The legally binding commitment to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by no later than 2050 has dominated discussion around the Climate Act. Within this target is a reduction of 51% by 2030.

However, the legal commitments within the act extend far beyond simply achieving targets. Also set out are a range of legal obligations for which any emission reduction plan must have regard. Many of these have specific implications in relation to the approach taken to the establishment and delivery of targets for agriculture.

In November last year, the Government’s Climate Action Plan set an emission reduction target for agriculture of 22-30%. Like other sectors, this target was based on calculating the sector’s emission levels on the basis of carbon equivalents (CO2e). However, as highlighted previously by the Irish Farmers Journal, and again this week by Anne Finnegan, it is now scientifically accepted that CO2e grossly overestimates the contribution of livestock to global warming.

Flaw in calculations

It is a flaw recognised by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC). In its sixth assessment report, it pointed to the fact that expressing methane emissions, which account for 60% of agricultural emissions, as CO2e overstates the effect of constant methane emissions on global surface temperature by a factor of three to four. Agriculture is uniquely exposed to this flaw in that emissions from energy and transport sectors are mainly in the form of carbon dioxide rather than methane.

Prof Myles Allen from Oxford University.

On this understanding of the science, University of Oxford professor and world renowned professor of geosystems science, Myles Allen, in a presentation to the Climate Change Advisory Council (CCAC), stated that a 3% per decade ongoing-indefinitely decline in methane emissions, alongside a net-zero target for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, would be enough to prevent Irish emissions from causing any further global warming. This is not opinion – it follows mathematically from the IPPC statement.

Prof Allen warns that setting a methane reduction target beyond 3% per decade would in effect see Irish policymakers using the agricultural sector to create a cooling effect to compensate for at least some of the warming caused by other sectors.

Government must give regard to science

This backdrop is extremely relevant in assessing whether or not the Government’s Climate Action Plan for agriculture is legally and scientifically robust. Under the Climate Act, the Government’s plan must give regard to relevant scientific or technical advice and the special economic and social role of agriculture, including with regard to the distinct characteristics of biogenic methane. Failing to have regard for the bank of scientific literature that now exposes the flaws in the methodology used to calculate the contribution of our agricultural sector to global warming would appear to fly in the face of these legal obligations.

Moreover, setting an emission reduction target that would decimate the livelihood of farm families merely to offset the contribution of other sectors to global warming would seem to expose the Government to a legal challenge in the context of having regard for climate justice and the Just Transition.

Rising global demand

Moving beyond the farm gate, the Climate Act also requires the Government to give regard to the impact of carbon leakage. The UN forecasts that global demand for dairy and beef is set to increase by 94.5m tonnes and 4.6m tonnes by 2030. In response, as Phelim O’Neill reports this week, Brazilian beef production, facilitated by record levels of Amazon deforestation, is forecast to swell by 8m head. How will the Government legally defend an emission reduction target that will force lower dairy and beef output only for it to be offset through increased production from more emission-intensive regions of the world?

This legal argument extends beyond the Climate Act to Ireland’s commitments under the Paris Agreement. Article 2 commits parties to lowering greenhouse gas emissions in a manner that safeguards food security. With the UN World Food Programme warning of 44m people falling into starvation in the wake of increased global food insecurity, a sectoral emission target that reduces Ireland’s contribution to underpinning food security would again leave the Government exposed to legal challenge on its international commitments.

Farming voice must be heard

Our agriculture sector cannot ignore the vital role that it must play in reducing the environmental footprint of global food production while also tackling issues such as biodiversity loss and water quality. But at the same time, it cannot sit silently by and allow Government pursue a policy agenda that is neither scientifically nor legally sound.

Over the years, we have seen numerous policy negotiations threatening the viability of Irish agriculture from GATT to WTO to Mercosur. In all cases, farmers mounted major responses to ensure the sector has been heard and that policy agendas were informed. The ongoing negotiations on finalising sectoral emission reduction targets could have a greater impact than any of the big battles of the past.

There is clearly a solid legal and scientific platform for farmers to mount a strong defence of our sector in the same way they did in the face of WTO and Mercosur – but there are just days left to send a clear message to Government.