Navigating Farm-Level Greenhouse Gas Assessments: Different perspectives, numbers and needs

This webinar presented research from the FOOTPRINT project, it explored the drivers of farm‑level greenhouse gas assessments, why they matter, and what farmers need in order to use them with confidence.

The project is working with 100 farmers across the UK, researchers across four nations, GHG calculator providers and industry partners, land management stakeholders to develop a scalable auditable process to sustainably and equitably reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The webinar brought together three expert speakers:

• Paul Burgess, Professor of Sustainable Agriculture and Agroforestry, Cranfield University
• Julie Ingram, Professor of Innovation for Sustainable Agriculture, CCRI, University of Gloucestershire
• Eleanor Durrant, Senior Learning Officer, Cool Farm Alliance

Paul set the scene by outlining the policy and governance landscape shaping farm‑level GHG accounting. He explained how the UK’s national Greenhouse Gas Inventory works, why agriculture’s share of emissions has become more visible, and how government, retailers and farmers each approach GHG reporting. He also introduced the aims of the LUNZ Footprint project and emphasised that current tools provide scientific assessments rather than direct measurements.

Eleanor explained how GHG calculators operate and why different tools answer different questions and therefore produce different results. She described the contrasts between whole‑farm and product‑level assessments, and the ongoing harmonisation work between Cool Farm, Agrecalc and Farm Carbon Toolkit. She also highlighted the role of the Living Lab, where shared data and farmer engagement are helping to improve transparency and comparability across tools.

Julie brought a social‑science perspective, focusing on learning, capacity and equity. She shared early findings from surveys and workshops with participating farmers and stakeholders, which revealed some tool confusion, confidence gaps in interpreting results, and concerns about compliance with supply chain reporting overrides the learning opportunities these tools offer to farmers to . Julie emphasised the importance of investing in people as well as tools, supporting interpretation, trust and broader farm‑system thinking.

Presentations were followed by a Q&A session where issues included:

• The policy, supply‑chain and farm‑level drivers behind GHG assessments
• Why calculators differ in methods, boundaries and treatment of removals
• The balance between compliance reporting and meaningful on‑farm learning and mitigation impact
• Early insights into farmer confidence, support needs and practical barriers
• The importance of transparency, consistent communication and wider sustainability outcomes