Farmers are anxious about the Government’s proposed changes to HWEN rolled out last month.
They’re unhappy about shouldering much of the price of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions from 2025, price being used to drive change and their shelterbelts and other vegetation being excluded from being recognised as absorbing emissions.
HWEN programme director Kelly Forster said the 13 HWEN partners, including the main agri-bodies and Primary Industry and Environment Ministries, were solution-focused.
She said the sector framework developed by the partnership had responded to the challenge to reduce emissions in a way that could maintain food production and a competitive and vibrant food sector.
There was still much more that could be leveraged out of the partnership approach before 2025 to "bridge the gap" between HWEN’s recommendations and the Government proposal, she said.
"The gut senses that the 20% reduction in sheep and beef [production] probably isn’t real, but we need to make sure we understand it better. So, a lot of alignment, but the careful balance that was thought in those HWEN recommendations has been lost for sector partners, but the partners are solution-focused and this is on both sides, industry and ministers, on how we bring that balance back."
She spoke at a forum on how farmers can mitigate climate change, hosted by the New Zealand Institute of Agricultural & Horticultural Science at Lincoln University.
Emission pricing recommendations had gone through "blood, sweat and tears" to get agreement and trade-offs from 11 sector partners and farmer consultation before going to ministers in May.
Now the Government proposals are in a further consultation process.
The key differences between them and HWEN’s vision are in setting emission prices and sequestration.
"Right now there is a fair amount of fear and angst and commentary on the emissions proposals from all angles," she said.
"So there is this desire and goal of being world-first, with non-government groups saying it’s not enough and farmers saying it’s too much."
HWEN agreed ministers would have the final say on setting prices with the recommendation that there be expertise to work on a range of factors balanced by social and economic impacts of meeting targets such as the cost and availability of technology and emissions leakage.
She said the Government proposals took the advice component to the Climate Change Commission and setting a price for targets was its ultimate goal and it could consider social and economic considerations, but they would be secondary.
"That is where I guess the fear and angst about what the price could lead to and that there aren’t checks and balances if it did say lead to a 20% reduction in the sheep and beef sector."
HWEN recognised having sequestration in the ETS was ultimately the best outcome, but not in a hurry. It proposed starting off with a pragmatic stopgap recognising a range of vegetation types on farms that would build a database and could eventually be transitioned into the ETS, she said.
She said the Government’s new proposal to give some credit for additional sequestration for managing pre-1990 bush was a win for farmers.
"But sector partners are clear — there needs to be more from 2025. I think what’s also fuelled concern is government modelling, which has highlighted some really severe consequences for the sheep and beef sector. The HWEN modelling also had some pretty severe consequences but they were at higher prices that we were at pains to make really clear that we weren’t recommending."
She said HWEN had been successful in meeting its milestones, including raising farmer awareness about climate change and 75% of farms knowing their greenhouse gas numbers.
So far 93% of dairy farms, 63% of sheep, beef and deer farms, 38% of arable farms, and 60% of horticulture farms know their emissions numbers.
TIM.CRONSHAW@alliedpress.co.nz
