Rebooting the Irish economy is very much a work in progress, with huge fiscal and personal challenges to be assessed and faced up to.

Across the EU there is better news in the recent proposal from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, despite continuing opposition from the frugal northern EU countries, (now excluding Germany though), to provide up to €750m in loans and other guarantees to manage the EU economy through the impending recession.

Here in Ireland, while serious people are engaged in trying to manage the uncertainty of the post-pandemic economy, there is the huge challenge of reopening hotels, bars and restaurants, reigniting tourism, alongside the very real threat of a nasty Brexit trade deal and the possibility of a devaluation of sterling.

Climate change

The row in the dressing room continues for some in regard to agriculture and climate change. The term never waste a crisis can be interpreted positively or negatively - tedious, pedantic and shrill springs to mind in this instance.

As stated previously the Food Harvest/Food Wise processes are a good indicator of where agri sits in the Irish political economy.

Agriculture's relevance was rediscovered by the State

The 2010 Food Harvest process which was hugely supportive of growth in agricultural output creating much needed jobs and exports, shows how agriculture's relevance was rediscovered by the State.

The Food Wise 2015 process, given reduced unemployment in the Irish economy by then, was focused on both environmental constraints and job creation.

Pre-COVID-19 with full employment in the Irish economy, the 2020-2030 process was always going to be heavily impacted by climate change concerns.

Where to now? Post-COVID-19, very clearly the Irish economy needs to maximise all of the growth potential available.

While agri food growth has very real climate change challenges, it is entirely possible with a mature balance between achieving increasing productivity, while managing emissions, to support Irish jobs and economic impact while linking into increasing global demand for low-carbon food.

Policy targets

While managing climate change, policy targets will mean increased complexity and cost for Irish food producers, a balancing increase in EU support levels and a ban on below-cost selling of fresh foods can serve to incentivise the adaptation of more carbon efficient production methods.

A balanced approach to agriculture and climate change can provide much-needed Irish economic activity

So a balanced approach to agriculture and climate change can provide much-needed Irish economic activity with unique multiplier effects, while also managing climate change accounting requirements.

Going back to the 2010 Food Harvest process, the growth in Irish agricultural output, exports and jobs was only possible because Ireland's production aspirations, particularly with the removal of milk quotas, were matched up with increasing global demand for western food diets - as in meat and dairy nutrition.

Trying to dismiss Ireland's low-carbon credentials or ignore the global damage done by substituting production in Ireland with production from non-compliant South America or even the United States, is the opposite of balanced realism - as is proselytizing first-world meat-free and nutrition-free diets to global consumers.

Yet, that is a core part of the anti-agriculture lobby’s totally binary view of Ireland's climate change challenges.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

The charts above from the FAO demonstrate a balancing evolution of global dairy imports in Asia, the Middle East and Africa matched by increased dairy exports from Europe (including Ireland), Oceania and to a lesser extent, the USA.

Part of the ignorance, and indeed perversity, driving the current anti-Irish agriculture campaign is the absence of any recognition that Ireland's beef and dairy herd size represents a growing demand for climate-friendly, low carbon-emitting Irish beef and dairy products.

New global middle-class

Indeed, it is quite staggering how the emergence of a new global middle-class driving demand for meat and dairy nutrition in Asia, the Middle East and Africa was known in 2000s and 2010s, but is now lost seemingly in a fog of first-world dietary diatribes.

The key takeaway from this evolving demand situation is that increased demand for meat and dairy nutrition will continue to grow and will either be met from a climate compliant region such as Ireland or the EU or from a non-compliant region such as the USA or South America.

As the chart from the OECD shows, Chinese per capita demand (population 1.4 billion) for meat doubled between 1991 and 2011 and continues to rise exponentially, with demand for beef showing the greatest increase in recent years.

However, such is the strength of tribal opposition to Irish agricultural growth that in an article in last Thursday's Irish Times two of the key pillars of this evolving demand for Irish agricultural production were rubbished and not in a scientific way - Ireland's grass-based low ranking across the dairy and meat sectors in carbon emissions and even more strangely the existence of carbon leakage as an issue.

Carbon leakage

If we look at carbon leakage first, the article states that while beef farmers and industry say that if Irish production is killed off, international demand will be met from Brazil - there is no evidence of this.

Back to the chart above on demand for beef in China and figures from the FAO and the USDA show that beef exports from Brazil to China totalled 414,000t - a 40% increase on the 2018 figure.

Chinese demand for beef is being met by increasing Brazilian exports. Ireland only got access to the Chinese market in 2018.

How widespread do the Amazon forest fires have to get before there is a realisation that carbon leakage is a real threat to global climate emissions?

Leakage issues need to become a regulated part of trade deals

Thankfully, the IPPC Report of August 2019 recognised that leakage issues need to become a regulated part of trade deals.

The case for dismissing Ireland's low emissions figures - the article suggests - is based on the fact that the cross-EU study was completed in 2010 using 2004 figures and so must be out of date.

Yet, the article states that the experts who are concerned about the impact of this science-based analysis in causing climate policy dilemmas are “in no way question(ing) the validity of the report”.

If the concern is outdatedness, then why did The Irish Times not check? The Teagasc sustainability report produced in March 2019 which has a detailed exposition of the methodologies used to back up its carbon emissions analyses.

Perhaps that’s because the 2019 Teagasc report has verified the Irish profile as per the chart below, which shows a decline in emissions per litre of milk in recent years.

Inconvenient truth

Based on what is not just weak science but also weak journalism, one has to conclude that the main reason for this wholesale dismissal of both of these concepts is not because newer, more comprehensive science has emerged, but principally because both the low emissions figures and the dangers of carbon leakage are inconvenient in terms of a tribal approach to Ireland's overall climate action policy.

This is not fact-based reasoned argument - it is the promotion of opinion masquerading as analytics. Ireland’s voting public and its agri food sector deserve better.