Finding other public owners to consolidate your action on public land, whether by sharing knowledge, drawing inspiration, or pooling means of action, is key. Organisations with goals to promote access to land for agroecology and general renewal also have valuable expertise and support to offer.

Synergies with public owners

To identify other local authorities, public domain holders, or charitable institutions (e.g. churches), consider asking long-standing residents or councillors, searching databases by names of institutions (‘domain of…’) or asking land registry institutions and/or land software providers for support in searching the database. Once plots have been identified you will have a better idea of the possible synergies:

• exchanging parcels to consolidate some farm units;

• deciding to pool the management of land;

• creating an association with public and private owners to create viable farming areas;

• joining forces to create infrastructure or better road access to the lands;

• Etc.

--> Learn about working with private owners in the “Acting as a facilitator” section.

Synergies with land organisations

In your area, there may be active small farmers unions, alternative agriculture organisations or ethical land trusts. You can partner up with these actors to support your action, in particular to:

• identify/map public land, carrying out diagnoses on land features and potential;

• co-reflect on a strategy for public land, and elaborate scenarios of use;

• accompany a tender process (defining criteria, disseminating the call to candidates, evaluating proposals for sustainability and viability);

• provide juridical and practical advice on tenancy contracts (if working with organisations that have experience in leasing out land to agroecological farmers);

• create links with other competent actors, facilitate dialogue with neighbours and third parties…

Some local authorities also prefer to externalise the responsibility of acting as landowners. Community land trusts in some countries can sometimes perform land management duties for third parties. For instance, in the outskirts of Bruxelles (Neerpede neighbourhood), the municipality of Anderlecht has decided to make 2 ha of agricultural land available to the Terre-en-Vue land cooperative for a long period of time on the basis of a 27-year emphyteutic lease. The lease has transferred full enjoyment of the property and all the rights attached to the ownership of the property to the cooperative, except being the owner from a patrimonial point of view. In turn, Terre-en-vue, who has experience in managing farms, leased the land available to two market gardeners who grow a wide variety of vegetables, fruits, mushrooms, and medicinal and aromatic plants.

In France, Terre de Liens has experimented with the following schemes (among others) to acquire or manage land with local authorities:

• The local authority secures a public subsidy to buy an agricultural property and rehabilitate it for a specific farming project. Once the work is done, the authority sells it back to Terre de Liens at the purchase and construction price minus the amount of the subsidy obtained.

• The local authority makes a targeted donation to the Terre de Liens foundation dedicated to investing in a specific farm on its territory.

• The local authority purchases part of the property (e.g. the building) and Terre de Liens purchases the other (generally, the land). Management of the building is then attributed to Terre de Liens for a very long time through an emphyteutic lease to keep the farm as a single unit. The opposite could also be true where Terre de Liens transfers management of the land to the authority through an emphyteutic lease (under specific conditions to ensure it is farmed organically and sustainably).

Sometimes, public farmland has been rented or managed by a third party for a long period of time. Leases (or other types of agreements) are tacitly renewed and use goes unquestioned. Plots can be scattered and there is no coherent policy on how to use them.

A good place to start is to have a more complete picture of the publicly owned land in your area. This can include land owned by your local authority, but also by other public-interest actors with whom synergies are possible, e.g. national land trusts, local charities, Social Welfare Centers, federal land, and so on. Mapping and investigating current uses, existing contracts with tenants, as well as the land potential (e.g. biodiversity and natural riches it hosts, fertility, etc.) will provide a good basis to establish a strategy.

If surveying land is a lengthy process – depending on the extent of assets and interests of users and owners involved – the diagnosis phase should not be an obstacle to, in parallel, starting a conversation to set objectives for the use of public assets. Local authorities can also begin to act on the plots that are clearly identified (see manage section), to demonstrate willingness and gain credibility in regaining control of public land.

Possible steps to building a strategy for public farmland assets

Identifying the land of your local authority is one thing. Mapping this land and identifying its characteristics can be more complex. You may consider partnering with a university’s geography or land planning programme. Some teachers look for field projects for their students and could help survey your area. Local community groups may already be interested in and doing some mapping work. Support from your land registry or land agency can also be harnessed. In a larger local authority, your planning department may already have GIS technology. Otherwise, consider open-source mapping software (with existing tutorials) to collate information at a low cost.

--> See also: how to get started section for tools on surveying and deciding on the use of public land.

The examples of Ghent and Cornwall illustrate a rising movement of local authorities to regain control of public lands and use them to deliver local benefits. However, the creation of a good strategy is not enough to achieve coherent public action in institutional environments with other competing objectives. Ghent’s work on a vision for public farmland materialised in a context of important public pressure after collectives of farmers and activists denounced the sale of a massive amount of public land (450 ha) by the city’s Social Welfare Center. Until today, the city faces difficulties in balancing the need to protect periurban land and the need for financial bankrolling of Welfare Centers’ action. Thus, while the moratorium on sales has preserved some areas of farmland in the city perimeter, other tracts of public land continue to be sold in the region. For Cornwall, while the process and strategy for county farms were inspiring, its implementation still needs to be assessed. With their limits, these examples shine a light on some important learnings.

1. Effective public land strategies are articulated with other relevant policy frameworks (e.g. on food, climate, urban development, and so on).

2. They should include specific, achievable objectives and a time-bound process to monitor them.

3. They are in line with a budgetary framework that prioritises and enables land stewardship.

National laws should also support the establishment of such local land strategies, with guidelines on objectives and financial rules that enable local land stewardship (see advocate section).

The next sections will bring additional information on making public land strategies work in practice: how to manage public land, investment, and find synergies with other actors to achieve your goals.

The main tendency observed in Europe is to disinvest farmland. Local authorities allocate fewer resources to maintain existing estates and, frequently, decide to sell or lease out the land to the highest bidder. For example, in England, the amount of council-owned farmland has halved over the past 40 years from over 170,000 ha in 1977 down to 82,000 ha by 2020 (CPRE 2022). This calls into question larger contextual issues related to the lack of means of local authorities to realise more and more services or the fact that skyrocketing farmland prices make it particularly lucrative to sell public assets. With constrained means, some authorities may also prefer leasing public land to one large farm rather than working on making the land accessible to multiple small farmers.

In this context, investing in farmland is a difficult endeavour. Yet it is essential to fulfilling key policy goals (see manifesto) e.g. facing climate change, creating lively rural economies, providing access to quality food. This handbook provides a few possibilities and ideas to invest in public farmland.

Ideas for targeted investment include:

• Acquire strategic land. For instance, target land that can help consolidate an existing municipal farm, land that is threatened by urban development or by grabbing for corporate interests, land to create a green belt or green fabric, or land where specific farm biodiversity or risk management must be implemented (e.g. acquire land in water catchment areas where intensive farming causes water pollution issues).

• Consider (co-)acquisition. There may be ways to share costs by acquiring land together with other entities, like groupings of municipalities (see the section “synergies with other public owners” below). Sharing costs with the farmers is also an option (with legal advice on some aspects, e.g. how to compensate tenants for investments in the farm when the lease is up). Finally, some community land trusts have implemented co-acquisition strategies with local authorities (see the section “synergies with land organisations” below).

• Temporary acquisition. Acquiring land for a transitory period is another option. In land markets, available plots tend to go to the highest and fastest bidder. Temporary acquisition consists of mobilising public funds to bankroll the purchase of the land for a short period of time while looking for a suitable candidate to transfer back the land (new entrant, organic farmer, social project…).

Targeted investment is facilitated if local authorities have pre-emption rights over other buyers or can partner with land agencies that have market intervention power.

Beyond land acquisition, investments are needed to maintain viable estates and gear public farms towards providing public services. These can be modest and gradual, shared with tenants, or subsidised by the state, EU, as well as private financiers. If sustained in time, however, they will improve public returns, while decaying farm estates can become burdens for public owners.

Some interesting areas of investment in existing estates include:

• Investing in processing units (cheesemaking or canning labs, milling facilities, etc.) to add value to the farm production, help channel the production to short supply chains, and create additional jobs.

• Investing in adapted infrastructure or equipment for organic farming (e.g. composting units, parks for free-ranging animals, planting of insect-friendly flower hedges, etc.) to help meet biodiversity and carbon-storing goals, while also improving the landscape and consumer attractivity.

• Supporting the creation of a Farmstart or other incubator/training farm by providing small plots for new entrants to pilot businesses, alongside training and support. For example, OrganicLea in north London, UK, is a cooperative horticultural business on council land which is also a Farmstart site. Public land is used to run the programme, and local councils (Waltham Forest Council, Enfield Council, Haringey Council) are also involved in helping find plots for the OrganicLeas trainees when they are ready to move onto their own land.

Finally, investing time from staff in knowing and managing public assets can already unlock positive outcomes, by strengthening links and trust with tenant farmers, supporting them in overcoming difficulties, fomenting synergies between farmers and retailers or with consumers, and so on.

Good idea! Valorize your action

Local authorities can consider that the impact of keeping an estate in public hands and supporting sustainable, diversified, locally-oriented production is hardly quantifiable or too invisible in the short term to satisfy their constituents. This may deter them from orienting public budgets towards investment in farmland. Simple communication on impact is key, e.g. putting a sign on public farms to explain the services it renders to the population (“this public farm keeps your air and water clean”, “this public farm creates local jobs”), asking farmers to mention the origin of commercialised products (“grown on local public land”), getting the local press or channel to report on the farm...

