Finland pays €1.9 billion in farm subsidies despite unchanged emissions

Finland distributes about €1.9 billion in agricultural subsidies each year, but the payments have not reduced emissions from farming, Yle reports. Agriculture produces almost one third of Finland’s emissions.

For 27-year-old farmer Topi Maanela, around one third of his income comes from subsidies. He officially took over his childhood farm for the third summer this year.

In mid-August, the rye fields at the farm in Mäntsälä had been harvested. Green plants sown in spring were emerging among the stubble. The plants protect the soil over winter, and Maanela receives €40 per hectare for maintaining vegetation cover during the cold season.

However, the requirements would also be met by simply cutting the stubble. Farmers can receive the additional subsidy as long as they do not plough the field before winter.

Maanela considers living clover and chicory a better option. During the autumn, the plants have a couple of months to photosynthesise, retain nutrients, loosen the soil and flower. They also provide better protection against the weather during winter.

The example reflects a wider problem in agriculture, according to Yle. When farmers want to benefit the environment, they often do so despite the rules rather than because of them.

Most subsidies are based on acreage

Part of Finland’s agricultural subsidy pot comes from the European Union, but Finland pays slightly more than half of the total itself.

The subsidies were designed to keep food prices low across the EU. Finland pays particularly large amounts because production in northern conditions would not survive on its own. The money is also intended to support self-sufficiency and keep rural areas inhabited.

Environmental targets are included, but they have not been prioritised when the funds are distributed. Most subsidies are paid according to the size of a farmer’s fields or the measures carried out. The impact of those measures matters less.

The subsidies are also not directed towards the actions that would have the greatest environmental impact.

Nearly nine out of 10 farmers receive compensation for environmental work. In practice, however, environmental subsidies function much like any other payments that increase farmers’ incomes. That is the conclusion of a report published this summer by the Kalevi Sorsa Foundation, according to Yle.

The European Union is currently drawing up the outlines of its subsidy policy for the coming years. Finland is also preparing to distribute the funds for the next period, which begins in 2028.

Researchers and reports give a short answer to the question of how the money should be distributed to meet environmental targets: not in the current way.

Improving the soil

Maanela and his partner, Elina Tuiskunen, are both 27 and plan to continue developing their two family farms on the border between Mäntsälä and Orimattila until retirement. Their aim is to ensure that the farms continue producing crops long after them.

When Maanela was a baby, there were still cows at the farm. He remembers them only from photographs. After the cows were gone, the fields were used to grow grain for about 20 years.

Maanela says this depleted the soil, and he now wants to bring it back to life. Healthy soil can withstand drought and heavy rain, and it does not require as much fertiliser.

The farming couple say that soil health is their main focus. Maanela now rotates the crops he grows and avoids leaving the soil bare. Plants such as clover bind nitrogen in the soil, supporting plant growth.

In summers when a field is used only for grass, there is no grain harvest. On the other hand, grass means less fertiliser is needed, saving both time and money. Maanela says the balance has worked for him.

He wants to gradually eliminate artificial fertilisers altogether. They are expensive, and some of them run off fields into waterways. Ammonia, the key raw material for nitrogen fertiliser, is also still transported from Russia.

Farmers want rewards for results

Environmental subsidies are useful to Maanela. They currently help him spread recycled fibre on the fields, build a slurry tank and sow plants that capture nutrients.

However, he says farmers could also cut costs on seeds if they did not care about the result. The field would then be about as lush as a driveway, he says.

If farmers do not already have the motivation themselves, the complicated subsidy system can seem intimidating, Maanela says.

“The motivation has to come from somewhere completely different,” he says.

He hopes policymakers will set clear targets.