You need JavaScript to view this

Agriculture, greenhouse gases and efficient mitigation measures; Jordbruket, vaexthusgaserna och effektiva styrmedel

Technical Report:

Abstract

The aim of this report is to identify effective measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) from agriculture, and to link these measures to policy instruments that could induce application of the mitigation measures. The focus of the analysis is on options for the individual agricultural enterprise, in particular regarding direct emission, i.e., emission that takes place on the farm. The report identifies the potential effect in an individual enterprise if a mitigation strategy is implemented. It discusses what types of firms/situations the respective measures may be suitable for, but no estimate is made of the overall effect of mitigation that would occur in all firms. When it comes to taxes and subsidies, the discussion concerns the incentives that these policy instruments provide, but does not delve into estimating how large the effect of an increase, e.g. in fuel tax, would be on the use of fuel and consequent emission. The fact that some measures can be difficult to implement on certain farms naturally influences how large the effect can be. The scientific basis needed to make such calculations, i.e., demand elasticities, is not available. Concerning GHG emissions, agriculture differs from other sectors in several respects, which have implications  More>>
Authors:
Berglund, M; Wall, A; [1]  Hoejgaard, S; Kaspersson, E; Rabinowiczb, E; [2]  Wilhelmsson, F [3] 
  1. Swedish Rural Economy and Agricultural Society - Halland, Eldsberga (Sweden)
  2. Swedish Univ. of Agricultural Sciences (Sweden)
  3. Lund Univ., Lund (Sweden)
Publication Date:
Jun 15, 2010
Product Type:
Technical Report
Report Number:
AGRIFOOD-R-2010-3
Resource Relation:
Other Information: 123 refs., 15 figs., 26 tabs.
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS; AGRICULTURE; GREENHOUSE GASES; FINANCIAL INCENTIVES; SWEDEN; ENERGY POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; NUTRIENTS; NITROGEN OXIDES; FOSSIL FUELS; FUEL SUBSTITUTION; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; AIR POLLUTION ABATEMENT
OSTI ID:
1005364
Research Organizations:
AgriFood Economic Centre, Lund (Sweden)
Country of Origin:
Sweden
Language:
Swedish
Other Identifying Numbers:
TRN: SE1107027
Availability:
Available from: homepage: http://www.agrifood.se/publications.aspx
Submitting Site:
SWD
Size:
166 p. pages
Announcement Date:
Feb 28, 2011

Technical Report:

Citation Formats

Berglund, M, Wall, A, Hoejgaard, S, Kaspersson, E, Rabinowiczb, E, and Wilhelmsson, F. Agriculture, greenhouse gases and efficient mitigation measures; Jordbruket, vaexthusgaserna och effektiva styrmedel. Sweden: N. p., 2010. Web.
Berglund, M, Wall, A, Hoejgaard, S, Kaspersson, E, Rabinowiczb, E, & Wilhelmsson, F. Agriculture, greenhouse gases and efficient mitigation measures; Jordbruket, vaexthusgaserna och effektiva styrmedel. Sweden.
Berglund, M, Wall, A, Hoejgaard, S, Kaspersson, E, Rabinowiczb, E, and Wilhelmsson, F. 2010. "Agriculture, greenhouse gases and efficient mitigation measures; Jordbruket, vaexthusgaserna och effektiva styrmedel." Sweden.
@misc{etde_1005364,
title = {Agriculture, greenhouse gases and efficient mitigation measures; Jordbruket, vaexthusgaserna och effektiva styrmedel}
author = {Berglund, M, Wall, A, Hoejgaard, S, Kaspersson, E, Rabinowiczb, E, and Wilhelmsson, F}
abstractNote = {The aim of this report is to identify effective measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) from agriculture, and to link these measures to policy instruments that could induce application of the mitigation measures. The focus of the analysis is on options for the individual agricultural enterprise, in particular regarding direct emission, i.e., emission that takes place on the farm. The report identifies the potential effect in an individual enterprise if a mitigation strategy is implemented. It discusses what types of firms/situations the respective measures may be suitable for, but no estimate is made of the overall effect of mitigation that would occur in all firms. When it comes to taxes and subsidies, the discussion concerns the incentives that these policy instruments provide, but does not delve into estimating how large the effect of an increase, e.g. in fuel tax, would be on the use of fuel and consequent emission. The fact that some measures can be difficult to implement on certain farms naturally influences how large the effect can be. The scientific basis needed to make such calculations, i.e., demand elasticities, is not available. Concerning GHG emissions, agriculture differs from other sectors in several respects, which have implications for what policy instruments that are appropriate. The sources of emissions are numerous and emission levels vary between farms. At the same time, there are mitigation measures that can lead to carbon sequestration. Much of the GHG emissions derive from biological processes and consist of nitrous oxide and methane. Emissions from biological processes are difficult to quantify and verify, in particular nitrous oxide emission. These circumstances speak against incorporating agriculture into a system of emission trading. The uncertainties and transaction costs appear to be too large. Taking into account agriculture's special characteristics, policy instruments directed at specific processes in the sector may be appropriate in many cases. However, there are no viable arguments for treating emissions of carbon dioxide in agriculture different from in other sectors. Accordingly, these emissions should be taxed in the same way as in other sectors, i.e., by means of general carbon dioxide taxes. From the perspective of efficiency, general policy instruments are to be preferred when the underlying problem is of a general nature. As the analysis shows, the farms' use of fossil energy may be reduced in different ways, all of which become more attractive with the rising price of fossil energy. Our analysis also shows that improved manure management can reduce GHG emissions. This may be achieved by choosing the right time, place and technique for spreading the manure, analysing the plant nutrient content in farmyard manure and calculating the yield to avoid excessive application of nitrogen rations. Further mitigation options are site-specific nitrogen fertilization and covering/ treatment of liquid manure. All these measures become more interesting for the farmer if the nitrogen price increases, which it will if a GHG tax is imposed on commercial fertilizers. The mitigation strategies have been analysed in two dimensions: effects on emission and effects on the farm's economy. Strategies that both improve the farm's economy and reduce emissions should already have been implemented. Agriculture accounts for a large proportion of the total GHG emissions, 15 percent to be precise. Hence, mitigation of GHG emissions in the agricultural sector is very urgent, but, as the analysis shows, easy solutions that rapidly lead to large reductions are not available. Advisory services therefore have an important role to play. On the positive side, there are several measures that may be relevant, to varying degrees, for different farms. Efforts are already being made through voluntary programmes and the RDP, among which there are also measures that have been adopted for other environmental reasons. In some cases there are synergies between these environmental objectives and the goal of reducing GHG emissions, for instance measures to reduce plant nutrient leakage. In other cases there are conflicting goals, for example grazing animals, contributing to biodiversity versus reduced methane emission from animals. When conflicting goals are present, a balance must be struck. However, this is not done in this report. As is evident in the report, uncertainty regarding the climate effects of various measures is due to insufficient knowledge. Greater knowledge and development of new technology are therefore essential for limiting emissions in the long run. Literature studies indicate that the costs for reducing GHG emissions will become considerably higher over time. Without new technology and changed consumption patterns, the emission problem will probably be impossible to solve}
place = {Sweden}
year = {2010}
month = {Jun}
}