Addressing the Climate, Agriculture, Landscape and Food Security Nexus through policy with Tobias Gräs Danish Agriculture and Food Council

Denmark made headlines in 2024 as the first country to implement a carbon tax on livestock emissions. The country's ambitious 70% emissions reduction target by 2030 includes agricultural reductions of 55-65%. What makes Denmark's policy truly remarkable isn't the tax itself—it's the 60% tax deduction corresponding to mitigation potential. This signals that Denmark's approach isn't anti-livestock, but rather pro-innovation, explicitly avoiding targets on livestock numbers while incentivizing farmers to adopt technologies and practices that can reduce emissions by up to 40%.

The impact of Denmark's inclusive policy-making approach through the tripartite agreement cannot be understated. Ministers, farmer representatives, nature organizations, labor unions, and industry came together to craft comprehensive solutions extending far beyond livestock taxation—encompassing voluntary land reform with full compensation, significant afforestation efforts, biodiversity enhancement, and water protection.

Today we are joined by Tobias Gräs, Head of Policy at the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, where he coordinates climate action through the World Farmers' Organization and represents Danish farmers and major European cooperative businesses in Brussels. Fresh from COP 30 in Belém, Brazil, Gräs brings insights from Denmark's pioneering policy implementation and an ambitious $50 million Green Climate Fund project transforming dairy production in Kenya's Lake Victoria region.

The Tunza GCF project demonstrates how Denmark's cooperative model can drive change across vastly different contexts. Partnering with FAO and the Green Climate Fund, this five-year initiative received $50 million in funding in 2025. with an additional $10 million loan component from Kenyan banks.

The project targets 130 agricultural cooperatives representing 80,000 farmers across six value chains in Kenya's Lake Victoria region: dairy, coffee, tea, poultry, African leafy vegetables, and fruit trees. Kenyan dairy cows in the Lake Victoria region average just three liters per day—with potential to reach seven liters through improved feed and management practices. The project aims to achieve 1.2 million tons of greenhouse gas emission savings by 2030 and 4.3 million tons by 2045.

The project's success relies on how farmer-owned cooperatives returning value to farmers through dividends and the provision of technical assistance to cooperatives on climate-efficient practices across value chains.

As Denmark prepares to scale its domestic climate policies while simultaneously supporting Kenya's transformation through the Tunza project, we welcome Tobias Gräs to discuss the successes and challenges of translating ambitious climate targets into practical action across radically different farming systems.

Transcript

Ash Sweeting 0:07

Welcome to the app cloud. I'm actually waiting. In 2024, Denmark made headlines as the third country to implement carbon tax on livestock emissions. What was the last reporter with the accompanying tax deduction announced on the timetarian? The Chinese livestock detective has continued to lead these topics as this policy is implemented most recently around farmer climate to feed additive link to the program. It's the political advantage of this policy, both in the EU and more broadly. Especially through farmer-owned cooperatives to address the climate, agriculture, landscape, and food security nexus. Tobias, thank you very much for joining me today. You've just got back from Brazil from Bellem from the COP. Do you want to start by telling us about your experience there?

SPEAKER_01 1:16

It was actually really nice. I was very skeptical uh going to Belem because uh of the logistical uh well challenges. Um but coming back, and I came back a little bit early because I didn't dare uh banking on on too many nights at uh exorbitant prices. In the end, the uh the prices came down because uh fewer people came to the lem. And it was actually really nice to have a haircut, so to speak, on on the number of participants at the COP. I think uh around 50,000 is is a better number than than the 80 or 90,000 that we were at before.

Ash Sweeting 1:58

And what in terms of outcomes, how do you see things evolving, changing, moving forward, or roadblocks from your time there?

