Note: This post is excerpted from Legal Pathways To Deep Decarbonization In The United States: Summary and Key Recommendations (2018) Michael B. Gerrard and John C. Dernbach/Editors. Environmental Law Institute. Chapter 30: Agriculture, by Peter H. Lehner and Nathan A. Rosenberg.
—
[We note] that many of the practices recommended to reduce agriculture’s contribution to climate change also will make farms and ranches more resilient to extreme weather and often increase soil health, productivity, and profitability. There can thus be a confluence of interests supporting incentives for broader adoption of these practices.
Congress should prioritize funding for conservation programs that offer the greatest climate benefits, while reducing or eliminating funding that benefits environmentally harmful operations.
Congress should adopt a farm safety net focused on payments for ecosystem services (i.e., payment for improved stewardship and environmental benefits such as climate stabilization or water quality or quantity) in place of much or all of the current programs.
Congress should significantly expand funding to support climate friendly practices at all research and extension entities within USDA, including the Agricultural Research Service, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program, Climate Hubs, and the Cooperative State Research and Extension Service, in order to achieve carbon neutrality while maintaining crop and livestock productivity.
Congress should at a minimum double the extension system’s budget to $900 million, designating the additional funds for climate change related education, programming, and services.
The Risk Management Agency (RMA) should ensure that its crop insurance policies do not interfere with cover cropping or other proven decarbonizing practices or conversely encourage less beneficial practices.
The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) should require publicly funded crop insurance policies to treat GHG-intensive practices as risk enhancing and reduce or eliminate their premium subsidies accordingly.
Congress should expand funding for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), while also reforming CRP to provide sustained climate benefits by offering farmers 30-year agreements or permanent easements, targeting lands with the most significant climate-change mitigation and adaptation potential.
Congress should redirect Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) funds, to the extent possible, to support farms and ranches working to significantly reduce emissions or sequester carbon.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) should revise the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) to prioritize low-carbon practices and to create a funding pool for farmers transitioning to, or practicing, carbon farming.