There has been a cool response from the farm organisations to radical proposals that private funding should be sought to fund farm retirement schemes where the inheritors of lands commit to reducing agricultural activity.

The controversial proposals were included in a recent research report for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which was compiled by KPMG.

ICMSA president Denis Drennan described the proposal as a “land retirement scheme” disguised as a farm succession initiative.

Drennan accepted that generational renewal is a massive challenge for all countries across the EU and that “Ireland is no exception”.

However, he questioned the logic of using externally funded farmer retirement packages to effectively “take out” farmland that could be used to produce food sustainably.

“Productive land is becoming scarcer by the day and we desperately need to be keeping what’s there for the production of food,” he maintained.

“The amount of suitable farmland in the EU is falling all the time – it’s falling by thousands of hectares in France and Spain right now, as we speak,” Drennan pointed out.

“We must realise that the best use of this kind of land is to produce food through active farming,” he added.

The IFA was even more dismissive of the proposals contained in the EPA report.

“This latest kite from the EPA – via a KPMG report – is not consistent with our position which is that CAP should be targeted towards active farmers,” a spokesperson for the organisation said.

“Everybody in the sector needs to keep the political focus on the CAP budget. IFA’s sole focus is on the EU budget and the funding for CAP,” the spokesperson added.

The INHFA said more detail and consultation were required before any proposals on a farm retirement scheme could be considered.

“There are no firm explanations on how farmers would be compensated for reduced farming activity,” INHFA president Phelim Molloy said.

Molloy insisted that consultation and engagement with the farm organisations will be critical if proposals such as those included in the EPA report are to make into an agreed policy or plan on farm retirement and farm succession.

The EPA report proposed that retiring farmers could receive “up-front payments” where their successor includes the lands in “large-scale [environmental] restoration or regeneration” projects.

The report controversially claimed that private funding for farm succession-related initiatives provided “an opportunity” to “encourage the transition to more sustainable land-use practices”.

The EPA-commissioned study suggested a number of different payment mechanisms for retiring farmers – in addition to the “up-front” route.

These included an incentive or support system where those inheriting the property set aside areas for nature.

Private finance schemes that aim to support “environmentally sustainable succession planning” could also be explored, the report stated.