SPEAKER_01 2:09

A really nice thing that is a first timer uh at Villem is the agri zone. Uh, and that gives me hope because um it was a space full of very nice and dedicated people. Uh it's an Embrapa, so the um Brazilian uh agricultural research institution campus uh that literally takes participants into the rainforest or secondary uh rainforest, which was a great experience. Um and it also puts a lot of practitioners um at the COP, a lot of agriculture practitioners. I met people working with uh coffee, sustainable coffee production uh in the Amazones. Um, these people who have practical solutions to uh how to uh lower emissions and as they crest the carbon were there. And and that's really what gives me hope. But also, I met some incredible people, uh some AgTech people, uh, who also give give us a lot of hope, who um who came to us because, well, I'm with the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, and we have we're a party to this three-partheid agreement in Denmark. It also sets out an ambitious research agenda uh to bring down emissions. And so they came to to me and and said that uh they are bringing, you know, from Australia to to other parts of the world, uh working on uh on products to come to the market uh that will lower um methane emissions and other things, which really is exciting to see that that all that is happening.

Ash Sweeting 3:48

So on that note, can you just outline for us what the Danish government has done in terms of addressing livestock emissions and and where's that at? And I guess it's a it's a it's a fairly bold and and move in terms of being one of the first countries to take such a big step. So there's a huge, you know, huge amount of leadership there, but that also comes with challenges.

SPEAKER_01 4:14

Yeah, so Denmark has a domestic reduction target that is very ambitious. It's a 70% reduction target by 2030. And within that, there is a sectorial agricultural target of reductions uh of between 55 and 65 percent. Um, so after the last elections in Denmark, it was a given, there was a parliamentary majority, uh, that agriculture should also contribute its share to this, and that that should be um that's set, set cast out in stone and be a uh a specific um amount of reductions. Now, um in the uh Danish Agriculture and Food Council that represents both farmers and farmers' own cooperatives, um, we have, let's say, a political uh opposition towards taxation and and other burdens on farmers. Um however, uh, since uh the political equation was the way it was after after the uh the last elections, our leadership, uh so our president uh decided to negotiate. Um and we have this tradition in in Denmark that um um when we seek to resolve the biggest issues in society, we try to do it uh in an inclusive manner so that the parties to the solution and to the to the challenges are at the same table. So in this case, uh the um the uh the minister uh for for the environment and and taxation and and uh agriculture and so there were six ministries, I think, came together and and uh took uh invited also to the table the representatives of of the um of the farmers and the uh the nature um organizations, uh also the labor unions and the industry, to find a solution. And and that was a very long process. It was also a process where the um the thing to be resolved, which at the outset the discussions were all about climate change. In the end, the deal, which is then the three partheid agreement, covers both climate and biodiversity issues, a lot of water issues in a comprehensive approach that actually sets out an agenda an agenda for land, voluntary land reform that um that is also fully compensated, and that's critical. So that is, if you like, uh new additional climate finance to uh to finance the well, to finance the necessary land use changes in Denmark and and uh very significant afforestation efforts, taking land out of production, uh to um to sequester more carbon and to uh to um enhance biodiversity and to also protect uh the uh the internal waters uh of our country. At the same time, it also introduces, and that's that's what's drawn a lot of headlines uh also globally, a first um tax on livestock. It's a tax on um on emissions from from cows and pigs. Um and it uses um well it use it uses some some some some figures. So each each cow is attributed a certain figure of how many um emissions it it's responsible for per year. Um and then it sets out an approach that whereby uh farmers um can, well, first of all, it establishes so establishing the first the world's first carbon tax, the three-part of the agreement also establishes the world's first carbon tax deduction on livestock. And I think probably from a global perspective, that is equally, if not more, important than the tax itself, because the tax deduction is set at a level that corresponds uh to the um to the mitigation potential. So in the Danish case, it's said that from livestock in our production system, uh mitigation of livestock emissions from cows up to 40% are possible. Now that means that the tax deduction has been set at 60%. So this um three partheid agreement is not an anti-livestock agreement, quite the contrary. It does not have as an explicit aim to lower livestock numbers. Um, and that is extremely important to secure uh the societal backing uh for this deal amongst farmers and also to secure food uh security uh for for the um well for the larger population. Denmark is is a food exporting country, and we take pride uh in um in um exporting our our pigmeat uh and dairy products throughout throughout the world. Uh and that you know being very climate-efficient products, it we hope that that also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions savings outside Denmark and outside uh Europe. So this deal, it really um uh establishes this new principle of a of a tax deduction that corresponds to a mitigation potential. Um, of course, this mitigation potential will be regularly updated. So as technology hopefully progresses, um the uh the figure of 60% deductions you know would likely go down because the mitigation potential, uh and that's what I take also from from some of the conversations I had in Bilhem, hopefully the mitigation uh potential for livestock production will will further decline, uh sorry, further increase over over the years to come. And therefore the tax deduction should should uh you know naturally uh decline as well in in years to come. So now we have this hands-on agenda in Denmark to for the government to to actually establish an inventory uh of uh climate mitigation, mitigating measures in in livestock and other parts of our industry, uh, agricultural industry, so that uh so that farmers can uh can uh more easily implement this deal.

