As the decarbonisation of farming gathers pace and greater scrutiny is given to sustainable supply chains, it’s never been easier to make a compelling case for growing peas and beans.

Not only are non-cereal break crops essential for today’s wider and more diverse rotations, they are also a good source of traceable, home-grown protein – something that’s recognised for its potential to reduce the environmental impact of imported soya.

See also: Why Scottish regen farming business added beans to rotation

At the individual farm level, it’s well known that pulses deliver a soil health benefit, reduce and replace the need for synthetic fertiliser and other inputs, while also helping to bring biodiversity back.

For today’s cash-strapped businesses who are intent on balancing productivity with sustainability and future-proofing the farm, they look like the perfect fit.

What has gone wrong?

The latest cropping area figures show that all is not well, with just 4% of arable land in pulses.

Depending on where you look, the pulse area fell by between 10-25% in 2024 and is likely to be lower again this year.

There are two main reasons for that, say experts, who point to disruption caused by the weather and the impact of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) in England on break crops.

Farmers report that they’re not stacking up financially compared to whole field SFI actions, so replacing risky, inconsistent crops with SFI actions such as CNUM3 legume fallow can be a no-brainer.

With a payment rate of £593/ha and costs in the region of £100-130/ha, a net margin of £350/ha is possible.

“No one makes money from growing beans,” says one grower. “With the SFI, you know what income you will get and can make a good stab at what the costs will be.”

If market conditions don’t change and policy continues to disadvantage break crops, new thinking is needed to monetise the benefits of pulses.

Where society gains, but farmers don’t, there must be other ways of rewarding the production of peas and beans.

“Although there are many benefits, the ‘cost’ is lost profitability at a time of thin margins in agriculture,” says James Webster-Rusk, from Andersons. “The incentive needs to come from elsewhere.”

What’s the solution?

Our reliance on imports of soya bean meal for livestock feed and the retailers’ ambitions to remove soya from their supply chains wherever possible offers hope.

In 2023, the UK imported 2.37m tonnes of soya from South America, representing 7.3m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions.

Replacing some of that with home-grown pulses has the potential to reduce that figure, breathing new life into these crops.

Is this a win-win? John McArthur of McArthur BDC believes so.

He points out that pulses can be effectively used in livestock feed and that by reducing the amount of soya used by 50%, there would be a saving of 3.4m tonnes of CO2e.

That’s equivalent to 7% of UK agriculture’s total emissions.

“That would mean pulses covering 20% of the UK cropping area, which is a big expansion from where we are now,” he acknowledges.

“The [greenhouse gas] savings come from reduced fuel use and less reliance on fertilisers – both direct and indirect – as well as from using less soya.”

Scotland’s Rural College head of monogastrics Jos Houdijk says there is supportive research that shows good outcomes for pigs and poultry, as well as for ruminant rations, from including beans.

“Processing beans, such as dehulling and toasting, can improve their digestibility and increase their replacement potential.

“So the negative land use change and feed miles associated with soya bean meal can be overcome.”

Policymakers and national retailers need to align on this issue, both men accept.

“The evidence is there, deforestation legislation is forthcoming and carbon emissions reporting is escalating. Peas and beans are part of the solution.”    

All the contributors to this article were talking to Farmers Weekly at From Soya to Sustainability, a conference hosted by the Nitrogen Climate Smart project.

The project is a £5.9m farmer-led research programme which is targeting farm carbon footprint reductions by harnessing the potential of peas and beans.

Growing profitable bean crops

© Gary Naylor Photography

Consistent yields from beans can be achieved, advises agronomist Todd Jex of Agrii.

He stresses that they shouldn’t be grown more than once every five years and that soil conditions have an important role.

Eliminating compaction is key, as the roots must be able to grow down unimpeded to allow for good nodulation.

Compaction can reduce yields by as much as 40% and min-till techniques have shown to be more consistent than direct drilling.

“That may mean using a low-disturbance subsoiler, even on unlikely soil types. Aim for a seed depth of 40mm.”

Earlier drilling dates have made a huge difference, Todd reports. “By earlier, I mean October for winter beans.”

Higher seed rates have also been successful and his advice is to keep rates up. He advocates 20-30 seeds/sq m for winter beans and 55-65 seeds/sq m for springs.

“We find that the extra in-crop competition helps to increase the height of the plant – that means there are fewer pods below the header height at harvest.”

Early weed control minimises crop competition. “Broad-leaved weeds need to be dealt with pre-emergence – for various reasons, it’s difficult to justify using bentazone.”  

Otherwise, Todd stresses that all essential nutrients are required, with both cobalt and molybdenum levels important in beans.

“Good nodulation relies on nutrient availability – the bean crop is capable of fixing up to 400kg/ha of nitrogen, but it’s usually between 140-250kg/ha.”

Case Study – Rob Waterston, Welford Park, Berkshire

Rob Waterson © NCS Project

Winter beans remain in the rotation at Welford Park Estate in Berkshire, after farm manager Rob Waterston was set a challenge of developing a “healthier” farm.

A seven-year rotation with a focus on soil health and the natural environment means that beans have featured for the past seven years.

However, Rob admits that only two of those seven years have been successful.

“It’s consistency that we struggle with,” he says.

“In some years, our bean crops are very sparse, which then has a knock-on effect on the following crop and creates weed control challenges.”

Last year was one of the good ones for beans, recalls Rob. “We put more effort into the nutrition of the crop and that seemed to pay off.”

He acknowledges the carbon footprint contribution made by the crop.

“We have signed up to a carbon trading scheme and monitoring has shown that we are sequestering carbon.

“Now we need to keep it there – beans help with that as they don’t need any nitrogen fertiliser.”   

The farm has a Sustainable Farming Incentive agreement and some of the most marginal land has been put into legume fallow.

Despite that, winter beans will remain, in line with the ambition of leaving a better legacy for the future generation.

Case Study – John Seed, Woodend Farming Partnership, Berwickshire

John Seed © MAG/Emma Gillbard

Beans are produced for both human consumption and home-grown feed at Woodend Farming Partnership in Scotland.

John Seed has replaced soya with pulses for feeding his laying hens.

The realisation that 82% of the farm’s emissions came from purchased feed was the push he needed to make changes.

However, he also had to to reduce costs and build resilience into the system.

At the time, imported soya was expensive and eggs were being sold for less than the cost of production, he remarks.

“Producing our own protein helped to trim our costs by £20-25/t of feed.”

Inclusion rates start at 5% and go up to 18% as the hens mature.

“That could be higher if we dehulled the beans, but the equipment is expensive and with the current lack of certainty in the industry, the rewards aren’t there.”

The switch from soya to beans has also resulted in a 400t/year reduction in carbon emissions, he reports.

If that saving is worth £40/t, it could add considerably to the farm’s bottom line.

“While we’re happy to be doing the right thing, we aren’t being rewarded for that yet,” says John.

“It would be good to inset that value against the price we receive for our eggs so that we can continue to farm profitably.”