It is common sense to tax climate-damaging food and production
In Denmark, we are skilled at producing food, and Danish food is recognized abroad for high quality and safety. If we are to maintain that position, the food must be produced without harming the global climate and without destroying Danish nature.
The objectives for the climate are quite tangible. The agreement on the green transformation of Danish agriculture states that the agricultural and forestry sector must reduce CO2e emissions by 55-65 per cent. in 2030. The Climate Act states that, overall, Denmark must not emit greenhouse gases by 2050 at the latest. The current government will go further and reach it in 2045. But agriculture's CO2e emissions have largely been unchanged for the past 15 years.
The world's climate challenges must be solved. But so must our domestic natural crisis. Today, we cultivate so much of the land that traditional habitat types and native species die out – there is simply no room for them. At the same time, we find pesticides in the drinking water, just as nitrogen and phosphorus from the fields threaten the aquatic environment. In the fall, we saw it worst oxygen loss in 20 years with dead, barren seabeds as a result.
In order to meet the challenges, it is crucial that agriculture undergoes an in-depth green transition. Two decisive elements must go hand in hand: the production of more climate-friendly and fewer climate-damaging foods as well as a change in consumption patterns, where we as consumers prioritize climate-friendly foods. The political negotiations on a tax will start soon, and it is important that an agreement is reached that can solve the challenges.
The tax model that is ultimately agreed upon should ensure a real change in what, how and where we produce - for example fewer production animals in favor of more vegetables and pulses, wetting of the low-lying soils and larger natural areas.
A climate tax on agricultural production makes it attractive for the individual farmer to change his production in a climate-friendly direction. This applies regardless of whether the food is sold abroad or in Denmark. However, for the price of food, tax on production does not necessarily mean much. A production tax of DKK 750/ton CO2e will according to the think tank Concito only mean a price increase for Danish-produced beef of approx. 4 per cent. This corresponds to around DKK 2 for a pack of minced beef and will probably not change our eating habits much.
Therefore, there must also be a tax on climate-damaging foods, so that we shift consumption to more climate-friendly foods. The consumption tax also applies to imported food, which is otherwise not affected by a tax on Danish production. Such a tax will help to increase the demand for the climate-friendly foods, of which agriculture must adapt to produce more.
We decide for ourselves what we want to eat. But we must recognize that society today bears a large part of the costs of negative environmental and climate impacts, which are not included in the price of e.g. climate-heavy foods. A tax will change that dynamic and ensure that it is the polluter who pays.
The best tax model therefore combines a tax on production with a consumption tax on the most climate-damaging foods.