Ash Sweeting 10:31

And how is it progressing? I think there's been well, there certainly has been some headlines um recently about some negative um potential negative um impacts of some of the the technologies that have been used to um claim that tax deduction. Is there anything you can share about what's been going on there? And and before we jump into that too deeply, I think the other side of things is this is a very comprehensive um agreement, as you said. It looks at biodiversity, it looks at um water, it looks at a whole range of things. And it must be frustrated when one single aspect of a of a big comprehensive program tends to grab all the limelight and eat up all the meteor oxygen when it kind of detracts from the much broader ambition.

SPEAKER_01 11:28

Well, of course, um it being the first uh tax on livestock emissions, it's it's natural that that attracts a lot of attention. Um so so so we are we're we are fine with that. Um of course what what we what we do is uh when we when we talk about the agreement outside Denmark, uh especially when we talk to farmers in in our World Farmers Organization who come to us and say, How could you do this? Um uh then we say, well, uh colleagues, please, please, please listen to us. We actually feel we we got a good deal, uh, and these are the reasons why. And and we we list um the example with the tax deduction. We also we also mentioned the um technology agenda that the government committed to, um setting out all these new measures, and and those measures can, you know, they they can be technological, and and as you you you rightly say, you know, there are challenges also with the implementation uh of this deal, because actually what we have done in Denmark is is we started implementing it on day one. So on the 1st of January, the government introduced a um a subsidy scheme uh for feed editors for cows, and also um uh an obligation uh on Danish agriculture for uh I think it's it's around 90 or 95 percent of conventional producers to actually sign up to this voluntarily. And if not, well, then there will be a uh a regulatory uh follow-up. So this is how we work with with with with a uh with a carrot and a stick. So the carrot being the subsidy scheme for this um you know, for this program, and the stick being that if farmers then do not sign up to it, well then there will be uh a legislative regulatory uh follow-up. And because farmers have actually implemented the measures, you're right. Uh there are there are reports and there are challenges. Uh and and and one of the challenges we have is that we have too few uh feed editors uh available uh on the market. Uh and and naturally when when when you go from this is a giant scale-up. So so um you had uh um trials on on unlimited numbers of of livestock, and suddenly you go you go to to full deployment in in a small country with with uh around uh half a million livestock um in total. Of course, the organic cars are not part of this, but but still with a significant number of conventional livestock. And yes, uh we've seen challenges and and and uh and we're looking into this, these challenges, how to mitigate them, uh, if they are all correlated with the use of this feed additive or not. I mean, these are ongoing investigations. And as I said before, uh, and and this is what we're saying, we would really welcome uh you know more feed additives to be brought to the market so as to have uh a bigger spectrum of measures uh to apply, tools to apply.

Ash Sweeting 14:37

Is there more diversity in terms of the approaches other than using a feed additive? Um, because we know that emissions are heritable, so you can breed for lower emissions. Um, we know that there's significant um you know up to 30, 40, 50 percent variation just within a herd, so selectively just culling the the top of the the 10% highest of highest emitting cows will decrease the emissions of that herd by far, far greater than 10%. Are those other types of interventions part of the current program, or are they um scheduled to be introduced um at some stage going forward?

