Webinar: Decoding new EU AgFood policies for Scope 3 programmes

The 6 Harvests webinar series delves into the critical strategies for scaling regenerative agriculture programmes to meet net-zero goals. Join industry leaders from the AgFood & Beverage sector at the forefront of the Regen Ag transition as they share insights on reducing land-based emissions and enhancing supply chain resilience.
‍

Episode 1: Decoding New EU AgFood Policies for Scope 3 Programs
‍

In our first session, we’ll be joined by policy makers shaping the agfood landscape at the EU level. This episode will help you understand the complexities of evolving regulations and their direct impact on your Scope 3 emissions strategies.
‍

As an AgFood & Beverage company, the conversation will help you answer your most pressing questions:
‍

• What are the primary goals of the new EU agfood regulations?
• How will these policies drive the transition to a net-zero agfood sector?
• As an ag food corporate, what are the critical deadlines and regulatory risks I should have in mind?
• How do these changes affect our Scope 3 roadmap?
• What potential challenges should we anticipate, and how can we proactively address them?
• What are the best practices for initiating or accelerating regenerative agriculture programs in light of the new regulations.
‍

Speakers:
‍

➡️ Valeria Forlin Deputy, Head of Unit for Land Use at DG CLIMA (European Commission)

➡️ Léna Girard, Manager, Agriculture & Economic Affairs at FoodDrinkEurope

➡️ Delphine de Brogniez, Director of EU Strategy at Regrow Ag

➡️ Andrew Voysey, Chief Impact Officer at Soil Capital

‍

Event details:
‍

📆 Wednesday, 13th November

🕦 11:00 CET  |  10:00 GMT

🗣 English

🌐 Online

💰 Free


Q&A Summary:
‍

How will the CRCF account for different farming types, climates, and landscapes across the EU? Is it a one-size-fits-all approach, or will there be room for national authorities or local datasets (e.g., models) to enhance the integrity of certificates?

There isn’t a single model that works universally across Europe. Models must be calibrated to suit specific soil and climate conditions. To address this, a set of criteria has been established to ensure the quality of both the models and the sampling approaches used. These criteria must be clearly defined and validated, providing a reliable framework for certification schemes. The next step will involve determining who will oversee the validation process.

For retailers or processors reporting under the CSRD, does this include negative impacts like biodiversity loss and water use from farmers? In other words, does it cover Scope 3 emissions?

Yes, Scope 3 emissions, by definition, include the emissions from suppliers as well as the impacts of products on consumers. This means that field-level impacts, such as biodiversity loss and water use, must be incorporated into reporting. While this requirement is challenging, it is mandatory.

The CSRD addresses negative impacts with the aim of promoting active disclosure. Over time, improved performance in reducing these impacts is expected to be rewarded through market mechanisms, such as recognition from investors and other stakeholders.

Do the new EU Scope 3 emission policies include measures to prevent carbon leakage by companies operating both inside and outside the EU, who might shift production abroad to avoid compliance?

There are currently no specific policies targeting Scope 3 emission reductions; the discussion is still in the exploratory stage. However, if such policies were implemented, carbon leakage would need to be addressed. In the past, under the ETS, free allowances were granted to sectors particularly exposed to trade impacts. This approach is being phased out as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is introduced.

The European Commission is also examining policies such as an Agricultural ETS and other tools. Maintaining global competitiveness is a key consideration as these options are developed.

When we talk about Scope 3 emissions, how should "within value chain emissions" be defined? Should the boundary extend beyond in-situ emissions?

The CRCF methodology aims to address both direct and indirect effects, such as indirect land-use change. Setting the boundary is complex and can vary—whether focusing on the crop level under carbon farming or regenerative practices, or extending to the entire farm level, including non-agricultural land managed by the farmer. Each option has different implications, and expert consultation is ongoing to evaluate these boundaries.

The methodology, which will be published within a year, could serve as an initial standard to clarify these definitions.

Current regulations provide very little guidance on Scope 3 emissions, leaving a significant gap in addressing these comprehensively. In forums on the voluntary sector, similar questions are being examined. The GHG Protocol Guidance is reviewing the scope boundaries, with indications that the definition may extend beyond the field itself. Final guidance from the GHG Protocol’s Land Sector and Removals Guidance (LSRG) is expected in the coming months.

Watch the webinar: