Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture – Steps towards Climate Friendly Food 2014

1. Background and objective 8

2. Key measures 9

3. Monitoring the implementation of the measures 10

4. Impacts of climate change 11

5. Measures in the food system for climate change adaptation and mitigation 12

1. Advice 12

2. Risk management 12

3. Plant production 14

4. Livestock production 17

5. Land use 18

6. Energy efficiency in agriculture 19

7. Energy production and use in agriculture 20

8. State of energy and nutrient self-sufficiency 22

9. Food consumption 22

10. Potential future measures 25

11. Compatibility of different steering instruments 26

6. Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture 27

1. Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions 27

2. Greenhouse gas emissions with climate impact and trend in these until 2035 28

7. Climate policy objectives of agriculture 29

1. International climate policy 29

2. EU climate policy 29

3. National climate and energy policy 30

8. International climate initiatives 30

9. Steps towards a productive and sustainable food system 31 Annex: Means of the National Climate and Energy Strategy for reducing emissions from agriculture 32 References 33 5 6 Summary Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture – Steps towards Climate Friendly Food The Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry aims to further enhance the sustainability of the Finnish food system, which is founded on profitable food production and responsible consumption. By improving sustainability in a comprehensive way it is also possible to increase the profitability of production. The objective is to improve energy and material efficiency and reduce emissions per litre or kilo of production. The array of technology solutions we al- ready have available should be taken into full use, while encouraging research and businesses to de- velop further innovations. In the future the consumers should be steered towards even more responsi- ble consumption. Through all this we can ensure that Finnish food derived from sustainable production is well placed on the market. Climate change brings changes to food production, both in Finland and globally. Active measures are needed to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the changing climate and to minimize its neg- ative impacts. The Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture presents a total of 76 measures to fa- cilitate the adaptation of food production and consumption to climate change and/ or to mitigate the change. The selection of the measures was based on the most recent scientific research results and views of various experts involved in the food system. By implementing the measures put forward in the programme we will achieve more climate friendly food production and consumption. The eight key measures identified in the Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture are:

1. Carbon sequestration into soil 2. Measures relating to the use of peatlands

3. Plant breeding

4. Plant and animal health and preventing the spread of invasive alien species

5. Handling and treatment of manure and more accurate nitrogen fertilization

6. Energy efficiency and production and consumption of renewable energy

7. Reducing food loss all through the food system

8. Changes towards a more plant-based diet In a climate programme the main focus is on climate impacts, but we should also aim for a comprehen- sive approach to all ecological challenges. It should also be kept in mind that, in spite of the varying objectives which the policy measures may have, the steering instruments should be mutually compat- ible. The signals and incentives that the steering instruments of the public authorities give to the various actors in a society must be free from conflicts in order that they contribute to achieving the common ob- jectives set for that society. The Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture is an important step towards better reconciliation of different policies. 7

1. Background and objective gramme for Finnish Agriculture are already implemented under the Rural Development Programme. Some of the suggested meas- The sustainable Finnish food system is founded on profitable food ures are such that the various actors in the food system should at production. The objective of the Climate Programme for Finnish least consider their implementation. Agriculture prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is to promote the sustainability of our food system and to make this The Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture recognises the better known. The programme promotes and improves the energy climate-related objectives set by the European Union and in other and material efficiency of agriculture and the whole food system. international contexts and promotes these, but the approach is dif- The programme offers additional tools for improving productivity ferent. The Climate Programme stresses a new way of thinking, and profitability as well. i.e. comprehensive sustainability of food production and consump- tion. In the Climate Programme the focus is on climate impacts, As the climate changes efficient measures are needed to adapt to but many of the proposed measures have other beneficial impacts this and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change on the environment as well. We should to a growing extent aim for adaptation and mitigating bring new opportunities for the food sys- a holistic approach to ecological challenges. tem, but active measures are needed to benefit from these. Often a more sustainable food system also means a more productive The implementation of the programme contributes to meeting the food system. EU and international climate and energy commitments. The na- tional reduction target for methane and nitrous oxide emissions set The Climate Programme for Finnish Agriculture serves as an in- for the agriculture sector is 13% between 2005 and 2020 (Long- formation bank for those acting on behalf of a more sustainable term Climate and Energy Strategy 2008). Studies have shown that and productive food system. The programme brings together the it is going to be very difficult to reach this target (Agrifood Research most recent research information on the climate issues in food Finland MTT Report 127). On the other hand, there are significant production and consumption, from the perspective of both adapta- opportunities in agriculture with regard to climate change mitiga- tion and mitigation. The programme will be updated on a regular tion in e.g. energy production. basis in line with the most recent studies and changing conditions and operating environments. When this Climate Programme was being finalised the Rural De- velopment Programme was still a draft and pending approval by The programme presents climate change adaptation and mitiga- the European Commission. This means that no final decisions had tion measures relating to the food system. In addition, the pro- been made on the measures under the Rural Development Pro- gramme also reflects on potential future means for adaptation and gramme that were included in the Climate Programme or the re- mitigation. Some of the measures included in the Climate Pro- lated target areas or amounts of payments. CO = carbon monoxide i.e. coal gas net carbon dioxide production CO2 = carbon dioxide CO2 NO x N 2 O = nitrous oxide NO X = other nitrogen oxides N 2 O NO x CO N 2 O CH 4 NMV OC NMV OC = non-methane volatile organic compounds CO2 N2O CO CH 4 = methane NMV OC exhaust gases CO2 CH 4 burning wood harvesting plants, CO2 manure nitrogen biomass sequestration soil respiration fertilisers soil organic matter, surface litter soil carbon Graphics: Stiina Hovi Sources: MMM and MTT Figure: How greenhouse gases are produced. Graphics: Stiina Hovi/Kantri © Maaseudun tulevaisuus 8

2. Key measures 3. Plant breeding The eight key measures identified in the Climate Programme for Plant varieties suitable to the changing climate conditions are Finnish Agriculture are: developed through plant breeding. Besides the breeding activi-

1. Carbon sequestration into soil ties it is important to test the varieties by official variety tests in

2. Measures relating to the use of peatlands different parts of the country. Besides new plant varieties there

3. Plant breeding is also a need to take back into use some of the plant genetic

4. Plant and animal health and preventing the spread of resources stored in gene banks, i.e. Finnish local crops. Local invasive alien species varieties, or landraces, that are well adapted to the local envi-

5. Handling and treatment of manure and more accurate ronmental conditions will be an important source of new proper- nitrogen fertilization ties. Appropriate selection of varieties makes it possible to en-

6. Energy efficiency and production and consumption of sure profitable and sustainable agriculture and to optimise the renewable energy use of nutrients and, where necessary, growth regulators and

7. Reducing food loss all through the food system plant protection products. 8. Changes towards a more plant-based diet

4. Plant and animal health and preventing

1. Carbon sequestration into soil the spread of invasive alien species Organic matter (e.g. manure, straw) added into the soil improves Changing climate may cause new animal diseases and pests to the water and nutrient holding capacity of arable land and boosts spread to Finland. Some of the dangerous pests have been clas- microbial activity. These enhance the production potential of arable sified as particularly harmful invasive alien species in Finland. lands, their ability to adapt to changing conditions and climate There are special schemes in place for monitoring the presence change mitigation by increasing the soil carbon stores. Support is of animal diseases and plant pests both within the EU and nation- available for increasing the soil carbon stocks through the environ- ally. The identification of diseases and pests and monitoring mental operations under the Rural Development Programme schemes need to be developed further. Operators are trained to (2015–2020): incorporation of slurry into the soil, recycling of nu- identify dangerous pests and emerging animal diseases and de- trients and organic matter, environment management grassland, tect plant health and animal disease risks in their activities and to plant cover on arable land in winter, use of organic cover for hor- prepare for these. Further development is also needed in the di- ticulture plants and seed potato, and organic production. Require- agnostics for indentifying diseases and pests. ments promoting the sequestration of carbon into the soil are also included in the cross-compliance conditions for support payments Climate change enhances the potential of other invasive alien spe- to farmers and the greening payment introduced in the beginning cies to spread towards the north and expand their habitats. Sup- of 2015. port for the use of biofuels with the aim to mitigate climate change may in fact contribute to the spreading of invasive alien species. Species used as biofuel elsewhere in the world and in Europe are

2. Measures relating to the use of peatlands alien to the Finnish nature and may cause problems should they Peatlands store significant amounts of carbon. Cultivation of peat- become established here. lands (e.g. tillage) breaks down the peat, which reduces the amount of carbon sequestered into the arable land. Greenhouse

5. Handling and treatment of manure and gas emissions from the cultivation of peatlands are much greater more accurate nitrogen fertilization than those from the cultivation of mineral soils. The use of peat- lands is regulated through operations under the Rural Develop- Efficient manure handling and treatment methods and efficient nu- ment Programme concerning management of water economy in trient recycling contribute to reducing ammonia and methane emis- arable lands and environment management grasslands and sions from manure and to substituting for the use of nitrogen fer- through the national nutrient recycling project by reducing the need tiliser produced by means of fossil energy, thus mitigating the to clear peatland areas for manure spreading. Environment pay- greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Organic materials can ments and payments for areas facing specific constraints are not be utilised, depending on the process, for energy production in bi- paid for cleared arable land, which restricts the growth of the or- ogasification, preservation of soil organic matter and returning nu- ganic cultivation area. trients, especially nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, to plant production. Better handling and treatment of manure may also re- duce the need for land clearing as it may be easier to transport the manure to areas where such nutrients are needed. The aim of the national programme concerning the utilisation of nutrients in agri- culture is to significantly improve the efficiency in using manure by 9

2020. Gaseous emissions can also be reduced by changes in the ous ways. A more plant-based diet contributes to reducing the cli- feeding of animals both directly and through manure. mate impacts of food production. Work towards a more plant- based diet is done by implementing the Government Resolution Because of climate change the yield production potential should on the promotion of new and sustainable environmental and en- be utilised to the maximum in order to secure sufficient food pro- ergy solutions in public procurement. Projects to promote the func- duction volumes. Location-specific nitrogen balances show the tioning of the food chain and other similar projects contribute to level of natural mineralisation of the arable land and possible ex- promoting raw material choices that are in line with sustainable cessive or too low fertilisation relative to the production potential consumption. of the site. Selection criteria for measures