SPEAKER_01 15:24

So, so um in answer to your question, the the the measures is not just about a feed editive, it's also about uh manure management, it's uh and in the longer term, it's uh as you say, it's about breeding, it's it's about genetics, uh, it's about um it's about farm management. Um, and this these are actually some of the practices that can also be shared, not you know just in Denmark, but but but globally, uh which is which is one of the things we we try to set out uh in in Kenya, where where we are taking some of the thoughts that have been um in the Danish uh three part agreement, and we seek to to apply them in in a different tropical context uh within the framework of a uh a new project that is supported by the Green Climate Fund uh and that we are implementing together with the um the FAO um and in partnership with with colleagues from uh from Finland and the Netherlands uh um and and Kenya um with cooperatives in in Kenya's the Legoria region.

Ash Sweeting 16:29

Could you please elaborate and tell us more about this this program? How big is it? What does it aim to achieve? Um, you know, how you know Denmark is is is one type of production system and you know, temperate and and highly uh technologically advanced, and Kenya is a much more of a traditional tribal or traditional type of a production system and and tropical. So how do you how do you make that jump?

SPEAKER_01 16:55

Well, the common denominator here is that we are all um the partners that I mentioned before, we are we're all members of the same World Farmers Organization. Uh the World Farmers Organization is is the uh umbrella organization of national uh farmers and and cooperative uh organizations in in a lot of countries, more than 70 countries throughout uh the world and and and growing. Um and uh I guess it was back uh uh at the COP in uh in Katowice in Poland in in 2018, so a few years uh after Paris, uh, where also the discussion started on climate finance for agriculture. Back then the the numbers were extremely low. They are still far too low. I think that the last report I saw was that now we have reached about 7.2% uh of global uh climate finance uh for uh agriculture and forestry systems. Back then it was it was half of that uh amount. And we said, okay, well, we need, of course, to lobby for for an increase. And and and to some extent, it seems that we have been uh together with other uh people who have been lobbying for that increase somewhat successful, but from a way too low uh starting point. So there's still a long way to go. Um but then we also thought, well, we don't just want to talk about this, we actually would like to see uh uh to show the change uh ourselves. And and back in 2018 in the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, we had just uh decided upon our own vision for Danish agriculture uh to be uh climate uh neutral by 2050. And uh the work we set out to do with our colleagues from MCK in Finland and LTO uh in the Netherlands was the global dimension to that vision. So so our our starting point was that that it is it is good that uh we uh decarbonize uh in um intensive uh livestock uh systems in Europe, in northern Europe. Um but it would be even better uh if we could uh share uh the uh the insights from that uh effort with colleagues in in other countries. Um and then we realized that one of the reasons why uh we are able to be frontrunners in in the Netherlands and in Denmark and Finland is because of our farmers' own cooperatives. Um that is uh, I mean, farmers-owned cooperatives have been there for more than 100 years. Um and uh in uh in the olden days it was it was all about uh uh capturing the the added value in the value chain so that the farmers would not uh be um exploited. Now this value chain approach that that cooperatives take is actually quite critical when it comes to climate action, because it it allows for a broader view on on emissions throughout uh the value chain. And it also means that that the uh the the cooperative, the company, because it's it's owned by its its farmers, its members, uh it has a certain power over its members in order so it can request changes. At the same time, it enjoys more legitimacy than perhaps a a private company that could annoy its suppliers by by you know making more demands, because it actually gives back the LUV added of these uh requests to the farmers uh at the end of the year uh through through dividends. So this was the the the thinking that that if we would be able to work um um you know to share the experience from from Danish and and uh and uh Scandinavian cooperatives and Dutch cooperatives in another context, well then then uh that change could also be possible. So we teamed up with with an entity, it's a Dutch agridevelopment agency called AgriCara. Um at this time it was then led by its founder, uh Kees Bloklan, um, who um who was uh a very inspiring figure. Um back in the day he had founded via Campesina, um, and then he had turned to uh to the more intensive side of Dutch uh livestock production and cooperative development. Um and we uh we set out to um to also see if we could find a match, and and uh we wanted this to be a green climate fund product uh project. Now, uh why is that? Well, that's because the Green Climate Fund is the uh is the implementing instrument uh under the Paris Agreement. Um it was originally conceived in Copenhagen at the COP 15. I believe it was, it was uh you know subsequently agreed upon in in Cancun, um, which also means that the Danish government takes um a big interest in in the Green Climate Fund and has historically been supporting the Green Climate Fund. Um so so when we reached out to them, because one of the challenges with this kind of uh climate finance is that Green Climate Fund um project proposals um are not easy to make. So uh so we had to to learn about this whole universe of accredited entities to the Green Climate Fund, of which there are about a hundred, um, and how to work with these accredited entities, uh, well, also to find an accredited entity to work with. So we were we were blessed in the sense that we we actually um managed to uh to partner with the FAO in its capacity uh as an accredited entity to the Green Climate Fund. Uh and in FAO, we find a really excellent partner which with the longest track records of of this kind of proposals. But still, we needed to um to fund this proposal um together with uh well together with AgriTerra as it happened. So AgriTerra put their own money in. So Mr. Blochland managed to secure, I think it was 200,000 euros in capital from the Board of AgriCara. And and uh in the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, we went to our the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Denmark, and and we were very happy to and thankful of getting a grant from them so that together we were able to finance uh this project proposal development uh that cost more than 400,000 uh US uh US dollars. Um and of course also took a lot of time because subsequently we would then have to look at to scan a lot of NDCs, so all the national determined contributions, see which countries put an uh uh emphasis on agricultural development, which countries um a subset of those countries also care about uh cooperative developments, um, and where would where you know in the end, where would there potentially be a a um a fitting, a mix, uh a match. And and that ended up being uh the case uh in Kenya. So uh so I think it was just after the pandemic uh or uh started that we that we set out to we selected Kenya um and we uh we um set out to to uh actually uh implement uh not implement to to uh to um to work on this project proposal which took a few years to conclude before finally uh in February of of this year, 2025, uh we we then got um the um board approval uh from the GCF um for a$50 million project. Um and that is uh yeah$50 million, that that is 30 about 30 million from from the Green Climate Fund, uh about uh 14 million from from the uh government of um of the Republic of Kenya, uh and and uh six um six million from the uh the government of the of our kingdom of Denmark.

