A decade of farmer-led data from the ADAS-facilitated Yield Enhancement Network (YEN) shows that high wheat yields do not necessarily require higher input spending, yet consistently deliver stronger margins and lower greenhouse gas emissions for each tonne of grain produced. Higher yielding crops also use nitrogen more efficiently, reducing the risk of nitrate leaching. These gains come from a more detail-oriented approach to crop management, rather than increased input intensity. By producing more food on the same area of land, higher yields support a land-sparing model that boosts food security while improving environmental outcomes. Sustainable intensification is not an option: it is essential, argue agribusiness consultant James Wallace and SSA co-ordinator Daniel Pearsall.

 

Ensuring that food production meets rising global demand while reducing environmental impacts remains one of the most pressing challenges for modern agriculture. In the UK and across Europe, wheat is at the centre of this challenge - not only as a key staple crop for food and feed, but also as a barometer of how arable farming can balance productivity, profitability and environmental stewardship. For the past 20 years, UK winter wheat yields have plateaued stubbornly at around 8 tonnes per hectare (t/ha).

 

A decade of farm-level data generated through the ADAS-facilitated Yield Enhancement Network (YEN) offers unusually rich, real-world evidence on what drives yield improvement, what those higher yields cost, and how they relate to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and nitrogen (N) balances. Recent analysis by ADAS of more than 1,200 wheat crops grown in the YEN programme between 2013 and 2022 provides a rare opportunity to examine this evidence in depth and to revisit long-standing assumptions within agricultural policy and practice.

 

Rethinking the cost–yield relationship

A persistent belief in farming circles is that higher yields necessarily require higher spending on inputs. Yet the YEN dataset demonstrates that this relationship is far from linear. Across the sample, total variable costs ranged from under £300/ha to over £800/ha, with an average of about £450/ha, but these costs showed little direct correlation with yield (see Figure 1, below). When expressed per tonne of output, however, variable costs showed a marked decline for higher yielding crops (Figure 2, below). Across the YEN programme, high yields - above 14 t/ha in many cases - were achieved across a wide variety of soil types, farming systems and regions without systematically higher expenditure on inputs.

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

From a sustainability perspective, this is a crucial finding. It suggests that knowledge, management precision and attention to detail may be more decisive than financial inputs. It underscores the importance of advisory services, farmer-to-farmer learning networks, and investment in agronomic research and understanding. It also highlights a potential risk: farms struggling with lower yields may wrongly assume that spending more is the only path to improvement, when YEN evidence indicates that smarter, not necessarily greater, input use is the key.

 

Economic sustainability: higher yields, higher margins

The analysis shows a strong and positive relationship between yield and gross margin (Figure 3, below). On average, less than 3 t/ha of grain was needed to cover variable costs, even across a decade of substantial price volatility. A wheat crop yielding 12 t/ha typically returned a gross margin of around £1,400/ha - some £600/ha more than a crop yielding 8 t/ha.

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

In policy discussions around sustainable agriculture, profitability is too often treated as secondary to environmental concerns. Yet farmers will only adopt sustainable practices if they are economically viable. The YEN data demonstrate that high-yielding systems are generally more profitable on a variable-cost basis. While fixed costs remain a major challenge in the economics of UK arable farming, the message is clear: higher yields make farms more resilient.

 

As farm incomes come under pressure from climate volatility, market uncertainty and post-Brexit policy transitions, this relationship between yield and margin should inform both policy design and on-farm decision-making. In particular, it supports the case for targeted investments - whether in soil testing, agronomy, precision nutrient planning or improved rotations - that the YEN data show can enhance yield potential without escalating input use.

 

Yield as a tool for reducing GHG intensity

A central insight from the ADAS analysis is that higher yielding crops tend to have lower GHG emissions per tonne of grain produced (Figure 4, below). While GHG emissions per hectare rose modestly with yield - mainly due to slightly higher nitrogen fertiliser applications and the decomposition of larger quantities of crop residue - the emissions intensity of the harvested grain fell by roughly one-third between low-yielding and high-yielding crops.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This matters enormously for national and international sustainability goals. Agriculture is under growing pressure to reduce its carbon footprint, and the debate often centres on cutting fertiliser use or scaling back production. The YEN data suggest a more nuanced approach: growing more grain on the same land area can substantially reduce GHG emissions per unit of food produced.