6. Energy efficiency and production and Research, advice and communication on best practices are need- consumption of renewable energy ed for promoting all the above-listed measures. Higher energy efficiency reduces the creation of greenhouse gas- es per unit of energy produced. Energy efficiency is also promoted The proposed measures promote the sustainability of the Finnish by operations under the Rural Development Programme, such as food system because: energy plans, inspections and investment aids. A national coordi- •• The measures are widely accepted among the actors. nation project for energy efficiency is to be launched by means of •• The measures reduce the negative environmental impacts of funding from the Rural Development Programme. The strategies food production and consumption. for the agriculture and horticulture sectors for promoting energy •• Some of the measures may also improve the profitability of efficiency have been compiled into a sectoral agreement to be up- food production in the short term. dated during the winter 2014–2015 and signed by the Ministry of •• The measures reduce the costs of food consumption. Agriculture and Forestry and national agricultural and horticultural •• The measures highlight the Finnish food production and producer organisations. consumption culture by maintaining Finnish agriculture and rural cultural landscapes and supporting local food culture. Use of renewable energy reduces the use of fossil energy sources, provided that the total energy consumption does not grow. Produc- tion and use of renewable energy enhances the emergency sup- 3. Monitoring the implementation of plies and has positive impacts on regional economies. Measures under the Rural Development Programme to encourage the pro- the measures duction and use of renewable energy concern the setting up of Greenhouse gas emissions and actions to reduce them are re- non-agricultural business activities in the rural areas by means of ported on a regular basis to the Secretariat of the UN Climate Con- both the building instructions for agriculture and agricultural invest- vention and to the European Union. ment aid. The implementation of the measures of the Climate Programme for Agriculture is monitored and reported to the management group

7. Reducing food loss all through the food of the Food Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. system The impacts of the programme are assessed by various proce- Throwing away edible food is a significant ecological and econom- dures in the context of e.g. the follow-up of the implementation of ic burden. With regard to the climate it means that the emissions the common agricultural policy, regular evaluations of the Rural from the production were caused for nothing. Among other things Development Programme and implementation of projects promot- reducing food loss is promoted by projects to enhance the func- ing the functioning of the food chain. tioning of the food chain. The projects aim to increase the aware- ness of and advice on the impacts of food loss and means to re- The implementation of the Climate Programme for Agriculture is duce it. Under the Rural Development Programme support is avail- coordinated with the work of the climate team of the Ministry and able for investments concerning environmental technology and other systems for national implementation and coordination. Ad- recycling. aptation of agriculture to climate change is reconciled with the Na- tional Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2022, currently under prep- aration.

8. Changes towards a more plant-based diet The Finnish Nutrition Recommendations 2014 encourage to in- The implementation and way of thinking of the Climate Programme crease the use of vegetables, berries, fruits, whole-grain cereal for Agriculture are integrated into the regular strategy work, oper- products and fish and to use less red meat and meat products. A ating and financial planning and budget preparation at the Ministry diet in line with the recommendations can be constructed in vari- of Agriculture and Forestry. 10

4. Impacts of climate change the drought problem will not be removed. In the future sufficient and correctly-timed water intake by the plants will be a key factor Climate change impacts on the cultivation conditions in all parts of for realising the increased yield potential. According to forecasts, the world. As the climate changes Finnish agriculture will also be more of the rainfall will come as heavy rains. Increased autumn faced with significant changes, some of which will have positive precipitation and possible lack of frost in the ground may increase impacts on the production while some will restrict it. According to susceptibility to erosion and nutrient leaching. the forecasts based on climate models available at the moment, most of the impacts taking place in the Finnish climate will be ben- Climate change is going to increase the risk to plant production eficial for agriculture. (TEHO Plus 2014). caused by pests. New pests may be introduced to Finland along with new crops or certain species of living organisms may turn The effective temperature sum will be rising and, accordingly, the into pests as the heat and moisture conditions are changing. The growing season will get longer. Already for the past thirty years we limit for the occurrence of plant species and varieties and pests have observed an earlier start for the growing season, and accord- has already moved more to the north. ing to forecasts this trend will continue. By the middle of the cen- tury sowing can be done 2 to 3 weeks and by the end of the cen- Climate change impacts on the global markets because of chang- tury even a month earlier than today. If this is taken advantage of es in the production areas of different plant species. The produc- in an appropriate manner, both agricultural production volumes tion conditions in many already unfavourable areas will become and range of products may grow. even worse and the conditions in areas which traditionally have yielded high surpluses will be changing. All in all, significant Autumn and winter precipitation is going to increase. In Finland the changes in food production and markets are to be expected, both early part of the growing season is typically quite dry, which re- globally and in Finland. Adaptation measures should be introduced stricts the growth of the crop. Both precipitation and evaporation without delay, but mitigation efforts should also be incorporated in during the growing season may be increasing, which means that the production systems. Photo: Hanna Koikkalainen 11

5. Measures in the food system for mate. The plan specifies the objectives and how these can be climate change adaptation and reached. Measures presented in the National Adaptation Plan have mitigation also been included in this Climate Programme for Agriculture as far as they concern the food system. National research on the various kinds of opportunities for adapta- tion and emission reduction is needed for the adaptation to and Plant breeding and variety tests mitigation of climate change. There is still considerable uncertain- ty with regard to the calculation of emissions from agriculture and Varieties cultivated in Finland need to be adapted to the long time impacts of the actions to reduce them. Information is also needed of daylight and acid soil. Domestic plant breeding as well as the on the implementation of the means for emission reductions and availability of national plant genetic resources for plant breeding the costs involved in order that the emission reduction measures are important aspects of securing emergency supplies. Plant can be targeted in a sustainable and cost-efficient way. breeding aims to produce high-yielding and robust varieties with due account for resistance to diseases and pests, stem strength and, with regard to grasses, nutritional value. Official variety tests Measure carried out in different parts of the country produce information on 1) Research on means for adaptation and emission reduction the best and sustainable choices of varieties to the farmers and in agriculture, their implementation and costs involved. processing industry. Information on research results is communicated in a usable form. Plant and animal health and invasive alien

1. Advice species Climate change, growing trade and new crops increase the occur- Through advice we can improve the farmers’ knowledge and skills rence of animal diseases and plant pests. The liberalisation of world in both environmental and animal welfare and health issues. Ad- trade, increased tourism and the consequent import of living organ- vice contributes to reducing the climate impacts of agricultural pro- isms further increase the possibilities and risks of spreading not duction, increasing energy efficiency and preventing risks caused only particularly harmful invasive alien species but also of other al- by climate change. Transmitting new information in a way that is ien species to larger areas. adapted to the circumstances of the farm helps to develop the farm and manage the risks. Under the Rural Development Programme Within the EU as well as in Finland the challenges in preventing farmers can choose the topic area for the advice according to their the spreading of invasive alien species are even greater due to own specific needs. the free movement of goods and legislation on internal markets. Various monitoring systems have been introduced to detect the presence of plant pests and animal diseases and changes in Measures this. The responsibility of the actors themselves is vital as plant 2) Production and compilation of material on climate issues in pests and animal diseases should be detected and preventive agriculture for use by the farmers. measures launched as early as possible to minimise the dam- age. The Finnish Food Safety Authority has a contingency plan 3) Climate issues included in the training of farmers to be with measures to destroy the colonies for the most significant taken into account during visits to farms. new plant pests and animal diseases. Besides chemical sub- stances, biological prevention and diverse crop rotations should 4) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: Aid for the also be promoted. (Ilmasopu 2009). utilisation of advisory services.

2. Risk management Protein crop production Protein self-sufficiency with regard to feed is an important aspect Climate change increases the uncertainty of supply on the world of the self-sufficiency of Finnish food production. The self-sufficien- market. Maintaining the domestic, diverse agricultural production cy of Finland and the EU in feed protein is very low, in Finland just and emergency supplies is an important part of climate change 15%. Competition for soya will be increasing as climate change is adaptation. likely to make its cultivation more difficult in the current main pro- duction regions. The impacts of climate change will make it possible The National Climate Change Adaptation Plan was adopted as a for Finland to raise the self-sufficiency in protein as the conditions Government Resolution 2022 in autumn 2014. The aim of the plan for cultivating leguminous crops (e.g. pea and broad bean) and tur- is that the Finnish society will be capable of managing the risks nip rape and oilseed rape improve in the long term. The possibilities associated with climate change and adapt to changes in the cli- to cultivate autumn-sown oilseed crops will also get better. 12 The cultivation of protein crops also allows to diversify cropping Sustainable livestock production systems and crop rotations, which enhances the climate change adaptation capacity of agriculture. Leguminous crops are capable Climate change and tightening competition for natural resources of fixing atmospheric nitrogen. We may become less dependent in the future may create pressures to increase agricultural produc- on industrial fertilisers if nitrogen can be made available to the tion in Finland. In particular, sectors where a lot of water is needed crops via nitrogen fixing plants. (Omavara 2013). Protein crops for the production, such as animal husbandry, would benefit from should also yield a higher contribution margin compared to fodder Finland’s abundant water resources. Cattle husbandry that rests cereals to turn protein crop production into an attractive alternative on a comprehensively sustainable basis is founded on the use of for farmers. domestic protein and grass feed. Perennial grasslands allow to increase the amount of soil organic matter and improve the per- By expanding the cultivation of leguminous crops we could substi- meability of the soil, i.e. ability of water to move through it. When tute more than half of the soybean meal used for feed. As the con- used for grass production, arable lands with mineral soil may turn ditions for domestic protein crop production continue to improve, into carbon sinks. at least in theory this could substitute for the use of soybean meal altogether. Special inputs are needed to the breeding of early va- Risk to farmers’ income rieties of oilseed rape, increasing the robustness of pea, develop- ment of broad bean varieties that are free from harmful substanc- Besides managing the production risk it is also necessary to man- es, selection of more competitive cereal varieties than at present age the risk with regard to farmers’ income. Market uncertainties with regard to the protein yield, and breeding of disease resistant will be even greater in the future, which means that means for protein crop varieties. regulating the risks are also needed. For risk management there is a need for long-term strategies, development of new insurance products by insurance companies, and increased business think- ing and risk-awareness among farmers. Connections with other sectors The changing climate conditions which impact on agriculture are linked, among other things, to the transportation sector as prob- lems in transportation have impacts on e.g. the collection of milk and replenishing the feed stocks. Extreme weather events may affect the supply of energy, which is why securing stand-by power sources is important. Measures 5) Development of the identification of animal diseases and plant pests through research and advice. 6) Development of methods for assessing the impacts of climate change (incl. costs and benefits) suited for use by sectors, local and regional actors and companies as well as methods for risk and vulnerability studies. (Objective of the Adaptation Plan 2022, included in the implementation of the plan). 7) Advance prevention of production and income risks in agriculture and development of concrete risk management means in cooperation with producers, research and the private sector (incl. insurance institutions). (Management of financial risk is an objective of the Adaptation Plan 2022, included in the implementation of the plan). Photo: Tero Sivula, Rodeo/MTT archive 13 8) Breeding of varieties tailored for our production conditions

