Barking up the Wrong Pine Tree? What the Paris Agreement Really Means for New Zealand Farming
Should New Zealand join Libya, Iran, and the United States as one of the few countries outside the Paris Agreement?
Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand pledges to cut emissions across the economy. That includes reducing methane by 10% by 2030 and by 24–47% by 2050.
But here’s the key point: Paris doesn’t tell New Zealand farmers what to do. It sets the destination, not the pathway. The policies and rules that affect agriculture are designed here at home.
Nearly half our emissions come from farming, so agriculture will always be part of the story. But Paris doesn’t prescribe emissions pricing, pine trees, or farm-level rules. Those are New Zealand decisions.
Right now, there are no Paris-driven requirements forcing farm-level emission cuts. Instead, when we signed the Agreement, politicians decided to rely heavily on carbon offsets in pine forests as part of our “reduction” plan.
That choice, and its devastating consequences for rural communities, are entirely our own.
We’re barking up the wrong pine tree by blaming Paris.
So what’s at stake? Leaving Paris would risk $4 billion of agri-food exports to the EU annually and the broader trade deals we rely on. Not to mention, leaving would affect all industries, not just agriculture.
Our green reputation, Pacific partnerships, and access to investment are also on the line. The question we should be asking is: what tangible benefit would New Zealand gain from leaving Paris? The answer is potentially nothing.
It’s not just governments that care. Many of our biggest customers such as Nestlé, Mars, and Tesco are increasingly demanding Paris-aligned action. Leaving the Agreement wouldn’t change their expectations.
Farmers are right to challenge the fairness and design of domestic policies. But quitting Paris won’t fix those problems. It would only weaken our markets, our reputation, and our ability to shape practical solutions.
The Paris Agreement is a shared vision of where the world is heading. Climate change is reshaping global markets. The real debate is about how New Zealand meets commitments in a way that works for farmers.
Agriculture can be part of the solution. The issue isn’t the Paris Agreement itself, it’s that we are focusing all our attention on the agreement rather than smarter, science-based policies. These hold the potential to unlock practical pathways that reduce emissions while strengthening rural economies to keep New Zealand farmers competitive, resilient, and proud on the world stage.
Barking up the Wrong Pine Tree? What the Paris Agreement Really Means for New Zealand Farming
Should New Zealand join Libya, Iran, and the United States as one of the few countries outside the Paris Agreement?
Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand pledges to cut emissions across the economy. That includes reducing methane by 10% by 2030 and by 24–47% by 2050.
But here’s the key point: Paris doesn’t tell New Zealand farmers what to do. It sets the destination, not the pathway. The policies and rules that affect agriculture are designed here at home.
Nearly half our emissions come from farming, so agriculture will always be part of the story. But Paris doesn’t prescribe emissions pricing, pine trees, or farm-level rules. Those are New Zealand decisions.
Right now, there are no Paris-driven requirements forcing farm-level emission cuts. Instead, when we signed the Agreement, politicians decided to rely heavily on carbon offsets in pine forests as part of our “reduction” plan.
That choice, and its devastating consequences for rural communities, are entirely our own.
We’re barking up the wrong pine tree by blaming Paris.
So what’s at stake? Leaving Paris would risk $4 billion of agri-food exports to the EU annually and the broader trade deals we rely on. Not to mention, leaving would affect all industries, not just agriculture.
Our green reputation, Pacific partnerships, and access to investment are also on the line. The question we should be asking is: what tangible benefit would New Zealand gain from leaving Paris? The answer is potentially nothing.
It’s not just governments that care. Many of our biggest customers such as Nestlé, Mars, and Tesco are increasingly demanding Paris-aligned action. Leaving the Agreement wouldn’t change their expectations.
Farmers are right to challenge the fairness and design of domestic policies. But quitting Paris won’t fix those problems. It would only weaken our markets, our reputation, and our ability to shape practical solutions.
The Paris Agreement is a shared vision of where the world is heading. Climate change is reshaping global markets. The real debate is about how New Zealand meets commitments in a way that works for farmers.
Agriculture can be part of the solution. The issue isn’t the Paris Agreement itself, it’s that we are focusing all our attention on the agreement rather than smarter, science-based policies. These hold the potential to unlock practical pathways that reduce emissions while strengthening rural economies to keep New Zealand farmers competitive, resilient, and proud on the world stage.