Ash Sweeting 25:19

And the what does what does the the program look like? How many farmers, how many cows, how what what are the what are the the key points or the key attributes of the program?

SPEAKER_01 25:33

So so um we went to uh to Kisumu, which is in in in western Kenya on on Lake Victoria, uh, and that was uh yeah, that was back in December of 2021, and we did consultations, so which value chains locally um were um of interest. Um and uh we also uh worked with our colleagues in in in the um Kenya Um Farmers Federation in Kenas. Um we um you know we established that that there were six value chains um that ended up being uh dairy, coffee, uh tea, and poultry, um African um leafy vegetables and fruit trees that were of of uh both local and and let's say um global interest because we had to find a mix where our uh expertise the the project a key component in in what has become the uh the Tunsa GCF project. And Tunsa is is uh Swahili, uh it means um you know to do better, to take care of. Um and and uh that's that's what we brought to the COP. Uh we said, okay, we we need to speak uh Swahili uh at COP30. Um but a key concept in a component of Tunsa is this notion of international partnerships. So so you will have uh a group of what we call agri-poolers, and agri poolers are our uh agricultural advisors, um uh farmers and uh colleagues in cooperatives uh in uh from from Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, uh, and Kenya, who will travel to the Lake Victoria region and and give advice to about 130 agricultural cooperatives, um each representing about um 500 or more uh farmers owners. So a total of will reach a total of about 80,000 farmers in the Lake Victoria region throughout the implementation period, which runs now from from uh five years from from 2000 and 26 uh onwards towards 2030. So so so and the advice that they will give uh is to on how to make these uh farmer zone cooperatives more climate efficient in in the value change that I that I just mentioned. Uh now um that can be advice on measures at the let's say at the dairy, at the at the at the creamery itself, but it can also be advice on measures um in the field, amongst the the the the members and the owners of the cooperative. Uh so so that is that is the um uh that is the uh the challenge and the opportunity uh to uh to explore. Uh in addition to the 50 million uh in grant funding for Tunsa, there is also a$10 million uh loan component. So here it's it's money from two Kenyan banks, uh Equity Bank and the Cooperative Bank uh in Kenya, that um that sets up a um uh a loan line uh for for for these corporatives uh to um to uh take out loans to to invest uh if some of this advice would inspire them to um well to buy new equipment or or other stuffs or or uh well other other um hurts or you know whatever whatever is is is is uh uh financially um sound to do uh that will bring also uh a return on investment because these loans have to be paid back uh and and there is also interest or albeit lower interest uh associated with with the loans.