3. Plant production and adaptation of location-specific cultivation plans to the future conditions by utilising the regional forecasts. More accurate nitrogen fertilisation 9) Development of cooperation between advice, research and farmers as well as technology industry to promote the All measures that improve the utilisation of nitrogen contribute to reduc- introduction of new adaptation tools. ing nitrous oxide emissions. For more efficient utilisation of nutrients what is the most essential is that fertilisation is as accurate as possible, 10) As part of the implementation of the Finnish Bioeconomy based on what the plants need, which means that both the quantities of Strategy the self-sufficiency in protein crops is improved fertilisers applied and the timing of their application are optimised. This with the aim to reach 30% self-sufficiency. Encouragement is the most sensible in economic terms as well. (MTT Report 127). is provided for taking advantage of the opportunities for innovative joint projects offered by the European Innovation Platform (EPI) in order that researchers and farmers will Measures engage in joint efforts to develop technologies and 15) Encouragement to farmers to join the environment payment market-oriented opportunities for increasing protein scheme. self-sufficiency. 16) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: Environment 11) Efficient utilisation of research on protein crops in advisory and climate measures – Balanced use of nutrients. services and training of farmers. Plant cover on arable land in winter 12) Increased use of leguminous and oilseed crops in animal feeding e.g. by developing recipes in a way that more Protecting the surface of arable land by plant cover in winter reduces domestic protein can be used in feeds. soil erosion and increases the accumulation of carbon into the soil by increasing the amount of organic matter. 13) A research programme on adaptation is prepared to produce information for the implementation of the National Climate Change Adaptation Plan adopted as a Government Measure Resolution in autumn 2014. The decision on the research 17) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: Plant cover on programme is made separately on the basis of broad- arable land in winter (target area at the end of the programming based preparation. (Objective of the Adaptation Plan 2022, period is 880 00 ha in the focus area for the measure and included in the implementation of the plan). 420 000 ha in other areas, payment according to plant cover: for 20% the payment is 4€/ha, for 40% the payment is 18 €/ha in 14) Support for the cultivation of protein and oilseed crops by the focus area and 9 €/ha in other areas, for 60% the payment is granting EU-funded single payments as coupled support 36 €/ha in the focus area and 11 €/ha in other areas, for 80% the for protein and oilseed crops. payment is 54 €/ha in the focus area). Photo: Yrjö Tuunanen, MMM/Mavi 14 Precision farming the decomposition of peat is also in the interest of the farmer as the organic matter that is beneficial for the soil structure is retained for In precision farming the variation between and within the parcels a longer time in the arable land and the use life of the drainage sys- is taken into account. This means that fertilisation can be reduced tem is extended. It has been estimated that the use life of organic in areas where high yields cannot be produced and, correspond- arable land may lengthen from 130 years to 500 years if the water ingly, increased in the most productive areas. In a study commis- level is raised from 70 cm to 30 cm. (MTT Report 127). Management sioned by the EU the potential of precisions farming was estimat- of the water economy of arable land is also important in mineral soil ed to be a 5% reduction in the amounts of chemical fertilisers used. to secure the intake of nutrients and producing a good yield in ex- The impact of precision farming may not be reflected in the total treme conditions, such as periods of drought or flooding. amounts of fertilisers used, if fertilisation is reduced in certain lo- cations and increased in others. The fertilisation limits of the farm- Measure specific environment measure concerning balanced use of nutri- 20) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: agricultural ents must also be taken into account as they may restrict the pos- investments (investment aid for controlled subsurface sibilities to increase the use of fertilisers on specific parcels. (MTT drainage) and control of runoff waters (environment Report 127). payment; target area 40 000 ha, payment 70€/ha/a to be used for implementing the measure by controlled subsurface Measures drainage and 250 €/ha/a for implementing the measure as 18) Guidance to farmers in technology choices and cultivation controlled irrigation and recycling of runoff water). methods to improve the efficiency of cultivation processes in specific locations. Intelligent applications are developed Increasing soil carbon sinks in cooperation between research, technology industry, advisory services and farmers. Based on the results of the soil monitoring at the MTT Agrifood Re- search Finland (samples from years 1974, 1987, 1998 and 2009), 19) Encouragement to farmers to measure the yield volumes on average the soil carbon stock has decreased. Good cultivation and quality (N level) for specific locations and, based on practices make it possible to increase the carbon stock by adding the results, to monitor the nutrient balances of specific carbon input into the soil or by slowing down the decomposition of parts of arable lands. Nutrient balance maps are converted organic matter in the soil. In the future it may be more difficult to into “contribution margin maps” showing the economic maintain the carbon stocks as the rising temperatures due to climate aspects of cultivation. The contribution margin calculation warming accelerate the decomposition of organic matter. (MTT Re- also includes the fuel consumption for specific locations. port 127). One reason for the fall in the carbon stocks is the young age of arable lands in Finland, i.e. decomposition resulting from the Managing water economy of arable land clearing of the lands still continues. (Heikkinen 2013). Unusually high groundwater level in organic soil slows down the The cross-compliance conditions that are a condition for payments decomposition of peat, thus considerably reducing the emissions. to farmers require that set-aside arable lands are green fallow or Underwater peat layer is protected from aerobic microbial decom- covered with stubble, while open fallow is accepted in exceptional position and thus, the thinner the peat layer that is exposed to ox- cases only. Burning of stubble is also allowed only as an exception, ygen, the lower the total emissions from arable land. Preventing for example, if necessary to prevent plant diseases or pests. Photo: MMM archive 15 Perennial grass cover Measures 21) Study of methods for measuring carbon sequestration in arable land, volume of carbon sinks in Finnish arable lands Perennial grass cover reduces erosion in arable land, thus also and cultivation methods through which the carbon sink can reducing the decrease in soil organic matter, i.e. carbon seques- be increased. A pilot project on increasing the carbon sink tered into the soil in arable parcels. Combining data in the soil da- is launched. tabase with data on plant species in arable lands gives information on the cultivation of different plants in organic soil. The share of 22) Three greening payment measures in direct support: grass is available for the years 1995 and 2008 and, based on the a) Crop diversification: at least two crops cultivated on farms results, the share of grass has decreased, which means that the with 10–30 hectares of arable land and three crops on emissions have increased. Increasing the share of grass would farms with more than 30 hectares. As an exception, in area extend the time it takes for the peat to decompose. Based on the C two crops may be accepted on farms with more than 30 average results from Nordic measurements of peat compression hectares. Not applicable on farms with more than 75% of it can be calculated, as an example, that a peat layer of 30 cm is arable land under grass and/or fallow if the arable area in sufficient for the cultivation of carrots for 15 years and for grass other uses does not exceed 30 hectares. cultivation for 60 years. (MTT Report 127). b) Retaining permanent grassland: permanent grassland area in the whole country may not fall below 5%. In addition, Organic production requirement to retain permanent grasslands located in Natura areas. A Government Resolution on the Government development pro- c) Ecological focus area: at least 5% of the arable area of the gramme for the organic product sector was adopted in May 2013. farm must be so-called ecological focus area (fallow land, The core principles of organic production include careful collection nitrogen-fixing crops and short-rotation coppice/energy and utilization of nutrients, diverse crop rotations and diversity of wood). The requirement may rise to 7% in 2018. plant species (Organic Production Programme 2013). Contrary to Derogations may be allowed for areas and farms meeting the common perception, organic production may not be better than certain requirements (e.g. forest-dominated areas and conventional one with regard to eutrophication or climate impacts. farms where most of the lands are under grass or fallow). (Roininen & Katajajuuri 2014; Pulkkinen et al. 2014). However, there is not enough data on the climate and eutrophication impacts 23) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: of organic production as there are no national emission models environment management grassland (target area 140 000 based on measurements made in organic lands that would be ap- ha, payment for riparian zone grassland located in the plicable to organic production. (Saarinen 2014). According to stud- focus area for the measure 500 €/ha/a, in other areas 450 ies (Tuomisto 2012), in general the cultivation methods in organic €/ha/a, for perennial environment management grassland farming have positive impacts on the environment when calculated 50 €/ha/a and for nature management field grassland in the for the production area but not for the quantity produced due to the focus area 120 €/ha/a and in other areas 100 €/ha/a). lower yield levels. In organic production, too, the emissions rela- tive to the production volumes need to be reduced e.g. through 24) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: organic higher productivity. production (target area 20% of the agricultural area in 2020, payment 160 €/ha/a and for outdoor vegetable Crop diversification and retaining permanent production 600 €/ha/a). grasslands 25) Study of the climate and eutrophication impacts of organic Because of the reform of the EU’s common agricultural policy, new production and developing new methods for their environmental requirements will be included in the direct payments assessment. funded by the EU as from 2015. 30% of the direct payments will be used for greening measures with the aim to promote agricul- 26) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: tural practices that are beneficial for the environment. Farmers environment payment. Operations of the environment have to comply with three greening measures in their eligible hec- payment incorporation of slurry into the soil, recycling of tares. nutrients and organic matter, environment management grassland, plant cover on arable land in winter and use of Cross-compliance conditions are a condition for support to farm- organic cover for horticulture plants and seed potato ers funded or part-funded by the EU as well as, in part, national increase the amount of carbon in arable land (target area support to farmers and structural support. Of the cross-compliance 5 000 ha, payment 300 €/ha/a for annual horticulture plants conditions especially the prohibition on burning stubble and plant and seed potato and 500 €/ha/a for perennial horticulture cover required for set-aside lands as well as requirements of the plants). Nitrates Directive have impacts on the climate. 16 27) More advice on the benefits of crop rotation and set aside to agricultural production and cross-compliance requirements and concerning soil carbon, benefits from increasing this and measures through which the amount of carbon can be increased. 28) Improving the efficiency of organic production through research and advice.

