Agri‑Environmental Climate Schemes (AECS) are central to Scotland’s environmental goals, but their success depends on voluntary farmer participation. This study used a discrete choice experiment to explore Scottish farmers’ preferences for AECS design. A total of 144 farmers completed an online survey, choosing between hypothetical scheme options that varied in contract duration, environmental objective, collaboration requirements, technical assistance, payment type, monitoring approach, and payment level. Data were analysed using conditional and mixed logit models. Results show that farmers are generally not in favour of having to collaborate with other farmers; the option to apply jointly was consistently viewed negatively across all models. There is some evidence that farmers prefer shorter contracts over longer ones, and that they are open to results‑based payments and schemes focused on soil health. The payment (monetary) attribute itself was not statistically significant, and its large standard deviation suggests farmers are divided on whether payments drive their choices: some respond positively and others negatively. Willingness to accept estimates should be treated with caution given the uncertainty around the payment coefficient. These findings highlight the importance of farmers’ independence and flexibility when designing schemes. The results also point to potential interest in soil health and results‑based payments, and that the payment level is not necessarily the main driver beyond application decisions. These findings can assist policymakers in understanding what truly matters to farmers when designing the AECS. By incorporating farmers’ views, they can not only encourage higher participation rates but also ensure that the schemes on offer align more closely with farmers’ actual requirements.