Ash Sweeting 29:44

And the the grant side of it, what's that going to be spent on? Is that can that buy is that advice? Is that you know potentially um education? Is there any uh technology in that, or is there any um you know new or better irrigation practices for the crops or or value or or in terms of you know post-harvest storage, all those sorts of areas where there are losses? Um obviously the the food that gets wasted has the same environmental footprint as the food that doesn't get wasted, um doesn't make any money in a you know it's a waste. So it does that is it does it include all those sort of components as well?

SPEAKER_01 30:29

So so so the the um the grand component really sets up the structure uh of this so so uh project so agriculture and and um and the fao um are both um what what in the GCF terminology is labeled executing entities. So so so if if you like the FAO uh in Rome, they are the the accredited entity, they own the um the project, and they have the legal responsibility towards the the Green Climate Fund to oversee its implementation and also to reach the uh significant greenhouse gas emission savings that that Tunsa should produce, which towards 2030 is is 1.2 million tons, uh and towards uh 2035 is a total of uh some uh uh 4.3 million tons of greenhouse gas savings. So really significant numbers that also empowers uh Kenya to actually increase its ambition uh in its NDCs, because this is additional climate finance uh that that is then making it possible for Kenya to step up. Uh now in answer to your question on on the actual like um spending of the 50 million, so that's that's what is then divided between FAO as an uh executing entity and agriculture as an executing entity. Um on the FAO part, uh the approach is is is um is um a classical FAO approach, leaving no one behind, establishment of uh farmer field schools, for instance, uh the uh the also um technical assistance to uh the counties. Uh, there are 14 counties uh in the Lake Victoria economic block. Um each of these 14 counties are also supported uh uh by um uh specific uh funds from from the Kenya government inside the the in well the 14 million uh Kenyan co-financing goes to the to the counties uh to the to that part of the implementation uh of the project. Uh so so in these counties there's really a lack of of technical expertise uh um to uh to uh to uh to help farmers, especially the the most vulnerable ones, uh become more climate efficient. On the agri terror side, which is uh the one that that we have uh focused on, um it is it is it is we're working with with cooperatives uh that are already established. Um actually it is it is um it might sound a little bit cruel, but but but but you know uh and and we are we can do it because we know that the FAUS component is there as well. But we are we are leaving some behind on the equitarian side, because uh we feel that that there is a missing um, let's say um there is a missing link where the uh a group of farmers who who are better off and still, you know, still very poor, uh, but better off and and and and and somewhat organized, you know, they have the potential, if they get the resources, to actually scale up. And and they have lacked support. Um and and this this this Tunsa project recognizes that here is a list here's a silver lining. Um so so so with Tunsa, we invest in in that part of the agricultural society. Um and the idea is to for them to produce more with less. Um now this was uh I can share this now because now the the project is is approved. It was controversial somewhat uh in the um in the process because um, for instance, the the inclusion of the dairy value chain, uh it was never said to us officially that there was a problem, but I mean our consultants came back to us and said, well, you know, they had informally been told that perhaps it would be faster if if that value chain was left out. And a few years ago there was there were some efforts uh to to defund um livestock and to defund um um also the the dairy value chain. And and and we we we stood up to that. Uh we we did that in in in official consultations on on the ESG guidelines um with the GCF uh through the World Farmers Organization. Um we stood up to that also in the Standing Committee on Finance, uh, and we stood up to that in in this process uh project uh proposal process uh because we felt that it was the wrong way to go. Um it was assumed uh at the beginning of this process that all investments in livestock would automatically cause uh increased greenhouse gas emissions. Um fortunately, the FAO came up with some new modeling uh in the middle of our proposed uh project proposal process, which recognizes that manage changes of management practices can lead to uh slight um um reductions. So we jumped on that. Um we probably feel that that that the figures that that we included in this project are very modest, but we we accepted them just to get this this value chain on board. What I feel is that that it's extremely important, um also since, and this is what we're happy to see in this new report from from the uh standing committee on finance forum on agriculture, that there is a lot of potential um in mitigation in in the livestock sector. Um and so so so so that that potential can be further explored and it is included um in the twin slip project.