4. Livestock production Handling and treatment of manure Animal manure is a significant resource because of the nutrients and energy contained in it, but it is also a significant potential source of environmental loading. All kinds of manure require care- ful and appropriate handling and treatment in all stages of the proc- ess for efficient utilisation of the valuable nutrients and to minimise the emissions. Nutrients in manure that do not end up in use by the growing crop are wasted and constitute an environmental haz- ard. The main issues with regard to careful handling and treatment of manure include feeding according to the relevant recommenda- Photo: Tarja Haaranen tions, rapid collection of manure from housing facilities, appropri- ate storage, and timely spreading using efficient methods and ac- organic matter and/or returning nutrients to plant production more cording to the needs of the plants. In addition, manure may be efficiently than in the original manure. (MTT Report 21). There are processed to produce energy and fertiliser products with different several techniques available for processing liquid manure, but on- nutrient contents for plant production. ly a few for solid manure. Measures before and after using a cer- tain technique must be taken into account in the processing. There Ammonia emissions are produced at the different stages of ma- must be appropriate storage facilities for the manure products and nure handling and treatment of manure, including emissions re- the same principles as for raw manure apply to their spreading, leased when using fertilisers. Most of the nitrogen in manure may evaporate into the air unless this is prevented. (Grönroos 2014). Emissions from the handling and treatment of manure can be re- Some of the measures to reduce emissions from feeding and duced by biogasification, if the whole chain from the biogas proc- those of manure relating to climate are the same, but the impacts ess to storage of the digestion residue and use of arable land is may also involve certain complications. Covering the manure properly done (see Chapter 5.7.1) (MTT Report 103). In the frac- stores may reduce ammonia emissions but it may increase nitrous tioning of liquid manure the dry and liquid fraction are separated oxide emissions. On the other hand, reducing ammonia emissions from each other. It is economically more sensible to transport the reduces indirect greenhouse gas emissions from fallout and, thus, dry fraction further away e.g. to parcels where the soil phosphorus on the whole it is a beneficial alternative, especially as the amounts level is not high or to crop farms. The liquid fraction with a higher of ammonia emissions are usually greater than those of nitrous nitrogen-phosphorus ratio is suited for arable lands where the oxide emissions. (MTT Report 127). It is important to examine the phosphorus figure is high, often located close to the main farm interactions of the different measures in a comprehensive way. buildings. Environmental loading caused by manure spreading depends a Manure separation and efficient utilisation of the fractions may re- great deal on the spreading techniques and methods. Equipment duce the need to clear arable land in regions with high stocking placing the manure into the soil and covering it with earth reduce densities, as well as balance the work load on animal farms. The the risk of nutrient loading of surface waters and ammonia emis- equipment needed for separation can often be shared by several sions into the air. farms or the separation can be purchased from another operator. Crop farms receiving the dry fraction must have appropriate stor- Manure may be processed to separate the material into solid, liq- age facilities or intermediate storage needs to be organised on the uid and gas fractions. This allows to utilise the organic material, livestock farm from which the dry fraction is spread directly to the depending on the process, in energy production, maintaining soil lands of the recipient farm. 17 Measures Slowing down the growth in cultivation in 29) Launch of a national programme on the utilisation of organic soil nutrients in agriculture with the aim to ensure efficient utilisation of manure by 2020, taking full advantage of the Since 2007 about 3 000–4 000 hectares of arable land has been means and resources under the Rural Development cleared in Finland each year. In 2000–2009 the average share of Programme (2014–2020), e.g. measures concerning peaty lands in the cleared area was less than 26%. (MTT Report advice, training, development, cooperation and 150). investments. There are several reasons for the growth in the use of peaty lands 30) Developing technology for the handling of recycled manure for cultivation. fractions in farm storage and logistics and site-specific •• Livestock farms expanding their operations have needed dosage, for example, as sowing fertilisation in cooperation more land for manure spreading and cultivation of forage between research, technology industry and advisory crops in areas where there is a shortage of arable land. services. •• Arable parcel structure of farms has been improved by land clearing. 31) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: •• Poorly productive forest land has been cleared into arable agricultural investments. land, hoping for a better economic return. Ensuring sufficient funding for investments in improving the •• Rise in arable land prices and rents due to the small supply efficiency of the handling and treatment, storage and use has increased the clearing of farms’ own lands. of manure. •• The costs of clearing are relatively low and it is a technically easy way to obtain more arable land. 32) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: agri- environment-climate payment. Indirect factors which have increased clearing: Environment payment operations incorporation of slurry •• Need to improve the economic profitability of a farm through into the soil (target area 140 000 ha, payment 40€/ha/a) existing or increased production capacity. and recycling of nutrients and organic matter (target area •• Rapid growth of livestock farms in areas where national aids 50 000 ha, payment 40 €/ha/a) and measure of the Rural for livestock production are higher than in southern Finland, Development Programme: Environment and climate – especially area C2 – often the share of peaty lands is also Balanced use of nutrients (target area 1.79 million ha, higher in this area. payment 54 €/ha/a for arable crops and 200 €/ha/a for •• Environmental protection legislation and environment horticulture plants). payments require larger areas for manure spreading as the maximum amount of manure to be spread per hectare

5. Land use decreases. •• Hopes that the newly cleared arable lands are eligible for all In the case of organic soil the emissions from land use can be in- types of area-related payments (land cleared after 2004 has fluenced by reducing the clearing of peaty lands and decomposi- not been eligible for natural handicap and agri-environment tion of peat in cultivated arable areas through long-term grass cul- payments). tivation and in mineral soil by increasing the soil carbon stocks or slowing down the decrease in the current stock. Measures 33) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: agri- Support may be applied for from the Ministry of Agriculture and environment-climate payment and payment to areas facing Forestry for land consolidation operations between farms where natural and other specific constraints. scattered arable land, forest, road or other land property in differ- ent ownership may be combined in larger and more functional These measures under the Rural Development Programme units in terms of their management. Farm size has grown in Fin- restrict the clearing of arable land as no payments are land but often the additional lands are small in size and located far granted for land cleared after 2004. away from the main farm buildings. Land consolidation reduces the need for transferring machinery and equipment, and offers a In the basic payments of the direct payment scheme the good means to modernise the structure of farms and improve the possibility to grant payment entitlements to all areas where use of lands. The practical arrangements of land consolidation these are lacking in 2015 will not be used because projects are the responsibility of the National Land Survey of Fin- entitlements would also be granted to newly cleared lands. land. (NEEAP-3 2014). (According to EU legislation, in the case of young farmers and those setting up in farming payment entitlements must 18 be given to all areas where these are lacking, including new situation. The means by which the objectives of the Energy newly cleared lands. On the grounds of EU rules a farmer Efficiency Directive and the Energy Efficiency Act under prepara- who has extra payment entitlements or who purchases or tion will be implemented will be written in the sectoral agreement. leases these may activate these on newly cleared areas as A national coordination project is being planned to support the en- well.) ergy efficiency actions under the Rural Development Programme, also to function as a link between the local actors and national work (Payment entitlements are a condition for eligibility for on energy efficiency. greening payment and support for young farmers.) Through agricultural building instructions and investment aid the 34) Promoting land consolidation through advice, farmers are steered to choose energy efficient solutions in build- communication and national aid. ing as well as ways to increase the use of renewable energy. En- ergy saving impacts in agriculture should also be achieved through land consolidation operations, where energy savings of 156 GWh/a

6. Energy efficiency in agriculture are expected in 2020. The estimated savings to be achieved by Incentives to energy savings in agriculture are offered by the farm the farm energy programme are 228 GWh/a in 2020 (NEEAP-3 energy programme launched in2010, as well as the high energy 2014). prices. The voluntary farm energy programme is one way to reach the objectives of the EU Energy Services Directive (2006/32/EC) So far the approach to energy efficiency has focused on the en- and Energy Efficiency Directive (2012/27/EU). ergy and material flows within agriculture. In the future research and advice should give more attention to indirect energy consump- The energy savings objective for Finland set in the directive is 9% tion in agricultural production and the whole life cycles of agricul- of energy end-use during the period 2008–2016. The initial objec- tural products. tive of the farm energy programme was that the farms participating in the programme would represent at least 80% of the use of en- Measures ergy in agriculture and farm forestry. (MENO 2009). This pro- 35) Research, development and cooperation projects to gramme objective was not reached, however, as by the end of improve energy efficiency in agriculture. 2013 only 392 farms had joined the programme (MENO 2014). 36) Developing agricultural investment aid in a way that The most important service for farms in the programme has been financing could be made available to individual energy the state-subsidised energy plan, which has been prepared for 248 efficiency projects. farms. From the beginning of 2015 the plans and related payments will be included in the Rural Development Programme for Mainland 37) Revision of the sectoral agreement concerning farms in Finland 2014–2020 as part of the farm advisory scheme. The winter 2014–2015. farms may commission an adviser specialised in energy issues to draw up an energy plan for the farm, including an account of the 38) Launch of the farm energy inspection scheme. current energy use and points where energy savings can be achieved. The potential for increasing the use and production of 39) Informing farmers about the indirect energy impacts of renewable energy is also assessed. Possible measures to be im- agricultural production e.g. when making farm-specific plemented on the farms within the limits of available resources are energy plans and inspections. listed in the plan. 40) Launch of a national coordination project on energy For energy inspection the energy use of the farm and possibilities efficiency under the Rural Development Programme. to improve energy efficiency are examined more broadly than for the energy plan, and in the next programming period its implemen- tation is envisaged to be supported through the farm investment aid scheme. The implementation of the energy programme continues until the end of 2015 by means of national funding, but many of the actions under the programme were included in the Rural Development Programme in the beginning of 2015. The sectoral agreement be- tween the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and national pro- ducer organisations for agriculture and horticulture on which the energy programme is based needs to be revised in line with the 19

7. Energy production and use in agriculture Farms have potential for the production of solar and wind energy, while geothermal heat can be used so supplement the energy so- lutions applied on farms. In June-July a solar energy system in- Energy production in agriculture stalled on a farm may produce up to 70% of the electricity needed on the farm. (Ilmase 2013). In agriculture energy can be produced from arable biomass or raw materials created in agriculture such as manure and other by-prod- Biogasification uct streams of the production or food industry by-products. The food chain offers a broad range of raw materials for direct combus- Emissions from the handling and treatment of manure can be tion, biogas and ethanol production, and liquid products to be used reduced by biogasification if the whole chain from the biogas as engine fuel. In promoting and developing the use of biomass process to storage of the digestion residue and use of arable derived from agriculture the focus must be on materials other than land works properly. This requires that the biogas plant itself is biomass to be used as food. gastight and the retention period is long enough in order that no significant amounts of methane are produced in storage af- In Finland arable bioenergy could be produced up to 12–22 TWh, ter the process. A substitution impact with regard to fossil fuels which is 3–6% of the energy consumption in Finland in 2012. Most which is shown in the energy sector can be calculated for ma- of the arable energy would be straw (8 TWh, decrease in organic nure biogas. matter on arable lands not taken into account) and biomass culti- vated for energy use such as reed canary grass (12 TWh, gross The main challenge for biogas production linked to farming has energy). However, reed canary grass is difficult to use for energy been its weak profitability. According to studies made so far in production as there are problems relating to the combustion tech- Finland, it seems that in the current circumstances biogasifica- nique. At the moment 0.5 TWh of the potential arable energy is tion of manure may be profitable on large farms or joint diges- being produced. (Mikkola 2012). When utilising agricultural bio- tion plants of several farms if certain conditions are met (the mass, comprehensive consideration of the whole chain is needed, minimum of 100 dairy cows, 1 000 fattening pigs, 330 sows, also taking account of the possible decrease in the soil organic 24 000 laying hens or 60 000 broilers). However, the profitabil- matter. ity can also be improved through processing of manure togeth- er with other suitable organic materials. (MTT Report 127). In Finland it is difficult to produce energy from biomass derived Producing electricity for own use to substitute for purchased from annual plants in a way that greenhouse gases would be re- electricity is more profitable than producing electricity for the duced because of the low yields, energy needed for drying grain public electricity grid. The profitability is even better if biogas and need for liming on arable lands. (MTT Report 9). is used as transport biofuel. (MTT Report 103). Photo: Ville Pyykkönen, MTT 20 Electricity produced by means of equipment with a maximum nom- 48) A plan is drawn up on the extent of the distribution inal power of 50 kVA is exempt from electricity tax and strategic infrastructure of alternative propulsion to achieve sufficient stockpile fee. If a biogas plant produces electricity using a genera- coverage in a cost-efficient way and ensuring its tor with a higher power than this and part of the electricity produced implementation to the extent that this is not market-driven is used, for example, on a farm in the same location as the plant (measure of the working group of the Ministry of Transport and part is fed into the electricity grid, tax is collected on the elec- and Communication “Alternative propulsion for the tricity used on the farm. This is the case even if no compensation transport of the future”). were paid for the electricity fed to the grid, which means that elec- tricity produced from biogas is not always tax-free. (MTT Report 49) Taxation of biogas electricity should be clarified so that the 103). Electricity produced using equipment with a maximum nom- use of self-produced electricity is always tax free. inal power of 50 kVA for own use is always free from tax, but that produced in plants of 50–2 000 kVA only during the months when Energy use in agriculture no electricity is fed to the grid. The tax on the electricity fed to the grid is always paid by the electricity user, not the producer. In the on-farm heat plants fossil fuels can be replaced by biofuels produced on the farm. According to the agricultural census 2013, wood and arable biomass based fuels represented 45% of the en- Measures ergy use on farms (including all fuel for heating and machinery but 41) Taxation of bioenergy production and consumption should not e.g. energy for preparing fertilisers). In 2013 the total energy be clarified. consumption of agriculture and horticulture enterprises was 10 TWh, which is about the same as in 2010 when the previous cen- 42) Small-scale energy production is promoted (working group sus was made. (Tike 2014a). There is no data for horticultural pro- of the Ministry of Employment and the Economy January– duction only but in greenhouses, for example, the share of renew- November 2014). able energy is lower than in the agriculture sector as a whole. This is because a lot of electricity is needed to light the greenhouses. 43) Ensuring sufficient financial and support tools for prompting decentralised renewable energy production. A suitable Energy consumption depends on how the machinery and imple- financing channel must be found for the establishment and/ ments are used in various circumstances. It is important to take or production of a renewable energy plant that is sensible advantage of automation and guidance applications from the plan- from the sustainability and economic perspective, ning of cultivation to daily operations, working methods and proc- independent of the production sector and scale. ess management. 44) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: agricultural investments. Production of liquid and gas biofuels and their use in agricultural machinery 45) The advantages and disadvantages that would result if a The options available to farms at the moment are either biogas or similar distribution obligation were laid down for the gas biodiesel derived from by-product streams. However, the price of sector as we have for the distribution of liquid biofuels are biodiesel manufactured from turnip rape, for example, rises above studied (measure of the working group of the Ministry of the price for fossil fuel oil. There are no statistics on the use of liq- Transport and Communication “Alternative propulsion for uid and gas biofuels in agriculture. So far very little biofuel is being the transport of the future”). used in agricultural machinery, as shown by the tax refunds con- cerning energy tax on bio-oils applied for with regard to just 0.5 46) Targeting of available support also to demonstrations of million litres (including both heating and fuel oil). There have been means of transportation that increase the share of some encouraging pilot experiments on the use of wood gasifica- second-generation biofuels and utilise emissions-free tion for electricity and heat production on farms. (Ek 2014). electricity (measure of the working group of the Ministry of Transport and Communication “Alternative propulsion for the transport of the future”). Measures 50) Measures of the Rural Development Programme: 47) Seeing to the consistency of general energy policy steering investments in establishing non-agricultural businesses in instruments and taxation to ensure low-carbon rural areas and non-agricultural activities. Through these transportation (measure of the working group of the measures funding is available for the use and production of Ministry of Transport and Communication “Alternative renewable energy. propulsion for the transport of the future”). 21 51) Measure of the Rural Development Programme: Through Measures agricultural building instructions and investment aid the 56) A calculation model for the farm-specific greenhouse gas farmers are steered to choose energy efficient solutions in balance is developed. building as well as ways to increase the use of renewable energy. 57) A project is launched to create an energy and nutrient self-sufficient farm model. 52) Research, development and cooperation projects to increase the production and use of renewable energy in 58) Possibilities are examined to introduce a strategic stockpile agriculture. compensation payment for farms that have achieved a high level of energy and nutrient self-sufficiency. 53) The distribution network of alternative transport fuels (e.g. biogas) is developed.