Decreasing local governments' budgets are a reality across Europe. Our experience shows that many local authorities succeed in balancing financial pressure and wisely using their farmland to fulfill policy objectives. However, in some cases, there may be little choice but to sell public farmland. If authorities are not able to keep all their assets, they should nonetheless be accountable for how they sell them. Public land belongs to citizens; deciding on its future should entail transparency and giving priority to projects that will benefit the local community, rather than selling to the highest bidder and with no criteria. The price of the land should be set fairly and not contribute to speculative tendencies (see the box “Fixed price land sales in Wallonia”).

Public landowners can influence the management of their land by providing access to specific people or using diverse instruments to encourage sustainable uses of public land. Having decided on people and projects to prioritise, local governments are also in a position to manage the relationship with tenants. This is a rather specialised area of work, and learning responsibilities as a landlord also comes along with experience. This handbook nevertheless proposes a few ideas and first steps to consider (see table 2 below “Being a public landlord, some ideas”).

Providing access to specific people and sustainable projects

Public owners must ensure best value return of public investment in land by prioritising land users and uses that meet specific policy goals. This includes prioritising:

• Agroecological farmers and new entrants. These farmers face specific difficulties (see about section) which public owners can help overcome to renew generations of farmers and promote regenerative agricultural practices.

• Sustainable and social projects. Prioritising projects with social and environmental goals can help enhance services derived from the public land (e.g. projects of re-employment and education through farming, and carbon-storing or biodiversity-enhancing projects). Sometimes pairing up farmers’ projects with non-profit organisations or social enterprises can be an option to help realise these goals.

• Existing farmers with specific needs. Public land can help consolidate the activity of some small and sustainable farms, e.g. access to additional pastures for extensive cattle-raising activities. It can also be used to incentivise a change of agricultural practices by existing farmers. In France, the intercommunal authority Communauté d’agglomération du Douaisis has for instance provided access to “test plots” of public land to conventional farmers wanting to experiment with organic agriculture. This helped several farms convert to organic farming.

To prioritise certain users, local governments can organise calls for tender to allocate public plots. It is important to reflect on criteria and scoring to select projects that comply with public goals (see the example of Leuven below). A mixed selection committee with concerned stakeholders – e.g. farmers, civil society organisations – can support the process with specific expertise. If allocating several plots, you may dialogue with candidates to decide on the repartition of lands.

Relevant examples: tendering out public land

Beyond guidelines for allocation, diverse instruments can be used to promote the sustainable use of public land. Minimum standards, leases including environmental clauses (see box “Zoom in on the French environmental rural lease” below), remuneration for public services, and nature conservation agreements are a few options. Such conditions should be established in cooperation with the farmers to ensure their viability and maintenance over time.

Some laws do not allow choosing tenants or imposing conditions for sustainable agriculture within agricultural leases. In those circumstances, alternative arrangements such as “free” or temporary (but renewable) contracts can be considered as in the case of Leuven above. Another option is to internalise the management of the farmland, like the municipality of Mouans-Sartoux in France which decided to hire and salary a vegetable grower. While this is a way to clearly control the achievement of public goals, it requires an important investment from the local authority (read the full case study for more information).

Local authorities can also reflect on wider “access to public farmland”, by providing ways for the local community to benefit from these open spaces. Some owners encourage open farm projects (which allow for visits by the public, or support educational use) or try to improve accessibility through green pathways or public transport leading to farms. With this, however, comes the responsibility to manage possible conflicts between farming and other beneficiary activities. For instance:

• Make sure the responsibility to handle a farm visit is not incumbent on farmers or benefits their financial models.

• Prevent littering, vandalism, disturbing farm animals by visitors (and their pets), and possible and other risks associated with wider access. This can be done in part by raising awareness of the value of the land people visit.

Being a public landlord

It may be a daunting task to reinvent your role as a public landlord, especially if no staff or official roles exist to manage public assets. This work can be approached more easily through experience sharing with other public or ethical landowners. Above all, day-to-day practice and commitment to work with and for tenants will make being a public landlord gradually easier. This handbook only offers simple ideas to get started.

For decades, publicly owned farmland has been used for housing and infrastructure development or as a buffer asset to sell in times of budgetary constraints. Today less agricultural land remains in the hands of public actors. This limited resource should support key public services including providing food, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon, recycling water, and more. Public farmland is an inheritance that belongs to citizens and should be integrated into a strategy to deliver benefits for them. In particular, public farmland can be used to:

• encourage regenerative agricultural practices

• train or provide land access to a new generation of farmers

• develop local food supply and land-based businesses that create local employment

• maintain cultural heritages and landscapes

• promote communities’ health, education, and access to green spaces

Does your council, county, commune own farmland? Do you wonder how public actors can acquire and/or manage farmland to realise local benefits? Check the infographic for a quick overview of how to act, and read the sections below for more information on strategising, investing, managing, or sharing about public land.