Barking up the Wrong Pine Tree? What the Paris Agreement Really Means for New Zealand Farming
Should New Zealand join Libya, Iran, and the United States as one of the few countries outside the Paris Agreement?
Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand pledges to cut emissions across the economy. That includes reducing methane by 10% by 2030 and by 24–47% by 2050.
But here’s the key point: Paris doesn’t tell New Zealand farmers what to do. It sets the destination, not the pathway. The policies and rules that affect agriculture are designed here at home.
Nearly half our emissions come from farming, so agriculture will always be part of the story. But Paris doesn’t prescribe emissions pricing, pine trees, or farm-level rules. Those are New Zealand decisions.
Right now, there are no Paris-driven requirements forcing farm-level emission cuts. Instead, when we signed the Agreement, politicians decided to rely heavily on carbon offsets in pine forests as part of our “reduction” plan.
That choice, and its devastating consequences for rural communities, are entirely our own.
We’re barking up the wrong pine tree by blaming Paris.
So what’s at stake? Leaving Paris would risk $4 billion of agri-food exports to the EU annually and the broader trade deals we rely on. Not to mention, leaving would affect all industries, not just agriculture.
Our green reputation, Pacific partnerships, and access to investment are also on the line. The question we should be asking is: what tangible benefit would New Zealand gain from leaving Paris? The answer is potentially nothing.
It’s not just governments that care. Many of our biggest customers such as Nestlé, Mars, and Tesco are increasingly demanding Paris-aligned action. Leaving the Agreement wouldn’t change their expectations.
Farmers are right to challenge the fairness and design of domestic policies. But quitting Paris won’t fix those problems. It would only weaken our markets, our reputation, and our ability to shape practical solutions.
The Paris Agreement is a shared vision of where the world is heading. Climate change is reshaping global markets. The real debate is about how New Zealand meets commitments in a way that works for farmers.
Agriculture can be part of the solution. The issue isn’t the Paris Agreement itself, it’s that we are focusing all our attention on the agreement rather than smarter, science-based policies. These hold the potential to unlock practical pathways that reduce emissions while strengthening rural economies to keep New Zealand farmers competitive, resilient, and proud on the world stage.
Barking up the Wrong Pine Tree? What the Paris Agreement Really Means for New Zealand Farming
Should New Zealand join Libya, Iran, and the United States as one of the few countries outside the Paris Agreement?
Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand pledges to cut emissions across the economy. That includes reducing methane by 10% by 2030 and by 24–47% by 2050.
But here’s the key point: Paris doesn’t tell New Zealand farmers what to do. It sets the destination, not the pathway. The policies and rules that affect agriculture are designed here at home.
Nearly half our emissions come from farming, so agriculture will always be part of the story. But Paris doesn’t prescribe emissions pricing, pine trees, or farm-level rules. Those are New Zealand decisions.
Right now, there are no Paris-driven requirements forcing farm-level emission cuts. Instead, when we signed the Agreement, politicians decided to rely heavily on carbon offsets in pine forests as part of our “reduction” plan.
That choice, and its devastating consequences for rural communities, are entirely our own.
We’re barking up the wrong pine tree by blaming Paris.
So what’s at stake? Leaving Paris would risk $4 billion of agri-food exports to the EU annually and the broader trade deals we rely on. Not to mention, leaving would affect all industries, not just agriculture.
Our green reputation, Pacific partnerships, and access to investment are also on the line. The question we should be asking is: what tangible benefit would New Zealand gain from leaving Paris? The answer is potentially nothing.
It’s not just governments that care. Many of our biggest customers such as Nestlé, Mars, and Tesco are increasingly demanding Paris-aligned action. Leaving the Agreement wouldn’t change their expectations.
Farmers are right to challenge the fairness and design of domestic policies. But quitting Paris won’t fix those problems. It would only weaken our markets, our reputation, and our ability to shape practical solutions.
The Paris Agreement is a shared vision of where the world is heading. Climate change is reshaping global markets. The real debate is about how New Zealand meets commitments in a way that works for farmers.
Agriculture can be part of the solution. The issue isn’t the Paris Agreement itself, it’s that we are focusing all our attention on the agreement rather than smarter, science-based policies. These hold the potential to unlock practical pathways that reduce emissions while strengthening rural economies to keep New Zealand farmers competitive, resilient, and proud on the world stage.
Barking up the Wrong Pine Tree? What the Paris Agreement Really Means for New Zealand Farming
Interested in our Merino Wool?
Please get in touch we would love to hear from you!