9. Food consumption 54) More efficient use of energy through automation and A quarter of the climate impact of the consumption by the Finns is intelligent technology. created by food. Greenhouse gas emissions can be influenced by sustainable food choices. It is important to make it as easy as pos- Lifecycle assessment of biofuels sible for the consumer to choose food raw materials and meals with the lowest possible climate impacts. What is decisive for the envi- In the lifecycle assessment of bioenergy a certain amount of emis- ronment footprint of eating is the choice of raw materials, while the sions is divided among the different products derived from the impacts of processing, transportation and packaging are small. same production chain. There are various methods to be used in targeting the emissions. In line with the RES Directive (2009/28/ Measures EC, at the moment the emissions are allocated based on energy, 59) Research on the environmental impacts of food raw i.e. the division is based on the energy content share of the prod- materials is increased. ucts. This means that all the emissions of the biogas production chain are allocated to the energy obtained from biogas as the 60) Consumer-driven advice is developed which brings together processing residue is wet and cannot be utilised for energy pro- the available information on sustainable food choices and duction. facilitates sustainable choices and finding services and tools that promote energy and material efficiency (in line with the Measures Government Resolution on the Programme to Promote 55) The impacts of the different ways of allocating the Sustainable Consumption and Production “More from Less emissions on biofuel production in Finland should be – Wisely” assessed. The assessment is used for influencing the reform of the RES Directive with regard to the grounds for Food loss allocation. Throwing away food that is fit for eating is a great economic and

8. State of energy and nutrient self- ecological burden. Every year the Finns throw away 20–30 kg of sufficiency food per capita, which is about 5% of the food purchased by house- holds. When converted into greenhouse gas emissions this corre- With regard to emergency supplies we should aim for the best sponds to the annual carbon dioxide emissions of about 100 000 possible energy and nutrient self-sufficiency. The carbon foot- passenger cars in Finland. Of all the discarded food as much as print of farms that are more self-sufficient in energy and nutrients 40% could have been eaten but people just rejected it for one rea- is smaller than that of farms using a lot of external inputs. Farms son or another. (MTT Report 41, Katajajuuri et al. 2014). should be considered in a comprehensive way. Most Finnish farmers own forest as well, which offers opportunities for the pro- In catering services the share of food loss is about a fifth of the food duction of energy and various ecosystem services. When con- intended to be consumed, which gives a total estimated food loss sidering all impacts of the farm on greenhouse gas emissions we of 75–85 million kilos a year. Most of the loss is waste from the food may achieve a state when the farm as a whole in fact functions served, especially in buffets. The main reason for the losses is the as a carbon sink. difficulty in estimating the consumption. 22 There are no statistics available on the losses in the wholesale and retail trade of food in Finland, but these are estimated at 65–75 million kilos a year. Only a rough estimate, between 75 and 140 million kilos a year, can be given of the loss of food fit for eating in the food industry. The peeling and sorting residue in the processing of fruit and veg- etables, bran and hulls in the milling industry and by-products from slaughtering are not included in the losses. The side-streams and losses in primary production depend on nu- merous factors, including the weather conditions, quality require- ments, markets, profitability, conditions for support payments to plant production, production conditions, plant diseases, pests, cul- tivation techniques and workforce. According to preliminary re- sults, 83% of the wheat crop, for example, ends up in food use and 14% of the side-steam, i.e. part of the production intended for food but is not used as such, ends up as feed for animals. (Foodspill 2, 2014). Food losses can be influenced by legislation as well. For example, the sanctions against western food imports to Russia put a sudden end to exports to Russia by Finnish food operators. By a decision of the Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira foods requiring cold stor- age intended for the Russian market were authorized to be sold in Finland without the statutory package labels in the Finnish and Swedish language. (Evira 2014a). Health from Food. Finnish Nutrition Recommendations 2014. © National Nutrition Council Measures 61) Developing a statistics and follow-up system for food loss. 62) Advance prevention and reduction of food loss all through tainable as possible. Sustainable development involves various the food chain through research, quality management and perspectives, of which the recommendations address just a anticipation. few. The recommendations encourage to reduce the use of processed meats and red meat from the current levels and to 63) Side-streams created in the primary production and further increase the use of vegetables, especially leguminous plants. processing of food are primarily utilised as food, then as If the meals were compiled in a way that the share of plant high value added products and, lastly, in energy products (vegetables, root plants, cereals, leguminous plants, production. berries and fruit) and the remedial actions already available were implemented in the food chain, the climate impact of the Measure of the Rural Development Programme: aid for diet could be reduced by more than 20% during the present investments in non-agricultural activities. Through the decade. (Nutrition Recommendations 2014). measure funding may be available for business activities based on environmental technology and recycling. The implementation of the Nutrition Recommendations is pro- moted, among other things, by the Government Resolution on 64) Increased information, awareness and advice on the promoting new and sustainable environment and energy solu- impacts of food loss and possibilities to reduce it. tions (Cleantech solutions) in public procurement. According to the resolution, institutional kitchens and catering services Nutrition recommendations should purchase foods that meet the recommendations, as well as organic, vegetarian or seasonal food. The aim should be, to The National Nutrition Council published the new Finnish Nu- a growing extent, that food choices would contribute to multiple trition Recommendations in 2014. The recommendations aim objectives at the same time, including the health, safety and for a health-promoting diet that is also as environmentally sus- environmental aspects. 23 Reducing meat consumption Consumer choices involve great potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, if the consumption is targeted to products with a small- Lower meat consumption is the main means for reducing green- er climate impact than that of meat. (Katajajuuri 2014). Using plant- house gas emissions from food consumption. Over the past dec- based protein, even partly, to substitute for the use of meat improves ade, however, the total meat consumption has grown. The con- the nutritional quality of the diet and reduces its climate impact. sumption of beef has stayed about the same but the consumption of pigmeat and poultry meat has grown. Measures 65) Developing domestic plant-based protein for human nutrition. A decrease in beef consumption is mainly reflected in the import Research and development of methods for preparing plant volumes, not in the domestic beef production. This is because in products. Finland 85% of the beef comes from the dairy breeds and the fact that for the consumer dairy products and meat represent 66) A study of the meat consumption volumes in institutional closer substitutes than e.g. meat and vegetables. This means kitchens relative to the nutrition recommendations. that a consumer who reduces the consumption of meat usually increases the consumption of dairy products and there is no de- 67) Increased advice to institutional kitchens concerning crease in the dairy herd numbers. (MTT Report 127). On the glo- sustainable food choices. Developing the design of menus and bal scale, however, such decrease takes place. The environmen- recipes for institutional kitchens with the focus on diverse use tal impacts of cattle husbandry vary according to the location and of sustainable raw materials, with due account of seasonal production method. Meat consumption should also be steered foods and domestic plant-based protein. towards the most sustainable production practices, where meat derived from combined dairy and meat production may again be 68) Changes to taxation practices with the aim to increase the use a good alternative. of domestic berries, fruit and vegetables. Photo: Marianna Laitinen, MMM 24 Communication on sustainable food choices Local food The understanding of sustainable food choices, including environ- A Government Resolution was issued in May 2013 on the Govern- mental impacts of food products and choices one can make, ment Programme on Local Food to 2020. For the purposes of the should be promoted through consistent communication efforts and programme local food means, in particular, food that promotes the campaigns relating to the core messages. Environment labels and local economies, employment and food culture of the regions and further development of these (including calculation) are one way that is produced and processed from local raw materials and mar- to improve consumer awareness of the environmental impacts of keted and consumed locally. In this context “local” refers to a re- food and environmentally sustainable consumer choices. By gion (“maakunta”) or a corresponding or smaller area. (Local Food means of the food carbon footprint we can communicate the 2013). amount of greenhouse gas emissions created during the whole lifecycle of foodstuffs. As yet there are no internationally approved The climate impact of local food depends on the product and pro- practical guidelines for calculating the carbon footprint, but Finland duction method as well as logistics. According to studies of the has adopted the first practical guideline in the world for calculating Agrifood Research Finland, in the case of local food the share of the climate impacts. (Foodprint 2012). transportation in the climate load may be as high as 20–30%. This is the case, for example, when small lots are transported sepa- rately to the consumers. In other respects, too, local food does not Measures necessarily involve any major reductions in greenhouse gas emis- 69) Compiling a uniform databank on sustainable food choices sions but the climate impact of food depends largely on production and using this as a basis for a communication campaign efficiency, optimising the use of fertilisers, growth potential of the targeted to consumers land and soil type. (Roininen & Katajajuuri 2014). However, it is possible for the consumers to get information on the climate impact 70) Support for supplementary education of teachers and of local food from the producers, which also makes it possible for up-to-date learning material production for teaching about them to contribute to reducing the load through their choices. the environmental impacts of food production and consumption at different education levels. Measure 71) Developing the calculation of the food carbon print. 73) Research on the climate and other environmental impacts of local food and reducing negative climate impacts. Traceability and responsibility systems