 

This is a powerful argument for “sustainable intensification” - the idea that boosting crop productivity on existing farmland can simultaneously reduce emissions, spare land for nature and enhance food security. Rather than framing yield and environment as competing aims, the evidence here shows that, when managed well, they can be aligned.

 

Nitrogen use efficiency and the importance of soil fertility

One of the most striking results from the analysis is the increasingly negative fertiliser N balance associated with higher yields (Figure 5). High-yielding crops captured more nitrogen in grain and straw relative to the fertiliser applied, indicating that they were drawing more effectively on soil N reserves, organic matter and residual N from previous crops. On average, each additional tonne of grain yield reduced the apparent fertiliser N legacy by 13 kg N/ha.

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

 

This has two major implications:

 

1. Higher-yielding crops help reduce the risk of nitrate leaching after harvest, a key concern in catchment management and regulatory policy.

2. Soil fertility - particularly soil organic matter and nitrogen mineralisation capacity - is fundamental to achieving high yields sustainably.

 

There is therefore a strong case for support and further research into soil health management, including measuring rooting depth (a factor often poorly understood), improving organic matter levels and integrating organic nutrient sources. The evidence also cautions against broad-brush policies that assume reducing fertiliser inputs alone will improve environmental outcomes - nitrogen use efficiency, not quantity of nitrogen applied, is the real lever.

 

Management factors driving high yields

The YEN findings also reinforce several agronomic principles that are well known but often difficult to implement consistently:

 

• Crops with many fertile shoots and long periods of green canopy tend to yield well.

• Frequent manuring, break crops and September sowing dates are common among high-yielding crops.

• Deep, effective rooting - crucial for water capture during dry seasons - is a consistent but under-measured factor.

 

Importantly, these issues relate to management decisions rather than input-intensity. This distinction is essential for the development of effective policies seeking to reward or incentivise sustainable practices. It points towards systems-based thinking - rotations, soil biology, crop structure and phenology - rather than arbitrary input reduction targets.

 

Yield as the foundation for sustainable land use

Perhaps the most profound conclusion from the ADAS analysis is that yield is central to achieving a sustainable future for UK crop production. High yields not only improve profitability and reduce GHG intensity; they also support a “land sparing” approach, where optimising production on existing farmland helps avoid the need to convert natural or semi-natural habitats elsewhere. This aligns with a growing body of conservation research showing that sparing land for nature - rather than spreading lower-yield farming across a larger area - tends to deliver better outcomes for biodiversity.

 

When the UK faces simultaneous pressures on food security, climate action, nature recovery and economic viability in rural areas, this evidence challenges simplistic policy narratives around a transition to so-called ‘nature friendly farming’. A retreat from productive agriculture would risk carbon leakage, biodiversity loss and increased import dependence. Sustainable intensification, grounded in real-time, farm-level data and science-based management, offers the potential to reconcile these competing goals.

 

Conclusion

The YEN dataset provides some of the clearest empirical evidence available that high-yield wheat production - when delivered through a detail-oriented approach to crop management and decision-making - can deliver economic and environmental benefits simultaneously. The YEN results based on actual farm crops also underline the value of on-farm development projects to highlight and communicate best practice to growers.

 

For policymakers, advisors and farmers, the implications are significant: raising yield potential is a strategic necessity for both sustainability and food security. Far from being incompatible, the evidence shows that productivity and sustainability are mutually reinforcing. The challenge now, as the UK government maps out plans for a land use framework, farming roadmap, food strategy and SFI reset, is to ensure that these insights shape the next generation of agricultural policy and practice.

 

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Science and Technology in Agriculture recently called on Ministers to embed its 30:50:50 mission – to produce 30% more food with 50% less environmental impact by 2050 – as a clear, long-term reference point across all food, farming and land-use policies. The YEN data provide valuable insights into how this can be delivered in practice.    

 

James Wallace is an independent agribusiness consultant. After graduating with a BSc in Agriculture at Edinburgh University and MSc from the London Business School, he has spent his career working in the UK seeds and plant breeding industry. He is a former board member of the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC) and the Euroseeds Cereals Sector as well as serving on numerous industry advisory committees and working groups. He is a strong advocate of the need to support on farm research projects to highlight where growers can adapt innovations and adopt best practices to improve productivity.

 

Daniel Pearsall is an independent consultant specialising in communication and policy development in the farming, food chain and agri-science sectors. He runs a small livestock farm in Scotland. He co-ordinates the Science for Sustainable Agriculture initiative.