Ash Sweeting 36:54

On the on the um the different approaches between the FAO and the the not leaving anyone behind and the let's find the find the best farmers and work with them a number of years ago. I was saw some some survey data on Australian, the Australian livestock industry. And in that, roughly five groups, roughly 20%, and there were 20% of livestock cattle and sheep farmers who were actively trying to grow their business, 20 odd were trying to improve their efficiency without actually having more acreage or more hectares. Um, 20% were waiting to hand on the operation to the next generation, 20% were waiting to retire, and 20% were hobby farmers who were doing it as a as a part-time side of thing. So in terms of where you're going to get the most impact for your your your money, if you've got the the the don't leave anyone behind approach, but you've got 60% of the operations are actually not trying to do anything differently. You've you've got a very steep hill to climb in trying to drive change um in that approach. And and the fact that you've you've got a foot in both camps, I think um balances those challenges quite well.

SPEAKER_01 38:16

Yes. Um I think these numbers are are quite universal. Uh that that that we have all these groups. I mean, um and and if we want to undertake climate action, uh of course all those groups can can contribute, but but where we see a particularly big potential is for the ones who want to stay in the business and who want to develop the business. Um and and that is that is um that is a subset of of of of the uh of the global farming community. So um so it I mean it it is it is it is it is it's it's a sensitive topic, um but we are also faced with with a a big uh climate crisis. Uh and and sometimes it's good also to be honest um about things. Uh and it's true that that a lot of um of very small uh farmers in in a lot of developing countries um have jobs in the cities. Uh so so so and they don't have the time to to to to do a lot of of the things. So in that sense, we also feel that working with cooperatives is also a way to include uh some of these people because because if a cooperative is strong enough, it it can it you can have a a larger scale cooperative which which is um which is uh actually including smallholders. So so that that that that is that is a very uh workable uh structure. Uh and and you can have you you they they can actually outsource a lot of the management to to uh to to people who are working uh with the cooperatives or in collaboration uh with your uh cooperatives. So um so yeah, it's about finding these uh practical uh solutions and and to um accept not just to accept the change but also to to get to the point where where change becomes exciting. Um I I've been um I've been uh I have a son who's four years old, um, and he's he's he's doing uh a lot of uh a lot of puzzles. So so I thought um some some some some time back that I could uh you know I could teach him something about you know making puzzles by by telling him you know to do the frame first. It's a little bit like when we're looking at the all the graphs with all the planetary boundaries. You try to then uh make the frame and then to fill in the picture afterwards. And and he just didn't want to do that. And rather, what he does, he said, Dad, you know, I want to put the the puzzles together that I like the most. And you know what? He's faster than I am, he's much faster than I am. And I think it shows it shows that that if we take a playful approach to some of these hard challenges, we can actually, as a as a human, human race, uh, we we can do a lot more uh that than we think. Um we just need to be ambitious. So that's it's good to have um ambitious targets, uh, but we should not be too prescriptive always about exactly how we we we we want farmers in all kinds and cooperatives in in all kinds of different settings to set out to be more climate efficient.

Ash Sweeting 41:38

I I love that example of your your four-year-old and um the puzzle side of things. And um I I I I tried the same lessons on my my daughter with with the same levels of success. Um so that and and you know the the the cultural side of things and what works in one context and um what works in like the Danish approach we were talking about before would work in a country like Denmark. But there's many, many countries around the world where where something with that much regulation wouldn't work, um or that trying to create that level of um of community buying and having everyone at the table would also be challenges just because of the nature of of you know all our different societies and cultures.