10. Potential future measures The various properties of food, also the intangible ones, must be traceable in a verifiable manner, starting from raw material produc- Various means have been studied to reduce greenhouse gas tion and use of production inputs. The aim should be a standard- emissions from agriculture. Some of these are applicable already ised traceability and responsibility system for the food chain, which at present, as also described above. Some of the means call for would be audited on a regular basis and developed systematical- further study or implementing them is not considered feasible, at ly. The traceability and responsibility system provides the consum- least for the time being. ers with even more accurate information on the origin and produc- tion method of food and the consequent, real and verifiable re- sponsibility factors/dimensions relating to food. (Food Policy Re- Adding turnip rape oil to animal feed port 2010). The seven dimensions of responsibility in the food The possibility to add turnip rape oil to animal feed has been stud- chain are: environment, product safety, nutrition, occupational wel- ied as a mitigating action relating to animal feed. The obstacle to fare, animal welfare, economic responsibility and local origin (MTT implementing this measure is the high costs relative to the reduc- 2009). tion in the carbon dioxide equivalent per tonne (43 €7CO2 eqv t). Another problem is the supply of turnip rape and rape. (MTT Re- port 127). Measure 72) Developing sector-specific and verifiable responsibility and traceability systems that are based on true information. In Afforestation preparing these, due account is given, as far as possible, Afforestation reduces carbon dioxide emissions and the growing to all the dimensions of responsibility relevant for the stock increases the carbon sink in the biomass. Afforestation of specific sector. peatlands reduces carbon dioxide emissions in the long term, even if they stay on a high level for decades after the afforestation. The 25 reason for this may be the groundwater level relative to land sur- measures of the public power do not conflict with each other face in afforested arable lands which may in some cases be opti- but that they contribute to achieving the objectives set in the mal for N2O production. The calculated benefit of afforestation is society. Policy coherence is important with regard to econom- realised only after decades as the arable land gradually turns into ic efficiency and effectiveness of the policies. Because of the a carbon sink. (MTT Report 127). In Finland, however, there is very large number of varying social policy objectives it is impossi- little arable land, about 8% of the surface area (Tike 2014b and ble to achieve full coherence between all policy instruments, Statistics Finland 2014a), while there is forest land in abundance, but potential problems with regard to coherence should be 86% (Metla 2013). Agricultural lands that have been cultivated for identified and, a far as possible, removed or restricted. The a long time create open farming landscape and produce important issue of policy coherence continues to be highly topical due benefits with regard to biodiversity. In Finland arable lands have to the new cross-sectoral social challenges. Climate change been cleared where this has been possible considering the topo- and adaptation to it is a good example of a policy issue which graphic factors and what is the most sensible for practising agri- cannot be addressed from the perspective of just one or two culture. In the Finnish conditions afforesting the already scarce sectors. (Ilpokohe 2012) arable land areas is also not on a sustainable basis in terms of the security of supply. Measures 74) Coordination of the agricultural, environmental, climate

11. Compatibility of different steering and energy policies. instruments 75) The realisation of cross-cutting themes (environment, In general policy coherence means that the various policies climate, innovation) is ensured in the implementation of and steering instruments are compatible with each other. This the Rural Development Programme. means that the signals and incentives given by the steering Sources of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and breakdown of the emissions by the sectors reported Land use, land use Agriculture change and forestry Energy (LULUCF) Livestock Fuel consumption digestion Cropland in agriculture CH4 CO2 CO2 CH4 N20 Manure handling Grassland CH4 N20 CO2 Soil Clearing of areas N20 for arable land N20 Source: Statictics Finland Figure: Sources of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and breakdown of the emissions by the sectors reported. 26 Share of emissions from agriculture of the total emissions in Finland in 2012 Burning cutting residue 0,01 % Manure handling and treatment 12 % Digestion 27 % Agriculture 9% Soil 61 % Source: Statistics Finland Figure: Share of emissions from agriculture of the total emissions in Finland in 2012.

6. Greenhouse gas emissions from 20% of the total emissions in Finland. In addition to this, the agriculture emissions from the manufacture of fertilisers relating to agri- cultural production are reported as emissions from the manu- facturing industry. (MTT Report 127). At the Yara nitric acid

1. Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions plant which manufactures fertilisers in Finland a catalytic ni- trogen removal system was installed in 2009, resulting in al- As a party to the UN Convention on Climate Change and the Kyo- most 90% lower nitrous oxide emissions from the manufac- to Protocol, Finland is committed to annual reporting of the infor- ture of nitric acid than before. With regard to the total emis- mation on greenhouse gas emissions to the international climate sions from the manufacture of fertilisers this means a reduc- convention. The Statistics Finland is the national responsible body tion of 40–50%. (MTT Report 9). We should also bear in mind with regard to the greenhouse gas inventory. The calculation of the that chemical nitrogen fertilisers are manufactured from un- inventory is based on guidelines issued by the Intergovernmental renewable energy, mainly natural gas. Panel on Climate Change. Emissions can be calculated using the default coefficient of the IPCC or by national methods. (MTT Re- In 2012 the imports of feed materials, feed additives and port 127). premixtures to Finland totalled about 320 million kg. These im- port statistics do not include the oilseed and beans imported Greenhouse gas emissions created in agriculture are report- by oil pressing mills. (Evira 2014b). The growing demand for ed for the agriculture, land use (LULUCF, i.e. land use, land soya for protein feed creates pressures to clear rainforests for use change and forestry) and energy sectors. The sum of the soya production especially in Brazil, which means that the im- emissions reported for these three sectors represent about port of protein feed has significant indirect climate impacts. 27 The emissions from agriculture are composed of scattered bio- Croplands and grasslands are further divided into sub-categories logical emission sources that are very difficult to measure and re- for emission calculations using the statistics of the Information port. It is important to develop calculation models for the reporting Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (Tike). For crop- to reduce the uncertainty involved in the reporting and calculation lands sub-categories are needed e.g. to divide arable lands with of greenhouse gases and to take account of the special national organic soil into those under grass and arable lands with mineral characteristics. soil into several sub-categories according to the tillage method. The calculated carbon dioxide emissions from land use are caused Measure by changes in the carbon stocks in mineral soil, decomposition of 76) Developing calculation methods for emissions and organic matter in drained organic soil, and liming (in 2013–2020, removals in agriculture relating to the climate. however, the emissions from liming are included in the reporting on the agriculture sector). In addition, the calculations include a small amount of N2O emissions from land clearing on mineral soil as the decomposing matter includes nitrogen as well.

2. Greenhouse gas emissions with climate impact and trend in these until 2035 In 2012 the emissions of the LULUCF sector relating to agriculture represented about 12% of the total greenhouse gas emissions in Finland. Agriculture sector Reporting on the agriculture sector covers the methane (CH4) and Energy sector nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions. Methane emissions are created in the metabolism of domestic animals (27% of the emissions of the Emissions from the energy sector relating to agriculture include agriculture sector). Microorganisms in the abdomen of ruminants the use of fuel in agricultural machinery and heating of agricultur- produce methane as they decompose feed. Ruminants are the al buildings (e.g. drying of cereals). Plants producing more than greatest source of emissions, but these are also produced in the 20 MW (e.g. heat plants of certain greenhouses) are included in metabolism of other animals. (MTT Report 127). the emissions trading sector. Because the emissions from the use of energy in agriculture are only a small share of the emissions of Handling and treatment of manure (animal housing and manure the energy sector, any energy savings in agriculture and increased stores) causes CH4 and N2O emissions as the gases in manure use of renewable energy may go unnoticed and may not be con- are released into the air and the organic matter in manure decom- sidered achievements of the agricultural sector in particular. (MTT poses during storage (12% of the emissions of the agriculture sec- Report 127). tor). There are N2O emissions from the soil produced by soil mi- crobes due to all nitrogen added to the soil (industrial fertilisers, In 2012 the emissions from the use of energy in agriculture repre- manure, sewage sludge), fixing of nitrogen by plants, plant residue sented about 2% of the total greenhouse gas emissions in Finland. and decomposition of organic matter in organic soil. These are (Statistics Finland 2014b). called the direct emission sources. Indirect N2O emissions are created by nitrogen leaching and fallout of ammonia emissions. Estimated trend in emissions from Emissions from the soil represent about 60% of the total emissions agriculture from agriculture (does not include soil carbon dioxide emissions). (MTT Report 127). In the baseline scenario for the agriculture sector the emissions are expected to grow by 4.2% in 2005–2020. The trend for 2020– 2030 shows a slight decrease and in 2030 there is again some Land use sector growth. Between 2011 and 2035 the emissions are estimated to Reporting on the land use (LULUCF) sector covers carbon diox- grow by 0.2 Mt CO2 eqv. In 2012 the emissions from agriculture ide emissions and sinks (CO2) relating to land use and changes totalled 5.7 Mt CO2 eqv. The increase in the emissions is due to in land use. For reporting purposes the surface area of Finland the growth in the size of animals and in their productivity, increased is divided into six land use categories (forest land, cropland, sales of mineral fertilisers and growth in the area of peatlands used grassland, wetlands, settlements and other land). Of these, for cultivation. (GAF 2013). emissions related to agriculture are created on cropland and grassland. Most of the grassland is abandoned arable land, but Some increase, 0.8 Mt CO2 eqv, is expected in the emissions of the area of over 5-year old grasses has been added to this. The the LULUCF sector related to agriculture by 2025. In 2012 these surface areas of all land categories are obtained from the na- emissions totalled 7.3 Mt CO2 eqv. The growth is mainly due to tional forest inventory (NFI). the increased cultivation of peatlands. (GAF 2013). 28

7. Climate policy objectives of trading scheme covers the carbon dioxide emissions of large in- agriculture dustrial plants and installations with a rated thermal input exceed- ing 20 MW. In Finland the scheme also covers installations pro- ducing district heat up to 20 MW or less. (Statistics Finland

