With all economic sectors facing the challenge of reducing their contribution to climate change in the coming years, representatives from a range of organisations including the IFA, ICOS, Teagasc, the Department of Agriculture, processors such as Dawn Meats and Glanbia as well as academics and environmentalists took part in a recent workshop to discuss options for Irish farming.

The RDS and the Institute of International and European Affairs hosted the workshop, giving all stakeholders an opportunity to look for concrete solutions to climate challenges together.

Efficiencies in feed, fertiliser and fertility

ADVERTISEMENT

According to a report of the proceedings published this week, the role of innovation and technology on Irish farms was the area that appeared to generate the widest consensus: “Feed, fertiliser and fertility (soil and animal) were identified as the key areas where efficiencies can be delivered. Being clearly able to demonstrate the costs and benefits of a new technique, technology or practice on farms, and finding (online) tools to communicate and demonstrate these benefits to farmers was identified as a key challenge, and opportunity.”

While the participants acknowledged the challenge facing farmers in capturing data on climate change progress and using the resulting information to drive change, they also said that existing tools such as the Economic Breeding Index (EBI) and Teagasc’s Carbon Navigator could play a role.

Age profile of Irish farmers an issue

They said the age profile of Irish farmers was an issue. “A key barrier to adoption of climate-smart agriculture discussed was the “dual structure” of well-educated young farmers looking for land and older generations who tend to have a lot of land,” the report notes.

Disagreement emerged in other areas, including the current point in Ireland’s national policy aiming for “carbon neutrality in the agriculture and land-use sector”. While some participants argued that “being ‘productively efficient’ and saving money is consistent with carbon-efficiency,’ others said it would never be enough to meet EU targets. There was also a lack of consensus on the definition of carbon neutrality or how it should be measured.

Forestry vs. marginal beef farming

One discussion theme was potential incentives to increase forestry planting in areas of “inefficient beef production”. Some argued that this would both reduce emissions from cattle and increase carbon sequestration in trees. However, others said that this could threaten biodiversity or displace beef production to countries with lower environmental standards. “It was unclear, therefore, if an incentive scheme could/should be developed to capture a “double” carbon dividend,” the report concluded.

The agriculture sector accounted for 44% of Irish non-Emissions Trading Sector emissions in 2013. These are the greenhouse gas emissions subject to a legally binding 20% reduction target on 2005 levels by 2020 under EU rules, and more in the future if world leaders find a long-term agreement at next month's climate conference in Paris.