Updated climate policies research shows competitive gap is widening for NZ farmers

// Climate change

Beef + Lamb New Zealand has released updated research showing that the changes New Zealand made to its agricultural climate change policies over the last few years are in line with the rest of the world.

image of NZ farm in sunlight

There is sometimes a perception that New Zealand agriculture has been let off the hook by amending its methane targets and not putting agriculture into the ETS.

But this report demonstrates that this is not the case. No country is looking to include agriculture in their ETS and virtually no country is looking to price their agricultural emissions. 

Nearly all international jurisdictions continue to focus on incentivising and subsidising farmers to achieve climate change outcomes. If New Zealand had priced its agricultural emissions this would have resulted in a significant competitive gap for New Zealand farmers.

The research built on a 2024 report and analysed developments in agricultural greenhouse gas reduction targets, strategies and policies in a range of international jurisdictions since then.  

It shows that since the previous report, some jurisdictions have pulled back from climate change commitments, and most still focus on directing large-scale public funding to incentivising and subsidising farmers to achieve climate change outcomes. 

Chair Kate Acland says this growing subsidy and incentive trend has major implications for New Zealand’s pastoral exports wishing to compete in the same markets.  

“B+LNZ is not advocating for subsidies for our sector – we’re asking for more creative approaches such as exploring ways to incentivise reductions through a focus on efficiency gains and options such as emissions reduction credits for technology uptake. 

“We believe reductions in emissions should primarily be driven by customers and the market.”

Acland notes there have been some positive developments in New Zealand, with Government announcements around not pricing agricultural emissions, revised methane reduction targets and limits on the amount of carbon forestry that can be entered into the ETS. 

“New Zealand’s decision to revise its methane targets down is not out of line internationally. 

“For example, the Australian Government - released  its Agriculture and Land Sector Plan last year, which does not have specific targets for reductions in agricultural emissions. Australia is not at this stage aiming to reduce gross reductions from agriculture until after 2040. 

She says the report’s findings have a range of implications for New Zealand’s approach to managing agricultural emissions.  

“We’d like to see an integrated approach to climate, land and environmental management policies. 

“While there has been progress locally on methane targets and emissions pricing, B+LNZ will continue to advocate for further progress on issues like taking a split-gas approach to international targets to recognise the different role methane plays in warming than emissions from fossil fuels.” 

Acland says B+LNZ is actively advocating on this issue.  

“We’ve continued to build the global coalition calling on parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to adopt a split-gas approach to greenhouse gas reporting under the Paris Agreement. 

“Today we’re announcing that 41 organisations across 16 countries have now signed the joint statement. The expanding coalition reflects growing international recognition that biogenic methane must be treated differently to long-lived gases such as carbon dioxide.  

“We’re particularly pleased to welcome the Global Farm Platform, as an international academic umbrella organisation, and World Animal Protection Africa, as an animal welfare NGO. Their support reinforces that a split-gas approach is a matter of sound science and good policy, not a narrow industry position." 

The eight additional organisations are the Global Farm Platform, World Animal Protection Africa, Sociedad Rural Argentina, Carni Sostenibili, the National Alliance of Agricultural Cooperatives in Uganda, the South African Feedlot Association, the Red Meat Industry of South Africa, and NFU Cymru.  

ENDS 

For media queries, please contact [email protected]   

Downloads