Once again we are seeing farmers and the “agricultural sector” being singled out as environmental laggards. This time it is the insistence by the Minister for Agriculture Charlie McConalogue that the emission reduction target set by the Government under the Climate Act can be achieved without decimating the sector.

We understand that the minister is coming under intense pressure to give way as the Cabinet seeks to agree sectoral emission reduction targets before the end of the month. It is critical that he holds his nerve and ensures that whatever target is set for the sector is within the scope of the emission reduction technologies that will be available to farmers.

Impact of reductions

The KPMG report, commissioned by the Irish Farmers Journal, into the impact of sectoral emission reduction targets on the sector exposed the economic impact of going beyond the scope of these technologies. In addition to deploying all available technologies, achieving an emission reduction target of 30%, which is being demanded by Minister for Environment Eamon Ryan, would require an 18-22% reduction in cattle numbers. The economic impact of this would be in the region of €3.8bn per annum in lost output and 56,400 job losses in rural towns and villages.

Even at the lower end of the existing range, the report found that to achieve a 21% emission reduction would require a 5-6% reduction in cattle numbers, costing just over €1.1bn per annum and leading to 10,000 job losses. Some dismiss the importance of these negotiations on the basis that the overall target within the Climate Act – to reduce national emissions by 51% by 2030 – is simply not possible. While this may prove to be the case, allowing a legally binding target to be set for the agricultural sector that can only be achieved by dramatically reducing both farm productivity and profitability would be reckless.

Strip-cropping in the Dutch polders is growing in popularity on commercial farms.

We only have to look at the position Dutch farmers find themselves in today to see the consequences of introducing binding targets that are not achievable. The ongoing protests are in response to moves by the Dutch government to implement a €25bn plan to cut nitrogen emissions by 50% by 2030. The plan will support the rollout of new, innovative technologies but will also require farmers to change to less intensive systems, relocate and, in cases, exit farming.

Court orders

The Dutch government has effectively been forced to take these severe measures due to orders by the Dutch and European courts to address nitrogen oxide emissions. These court orders are linked to cases taken by environmental groups against the Dutch government back in 2016 for the failure of a nitrogen (N) permit system, introduced by the government in 2015 to control emissions. The cases ended up in the Court of Justice of the European Union which ruled against the Dutch government. In implementing the ruling, the Dutch high court suspended all N permit applications and forced the government to come up with a long-term plan to reduce N emissions. It is this plan that Dutch farmers are now realising will force many of them out of business with the Dutch government estimating that a 30% reduction in livestock numbers is now needed.

The warning to Irish farmers should be clear: extreme care is needed when setting legally binding targets. The fact that these targets were not achievable when they were set will carry little weight when failure to deliver on them is challenged through the courts in years to come. As Dutch farmers are now learning, allowing unachievable, legally binding targets to be set for the sector will ultimately open the door to future agricultural policy being determined through the courts.

Dairy farming in The Netherlands

Now is the time for Irish farmers to be vocal in their demand that the Government’s target for the sector is scientifically and legally sound and can most of all be achievable without decimating their livelihoods. Otherwise we risk a scenario in years to come where the future of the sector is being determined by a ruling from the EU Court of Justice in response to cases taken by environmental groups. It is concerning that when measured against actions taken to defend the sector from previous major threats, farmers’ response to this immediate and real challenge is – at best – muted.