainable practices and technologies with true scalability potential.

The solutions farmers will keep using when support ends are those that deliver a measurable and reliable return on investment alongside environmental benefits.