Mastodawn

An Austrian farmer cuts a steep alpine meadow by hand once a year — late, after the wildflowers set seed. Too steep for machinery. She has been paid for that by the government since 1993.

Not as charity. As compensation for managing a landscape that holds water, carbon, pollinators, and tourists in the valley.

Australia calls its 2% farm subsidy rate a point of pride.

New piece, with economist Leanne Ussher, on 30 years of European ecosystem payments — and what the "efficient" alternative actually costs:
https://growgood.org.au/en/blog/ecosystem-services-eu-vs-au/

Toot 1/3

Paying for What Lasts

GrowGood is a farm management system for a better food future.

Show thread

Leo Gaggl 3d ago

Austria: 74% of farms in ÖPUL. 89% of agricultural area. 210,000 ha of biodiversity maintained.
Switzerland: result-based payments — for *what the land becomes*, not just what the farmer did.
Italy: payment levels set from the actual ecological value provided.

Australia: soil eroding at 5× the natural formation rate. Herbicide spend up 65% in a decade. Biodiversity stewardship funding cut to $18M nationally — down from $27.9M the year prior.

Toot 2/3

Show thread

Leo Gaggl

The root problem is accounting. You cannot compensate for what the ledger does not record.

We are building that ledger: ecological events — soil carbon, pollination, water quality, biodiversity — in the same data structure as farm economics. Open standards. Auditable. Portable.

Not because better software fixes the politics. But because once the data exists, the question gets harder to avoid.

@growgood.org.au #RegenerativeAgriculture #EcosystemServices #AgriculturalPolicy #AgTech