Author: Krystyna Springer
The report examines the potential for emission reductions in EU agriculture by reviewing a selection of modelling scenarios and assessing variations in residual emissions across pathways, their composition by sub-sector and emission source, and the scenario characteristics driving these differences.
As the EU policy debate turns toward defining the next milestones on the path to climate neutrality by 2050, there is growing practical urgency around clarifying the roles of different sectors in the mitigation effort and their respective contributions to residual emissions at the point of climate neutrality.
Against this background, this report looks at the potential for emission reductions in EU agriculture – a sector commonly referred to as “hard-to-abate” and expected to become the largest contributor to residual emissions.
The report reviews a selection of scenarios for the EU agricultural sector, which adopt different analytical approaches and assumptions to envision its transformation by mid-century. It assesses variations in residual emissions across pathways, their composition by sub-sector and emission source, and the scenario characteristics driving these differences. The focus is on the three largest emission sources: livestock enteric fermentation, manure management, and nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural soils.
The examined scenarios reveal a wide range of possible outcomes, with residual emissions in 2045–2050 ranging from 150 Mt CO₂e to 275 Mt CO₂e, representing 59% and 25% reductions, respectively, relative to 2023 levels.
Scenarios that combine a shift away from animal protein with the rollout of mitigation technologies achieve the most ambitious emission reductions. These pathways also support global mitigation by reducing carbon leakage and improving the EU’s trade balance. By contrast, scenarios without a significant demand shift show modest leakage and a weaker trade balance in the absence of measures such as a carbon border adjustment mechanism.
Most scenarios model the adoption of mitigation technologies, showing that technology can play a key role in reducing emissions, though uncertainties remain about scalability and trade-offs. Uptake levels are driven mainly by implementation costs and the assumed carbon price – ranging from EUR 100 to EUR 470 per tonne of CO₂e across the analysed scenarios. In crop production, nitrification inhibitors in fertiliser use consistently emerge as the main driver of reductions, while in livestock, 3-NOP feed additives and anaerobic digestion show the highest potential. However, these technologies often rely on more intensive production systems, which can conflict with other sustainability goals.
Nearly all scenarios project a decline in animal-source food production and smaller livestock herds, though the extent of these shifts varies. Differences in environmental priorities shape the balance between ruminant and non-ruminant livestock, yet overall herd reductions consistently help reduce pollution and ease pressure on land and ecosystems. Outcomes for crop production vary more widely: under supportive market and policy conditions, output can remain stable or even increase, particularly for permanent and nitrogen-fixing crops. However, while the models account for some climate change effects on agricultural yields, they do not fully capture additional warming, the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, or the complex interactions between climate mitigation and adaptation measures.
The analysed scenarios do not provide significant detail or insight on the socio-economic impacts of the modelled reductions and their distribution, and thus cannot be used to draw detailed conclusions on these aspects. Nevertheless, all scenarios assume the application of a carbon price, implying transition costs that will ultimately have to be borne either by agri-food value chain actors or the public budget.
Photo by Tom De Decker on Unsplash