1. International climate policy 2014d). The aim of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, The Communication of the European Commission “A Roadmap for adopted in 1994, was to bring the emissions of industrialised moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050” (COM (2012 countries (listed in Annex I to the agreement) back to the 1990 112) specifies ways to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050. level by the turn of the millennium. The parties to the agree- ment were obliged to establish their greenhouse gas emissions The Decision of the European Commission and of the Council No and removals due to the sinks. The Kyoto Protocol obliges the 529/2013/EU changed the reporting on the LULUCF sector. Re- industrialised countries to reduce the emissions of six green- porting on the emissions and sinks relating to the management of house gases or groups of gases by the average of 5.2% from croplands and pastures is mandatory within the EU as from 2021. the 1990 level in 2008–2012, i.e. the first compliance period. The Member States were also obliged to report to the Commission The aim of Finland was to bring the emissions down to the 1990 on their LULUCF actions by July 2014. level in 2008–2012. (UNFCCC 1994). This emission reduction target was reached and, in fact, exceeded (Statistics Finland Ammonia emissions are not greenhouse gas emissions but they 2014c). The emissions obligations also take account of the im- impact on air quality. Ammonia emissions are regulated by the Na- pact of sinks (forests, soil). tional Emission Ceiling Directive (2001/81/EC). The ammonia emission ceiling set for Finland in the directive for 2010 is 31 kilo- The second compliance period of the Kyoto protocol covers the tonnes, which corresponds to an 11% reduction in ammonia emis- years 2013–2020 and the number of participating countries is sions from the level in 1990. In 2011 the emissions totalled 37.1 smaller than in the first compliance period. The protocol specifies kilotonnes, which exceeds the target by almost 20%. The reasons individual emission reduction targets for the parties. During the for exceeding the ammonia emissions ceiling include more ad- period the allowable emission levels are cut if they exceed the re- vanced inventory method and the fact that the necessary meas- alised emissions of 2008–2010. The current emissions reduction ures were not taken in the agriculture sector, which accounts for actions will not be sufficient to stop global warming at below 2 de- about 90% of the ammonia emissions. (Grönroos 2014). The so- grees, which means that in the negotiations concerning the post called climate protection package issued by the European Com- 2020 climate agreement means are being sought to tighten the mission to the European Parliament and Council on 18 December emission reductions already before 2020 (MTT Report 127). 2013 (Commission 2013a) includes a proposal to amend the Emis- sion Ceiling Directive (Commission 2013b), but the proposal would not change the target set for Finland.

2. EU climate policy The aim of the 2020 Climate and Energy Package adopted by the According to the Commission Communication “Towards a circular EU in 2008 is to reduce the total greenhouse gas emissions by economy: A zero waste programme for Europe” issued on 2 July 20% from the level of 1990. The share of renewable energy in the 2014, changing Europe into a circular economy involves more ef- EU should be raised to 20% of the end-consumption of energy (the ficient nutrient recycling, creation of new jobs and adoption of new objective for Finland decided by the EU is 38%) and energy effi- business models as well as reducing the environmental impacts ciency should be increased by 20% compared to the baseline of greenhouse gas emissions. (Commission 2014a). trend. The share of transportation biofuels should be raised to 10%. (Ministry of Employment and the Economy 2008). About 60% Climate and energy policy framework until of the greenhouse gas emissions in the EU come from sectors not 2030 covered by the EU emissions trading scheme. The decision on burden sharing concerning sectors excluded from emissions trad- The European Council adopted a framework for the EU climate ing (No 406/2009/EC) specifies binding obligations for emissions and energy policy in October 2014. The binding emission reduc- excluded from the trading scheme in the whole EU. According to tion target for greenhouse gases within the EU was set at 40% the burden-sharing decision, by 2020 Finland has to reduce the from the 1990 level until 2030. The lower emission reduction po- emissions of sectors excluded from the trading scheme by a total tential of agriculture compared to other sectors is recognized in the of 16% from the 2005 level. Council conclusions, which also stress the importance of ensuring the reconciliation of the objectives concerning food security and In 2012 the greenhouse gas emissions in Finland totalled 61 mil- climate change. The European Council requests the Commission lion tonnes CO2 eqv, of which 29.5 million tonnes CO2 eqv came to examine the best ways of increasing food production in a sus- from the sectors covered by emissions trading. The EU emissions tainable manner. (EC 2014). 29

3. National climate and energy policy 8. International climate initiatives The Long-term Climate and Energy Strategy 2008 (Ministry of Em- Several climate-related initiatives concerning agriculture have also ployment and the Economy 2008) allocates the greenhouse gas been introduced outside the international climate negotiations. Fin- emission reduction target for individual countries in the non-emis- land is a party to the Global Methane Initiative GMI, Climate and sions trading sector established in the EU climate and energy Clean Air Coalition CCAC and Global Research Alliance on Agri- package as targets for specific sectors. According to these, the cultural Greenhouse Gases GRA. emissions from the agriculture sector should be reduced by 13% from the 2005 level until 2020 (the means are listed in Annex 1). The various initiatives should not be overlapping with the exist- The Government updated the strategy on 20 March 2013 (Ministry ing initiatives and work that is already being done. Special at- of Employment and the Economy 2013) and submitted it to the tention should be drawn to the mutual complementarity of the Parliament as a Government Report. initiatives and the national benefit and added value to be de- rived from them. The Government Foresight Report on Long-term Climate and En- ergy Policy presents a vision for the national policy until 2050. Global Methane Initiative GMI In June 2014 the Government gave a legislative proposal to the The Global Methane Initiative, launched in 2010, is a voluntary Parliament concerning a new Climate Act. This is a target-oriented multilateral cooperation initiative which aims for a reduction in framework act concerning the state authorities, mainly applicable methane emissions on the global scale. Besides reducing emis- to emissions excluded from emissions trading. sions the initiative aims to increase the use of methane as a source of energy. GMI promotes the creation of markets for renewable Based on research (GAF 2013) the maximum total technical emis- energy, disseminates information on various technologies, and sion reduction potential in the agriculture sector (methane and ni- aims to remove the obstacles to reducing methane in the partner trous oxide) without reducing the production volumes would be countries. 9.5%. This could be achieved if all of the following emission reduc- tion actions were implemented at the same time: •• Increase in the use of turnip rape oil in the feeding of dairy Climate and Clean Air Coalition CCAC cattle by 0.5 kg a day (would reduce emissions from The Climate and Clean Air Coalition established in 2012 aims to agriculture sector by 1.1% by 2035). increase the awareness and research relating to the impact of fac- •• Biogas produced on half of the total number of large farms tors that influence the climate on a short term and support proc- (would reduce emissions from agriculture sector by 2.8% by esses by which such emissions can be reduced. CCAC functions 2035). mainly through precisely targeted initiatives. •• Cultivation practices for organic soil and restraining land clearing: afforestation of 3 000 ha of arable land per year, increasing grassland area from 40% to 80%, controlled Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases GRA subsurface drainage for the whole grassland area (would reduce emissions from agriculture sector by 15% by 2035). The Global Research Alliance GRA was established in 2009 and Finland joined the alliance in 2010. The purpose of GRA is to pro- It should be noted that the scale of the impact of the different meas- mote research collaboration concerning the climate impacts of ag- ures with regard to achieving the emission reduction potential var- riculture and reduction potential of greenhouse gas emissions. The ies a great deal. leading idea in the GRA work is to create a research network that functions as freely and without limitations as possible for global- scale collaboration between researchers working on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. The Finnish liaison organization in the GRA is Agrifood Research Finland MTT. 30