SPEAKER_01 42:29

Exactly. And actually, um part of what also works in the Danish context is exactly that that even if if we are a highly regulated society, uh we take the character approach first, right? So so so um our members who have to implement the tripartite agreements, they do get to sit down and and actually you know juggle the land puzzles first themselves and see if they can come up with a solution. And and what I hear, I mean, they haven't they haven't come. We have broken the country down into a number of local tripartite zones, so to to see exactly which kind of uh which which which lands have to be taken out, but in quite a number of these subzones uh within Denmark, they have been able to reach local agreements already. So so um this discretion uh at the very local level uh it's it's it's it really contributes to ownership uh and and and and it makes makes the whole thing uh yeah more human than than if you would just come with with with with a map and say, okay, we have designated these areas to be you know um for for the um uh well for forestry and and no longer for for your cows.

Ash Sweeting 43:52

People people have ownership in it, so they have a they have much more but they they they feel bought into the System. Yeah, exactly. So back to Tunza. Is there or are there plans to uh implement a similar project in other countries through a similar sort of a mechanism? Obviously adapted to whatever that that society and culture happens to be.

SPEAKER_01 44:19

So the cooperative partnership uh for climate, smart, food and forestry, which which I've been counseling to for the past five years or so, um uh has uh ambitions to uh to um um take what we learned from this GCF uh project uh uh with with the FAO um in Kenya and to apply it uh somewhere else. Um we feel that um that um we now also what we felt was inherently true just because we felt it, namely that cooperatives being strategically placed above and below the farmer at the same time, uh owned by the farmers, yet having management that that can instruct farmers to change practices. Um I mean the the this feeling that that they are they are strategic um was something that we had to prove in this process. So our consultants spent time and energy uh doing research and and and having that stated. Now we have this GCF project. We hope that it it can be a reference. It's it's it's up there on the shelves, uh, amongst uh the other GCF projects. And the GCF is it's it's a gold standard for for climate action projects. Uh, and and it was important for us um that amongst um the projects on the GCF shelves, there was also a project that focuses on sustainable uh intensification and this kind of land use change approach that we take. Um now um I will be stepping down as as counsel uh after all these years, uh and and uh I'm happy to give the relay to um to the next uh um counsel, uh who's likely um being uh from from AgriTera, uh so amongst our partners. And I'm sure that um that um um he will take us further uh and we'll see where we go.

Ash Sweeting 46:18

Wonderful. Thank you very much for that. And um before we go, is there anything you'd like to add that we haven't already discussed?

SPEAKER_01 46:29

I think that it is um saddening to see that once again the uh UNFCCC agriculture negotiations have uh uh failed, um which shows that a small minority of countries because of the UNFCC process and and this uh well that requires unanimity are able to block um progress for everyone else. That is that is disheartening, but it is good, it's really uplifting uh to feel um the spirit of um of the acrizone. Um and uh kudos to the Brazilian COP presidency for for introducing that novelty. I hope that that the next uh COP will also see an Aquisone uh um so that we will going forward, we'll have three zones, we'll have the blue zone, the the green zone, uh, and the acrazone. And then I really hope uh that um that not just a few, but a lot of exciting aquitech uh innovations will come uh to the market uh in in recent years, um in years to come, uh, because those are the in the innovations that that we need. It was really inspiring um to uh to meet some of the companies uh that that uh that invest and and and put put uh a lot of efforts into developing this stuff. Uh and that does give uh hope for for the rest of the sector. Um that uh well the livestock sector, I think, uh uh has come out on the other side of its long shadow. Um when I started working with uh with with climate and agriculture um some 13, 15 years uh years ago, um it was agriculture was not really on on the um, it was not really a topic uh that environmentalists cared about. Then it all flipped, and for some years it was as if uh agriculture was a bigger culprit than the oil industry. And of course, I mean now there's a rebalancing uh taking place, and and and agriculture uh uh is there and and and land use change is significant. So that's why that's actually why we need to pursue this agenda of sustainable intensification is exactly to make space uh for for land use uh reforms and land use change that that you know frees up space uh for for nature and biodiversity and sequestration. And I hope that that that will happen going forward. Louis, thank you very, very much.

Ash Sweeting 49:12

It was a pleasure. Thank you. Thank you for listening to the AshCloud. Please subscribe to AshCloud if you've enjoyed this podcast, where I will continue to discuss food sustainability with guests to bring a deep understanding of the environmental, political, and cultural challenges facing our society and creative ideas on how to address them.