9. Steps towards a productive and sustainable food system A climate-wise production system is one that is productive relative to the surface area used and the fossil and other unrenewable en- ergy resources and resilient and adaptive in changing climate con- ditions, as well as minimizes the emissions relative to a kilo of raw material produced. The steps towards sustainable consumption in- clude the application of the new national nutrition recommenda- tions, reducing meat consumption, preference for local and sea- sonal food produced in a sustainable manner and avoiding losses all through the food chain. Climate change is a great challenge for all sectors of the society, also for agriculture, which is why climate change adaptation and mitigation must be taken into account at all stages of our food sys- tem. For agricultural production there are technical solutions to im- prove production efficiency, facilitate adaptation to climate change and restrain the creation of greenhouse gas emissions. In all this best possible use should be made of the knowledge and skills of the farmers. There may also be conflicts between the production and environmental objectives. Well-managed soil is highly productive and capable of adapting, thanks to the better water retention capacity. Seeing to the good growth potential of the land also supports the carbon objectives as more carbon is sequestered into the soil. Appropriate use of plant nutrients improves productivity and contributes to mitigation, while diverse crop rotations reduce the risks to farmers and enhance their adaptation capacity. Promoting domestic feed production improves the security of supply and makes us less dependent on the volatile world markets, as well as reduces the negative climate impacts of agricultural production. Coordinated and consistent communication and increased aware- ness relating to the climate impacts of food choices steers the con- sumption into a more sustainable direction. Compliance with the national nutrition recommendations increases vegetable consump- tion and reduces the demand for meat, which diversifies the domes- tic consumption patterns and allows for higher self-sufficiency with regard to meat. In the future the consumers will be steered towards even more sustainable consumption. In this context Finnish food derived from sustainable production is well placed on the market. By implementing the measures proposed in the Climate Programme for Agriculture we can promote a sustainable and productive agri- culture through all the available means. Strong inputs in the imple- mentation of the Rural Development Programme, projects promot- ing the functioning of the food chain, activating the operators, and research and development offer excellent opportunities to promote sustainable and productive food production and consumption. 31 Annex: Means of the National Climate and Energy Strategy for reducing emissions from agriculture With regard to reducing emissions from agriculture the means listed in the strategy are the following: •• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and energy savings targets are taken into account in all agricultural support policy planning. •• Manure handling and treatment methods that are beneficial for the environment are promoted. More efficient production and use of energy crops for energy production and use of agricultural side streams and manure especially in biogas production. •• Finland strives to amend the EU State Aid Guidelines to allow the introduction of national measures to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. •• Study of means available for reducing greenhouse gases in organic soils besides cultivation of grass on peatland included in the environment payment. •• Study of measures by which the current livestock production volumes can be achieved with even lower greenhouse gas emissions. •• Research and development of statistical methods concerning uncertainties relating to soil emissions data and for better monitoring of land use changes to allow for correct targeting of emission reduction actions. In addition, the chapter on bioenergy production includes the objective of promoting the production of energy crops and use of ag- ricultural side streams and bioenergy derived from manure in the form of e.g. biogas so that the amount of renewable energy based on this reaches the level of 4–5 TWh. The 2008 Climate and Energy Strategy was updated in spring 2013. With regard to agriculture the updated strategy lists the fol- lowing principles: •• Measures related to climate change mitigation will be planned and implemented so that they do not jeopardise Finnish agriculture or global food security. •• Research on emissions from land use and agriculture, and on efficient ways of reducing emissions, will be increased to facilitate the correct targeting of measures. •• Food waste will be reduced at every stage of the food chain, while emphasizing the importance of food choices in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Consumers, in particular, will play a key role in this. •• In developing and promoting the energy use of biomass of agricultural origin, the focus will be on non-food biomass. •• Measures to develop closed nutrient and material cycles in agriculture-based energy production will be promoted. In addition, the chapter on bioenergy production includes the objective of promoting energy efficiency on farms. 32 References Commission 2013a. The Clean Air Policy Package. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air_policy.htm Commission 2013b. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants and amending Directive 2003/35/EC http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013PC0920&qid=1421765404649&from=FI Commission 2014. Communication from the Commission. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:aa88c66d-4553-11e4-a0cb-01aa75ed71a1.0022.03/ DOC_1&format=PDF EC 2014. European Council. Conclusions 23/24 October 2014. EUCO 169/14. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/145397.pdf Ek 2014. Ek Fredrik. Presentation: http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/ymparisto/aMsvRq1nh/020614_Ek.pdf Evira 2014a. Decision of the Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira: http://www.evira.fi/files/attachments/fi/ elintarvikkeet/paatos_001.pdf . Evira 2014b. Statistics of Import. Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira. ossi.ala-mantila@evira.fi. 27.5.2014. Foodprint 2012. Katajajuuri Juha-Matti. Elintarvikeketjun jalanjäljen tiedonkeruu- ja laskentamenetelmien ja työkalujen kehitys. Agrifood Research Finland MTT. Project. 2012. Foodspill 2, 2014. Räikkönen Raija. Presentation: http://portal.hamk.fi/portal/pls/portal/!PORTAL.wwpob_page. show?_docname=13519613.PDF GAF 2013. Regina K, Sievänen R, Liski J, Jylhä K & al. Maa- ja metsätalouden sekä muun maankäytön kasvihuonekaasupäästöskenaariot. Project. 2013. Grönroos 2014. Grönroos Juha. Maatalouden ammoniakkipäästöjen vähentämismahdollisuudet ja -kustannuk- set. Väliraportti. 23.5.2014. Finnish Environment Institute. Project. 2014. Heikkinen 2013. Heikkinen J, Ketoja E, Nuutinen V & Regina K. Declining trend of carbon in Finnish cropland soils in 1974–2009. Global Change Biology (2013) 19, 1456–1469, doi: 10.1111/gcb.12137. 2013. Ilmase 2013. Agrifood Research Finland MTT. Information card for farms: http://www.ilmase.fi/site/wp-content/ uploads/2013/11/Maatilan_aurinkosahko_netti.pdf Ilmasopu 2009. ILMASOPU – Adaptation to climate changes of agriculture and food industries. Agrifood Research Finland MTT. Project. 2009. Ilpokohe 2012. Kivimaa P & al. Ilmastopolitiikan ja muun yhteiskuntapolitiikan koherenssi. 2012. Project. Suomen ympäristö 34/2012. Katajajuuri 2014. Katajajuuri Juha-Matti. Presentation: http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/ymparisto/ni- 5iQGX1R/020614_Katajajuuri.pdf Katajajuuri et al. 2014. Katajajuuri J-M, Silvennoinen K, Hartikainen H, Heikkilä L & Reinikainen A. 2014. Food waste in the Finnish food chain. Journal of Cleaner Production vol 73: 322–329 (15 June 2014). 33 Local Food 2013. Local Food – But of Course! Government programme on local food and development objectives for the local food sector to 2020. Government Resolution 16 May 2013. http://www.mmm.fi/attach- ments/lahiruoka/ezC7OsnFd/LocalFood_ButOfCourse.pdf MENO 2009. Final Report of the Preparations of the Implementation of the Farm Energy Programme. Työryhmä- muistio mmm 2009:9. MENO 2014. Yearly Report of the Farm Energy Programme 2013. Motiva. 2014. Metla 2013. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry. Metla. http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/metsatilastollinenvsk/index-en. htm Mikkola 2012. Mikkola Hannu. Peltoenergian tuotanto Suomessa: potentiaali, energiasuhteet ja nettoenergia. University of Helsinki. Department of Agricultural Sciences – Publications. N:o 10. 2012. Ministry of Employment and the Economy 2008. National Energy and Climate Strategy. 2008. Summary in English: http://www.tem.fi/files/20587/Climate_Change_and_Energy_Strategy_2008_summary.pdf Ministry of Employment and the Economy 2013. National Energy and Climate Strategy. 2013. http://www.tem.fi/ files/36292/Energia-_ja_ilmastostrategia_nettijulkaisu_ENGLANNINKIELINEN.pdf MTT 2009. Forsman-Hugg S, Katajajuuri J-M, Paananen J, Pesonen I, Järvelä K & Mäkelä J. CSR in the food supply chain. Project. Maa- ja elintarviketalous 140. MTT Report 9. Sinkko T, Hakala K & Thun R. Greenhouse gas emissions from cultivation of agricultural crops for biofuels in Finland. 2010. MTT Report 21. Luostarinen S, Logrén J, Grönroos J, Lehtonen H, Paavola T, Rankinen K, Rintala J, Salo T, Ylivainio K & Järvenpää M (toim.). Sustainable utilisation of manure. 2011. MTT Report 41. Silvennoinen K, Koivupuro H-K, Katajajuuri J-M, Jalkanen L & Reinikainen A. Food waste volume and composition in Finnish food chain. 2012. MTT Report 103. Marttinen S, Lehtonen H, Luostarinen S & Rasi S. Biogas entrepreneur’s operational environment in Finland. 2013. MTT Report 127. Regina K, Lehtonen H, Palosuo T & Ahvenjärvi S. Agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and their mitigation. 2014. MTT Report 150. Niskanen O & Lehtonen E. Development of parcel structure and clearing of new fields in Finland in the 2000s. 2014. MTT Report 160. Roininen T, Pulkkinen H, Järvinen M, Nikula J, Höynälänmaa S, Katajajuuri J-M & Hyvärinen H. Climate Choice in restaurants – Final report of Climate Lunch Project. 2014. NEEAP-3 2014. Finland´s National Energy Efficiency Action Plan. Reporting to the Commission is based on directive (2012/27/EU). http://www.tem.fi/files/40778/Suomen_NEEAP-3_29_04_2014.pdf Nutrition Recommendations 2014. Finnish Nutrition Recommendations for the whole population. http://www. ravitsemusneuvottelukunta.fi/files/images/vrn/2014/ravitsemussuositukset_2014_fi_web.pdf. 34 Omavara 2013. Peltonen-Sainio Pirjo. Strengthening domestic protein self-sufficiency under pressure of global changes (OMAVARA). Agrifood Research Finland MTT. Project. 2013. http://jukuri.mtt.fi/handle/10024/481010 Organic Production Programme 2013. More organic! Government development programme for the organic product sector and objectives to 2020. Government Resolution 16 May 2013. http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/ luomu/6KYevg8pw/Luomualan_kehittamisohjelmaEN.pdf Roininen & Katajajuuri 2014. Roininen T & Katajajuuri J-M. Ruokavaliomuutoksilla saavutettavat ilmastohyödyt. Teoksessa: Seppälä, J. (toim.) Kohti hiilineutraalia yhteiskuntaa. Ilmastopaneelin loppuraportti. Project. 2014. Ruokapoliittinen selonteko 2010. Government Report of Food Policy. http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/maatalous/ maatalouspolitiikka/newfolder_14/5tTDQgjLk/selontekosuomi.pdf Saarinen 2014. Personal notice of Merja Saarinen, responsible director of SustFoodChoice –project in Agrifood Research Finland MTT. 16.5.2014. Statistics Finland 2014a. ”Finland in Figures: Environment and Natural Resources, Geographical data”. http:// www.tilastokeskus.fi/tup/suoluk/suoluk_alue_en.html Statistics Finland 2014b. Sectoral greenhouse gas emissions, obtained from Official Statistics of Finland. kasvihuonekaasut@stat.fi. 24.4.2014. Statistics Finland 2014c. Greenhouse gases 2012. http://tilastokeskus.fi/til/khki/2012/khki_2012_2014-04-15_fi. pdf Statistics Finland 2014d. National greenhouse gas emissions 1990-2012. http://www.stat.fi/tup/khkinv/suo- minir_2014.pdf TEHO Plus 2014. Peltonen-Sainio P & Hakala K. TEHO Plus –hanke 4/2014. Viljely muuttuvassa ilmastossa: miten peltoviljely sopeutetaan onnistuneesti. Project. 2014. Tike 2014a. Energy consumption of agriculture and horticulture 2013 (provisional) http://www.maataloustilastot.fi/ maa-ja-puutarhatalouden-energiankulutus Tike 2014b. Arable areas in 2014, forecast. http://www.maataloustilastot. fi/k%C3%A4yt%C3%B6ss%C3%A4-oleva-maatalousmaa-2014-alueittainen-ennakkotieto_fi Tuomisto 2012. Tuomisto HL, Hodge ID, Riordan P, Macdonald DW. Does organic farming reduce environmental impacts? A meta-analysis of European research. J Env. Management 112:309–320. 2012. UNFCCC 1994. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 61/1994. http://www.finlex.fi/fi/ sopimukset/sopsviite/1994/19940061 VN 2009. Government foresight report on long-term climate and energy policy. Government Report. Prime Minister´s Office Publication 28/2009. VN 2013. Government resolution on the promotion of sustainable selection in public procurement. 13.6.2013. 35 Publications of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 1/2014 Metsäpoliittinen selonteko 2050 ISBN 978-952-453-821-3 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-822-0 (Verkkojulkaisu 1a/2014 Statsrådets skogspolitiska redogörelse 2050 ISBN 978-952-453-823-7 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-824-4 (Verkkojulkaisu) 1b/2014 Government Report on Forest Policy 2050 ISBN 978-952-453-825-1 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-826-8 (Verkkojulkaisu) 1c/2014 Доклад Государственного совета (правительства) о лесной политике на период до 2050 года ISBN 978-952-453-850-3 (Verkkojulkaisu) 2/2014 Manner-Suomen maaseudun kehittämisohjelman 2014-2020 ennakkoarviointi ISBN 978-952-453-831-2 (Verkkojulkaisu) 3/2014 Maatalouden ympäristötuen vaikuttavuuden seurantatutkimus (MYTVAS 3) - Loppuraportti ISBN 978-952-453-851-0 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-852-7 (Verkkojulkaisu) 4/2014 Kansallinen paikkatietostrategia 2016 ISBN 978-952-453-854-1 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-855-8 (Verkkojulkaisu) 5/2014 Ilmastonmuutoksen kansallinen sopeutumissuunnitelma 2022 ISBN 978-952-453-860-2 (Verkkojulkaisu) 6/2014 Kansallinen rapustrategia 2013-2022 ISBN 978-952-453-864-0 (Painettu) ISBN 978-952-453-865-7 (Verkkojulkaisu) 7/2014 Elintarviketeollisuus vesihuoltolaitoksen asiakkaana ISBN 978-952-453-869-5 (Verkkojulkaisu) ISBN 978-952-453-870-1 (Painettu) ISBN 36 978-952-453-871-8 (Verkkojulkaisu) ISSN 1238-2531 (Painettu) www.mmm.fi ISSN 1797-397X (Verkkojulkaisu)