Relevant Matter
Matters involving public funds
Public Policy Area
Finance
Period
1 Jan, 2017 to 30 Apr, 2017
Specific Details
IFA Proposal for Evaluation of benefit for Minor Works Flooding Schemes on Irish Farm Land
Intended results
Given the increased recurrence and severity of flooding, IFA wants the cost-benefit analysis for the assessment of flood defense work on farmland to be updated to provide a more accurate assessment of losses
That a new methodology is introduced, which values the output of farmland appropriately, and which recognises the medium to long-term benefits arising from flood risk management works.
That the guidelines in a report 'A Common Framework of Flood Risk Management Cost benefit Analysis Features' that flood risk management for agricultural land can facilitate agricultural production where otherwise it would be impeded by either saturated soils or surface inundation, and outlines the method for assessing agricultural benefits through a series of steps. These are:
Step 1: Defining the benefit area This identifies the total area that is liable to flooding, and hence the benefit area of any flood risk management intervention
Step 2: Defining agricultural productivity This step attempts to put a value on the productivity of the affected land, through the measurement of crop yields or the value of livestock output per hectare.
Step 3: Defining the impacts of flooding The impact of the flooding is informed by issues such as the following: • Frequency of occurrence (including the chance of multiple floods per year) • Seasonality (especially the distinction between winter and summer floods) • Duration (from a few days to one or more weeks) • Depth of flooding (as this affects damage to crops and livestock) • Water quality (including contamination, sedimentation and salinity)
• Soil damage (including compaction and including compaction and erosion risk, loss of soil biota) • Carryover effects (chance of crop recovery, impacts on yields in subsequent years)
Step 4: Expressing any difference in monetary values Finally, this step puts a monetary value on the benefit arising from undertaking the flood risk management work. The guidelines state that the monetary value of changes in flood risk management standards can be determined using the accounting conventions of gross margins, fixed costs and net margins, expressed either per hectare (ha) or for a farm as a whole .
To ensure that direct payments and other subsidies are included in the overall benefits assessment, as farmland on which agricultural activity cannot take place, due to flooding, is not deemed eligible for activation of a Basic Payment entitlement.
To ensure that the benefits to farmland arising from a flood risk management investment should be calculated over a medium-term timeframe. In the OPW guidelines on flooding, the timeframe on which benefits for larger scale projects are assessed is 50 years – which could equally be applied to the benefits assessment for the Minor Works scheme.
To ensure flood risk management works are viewed with the same medium-term timeframe as land drainage. The estimate of benefits arising from flood risk management works should be based upon a percentage of additional Gross Margin earned over a medium term time period (that is, Gross Margin that is not lost, due to flooding damage).
To ensure that where farm buildings are flooded, these should be separately valued to the farmland. The current OPW guideline for the valuation of commercial buildings is €10,000 per building. IFA believes that this valuation should also be applied to farm buildings.
Name of person primarily responsible for lobbying on this activity
Padraig Joyce IFA Floods Chairman and Gerry Gunning IFA Rural Development Executive
Did any Designated Public Official(DPO) or former Designated Public Official(DPO) carry out lobbying activities on your behalf in relation to this return? You must include yourself, and answer Yes, if you are a current DPO or a DPO at any time in the past. (What is a Designated Public Official?)
No
Did you manage or direct a grassroots campaign?
No
Was this lobbying done on behalf of a client?
No
Lobbying activity
The following activities occurred for this specific Subject Matter Area.
Designated public officials lobbied
The following DPOs were lobbied during this return period on this specific Subject Matter Area. These DPOs were involved in at least one of the Lobbying Activities listed above, but not necessarily all of them.
As returns are specific to a Subject Matter Area the above Lobbying Activities may be associated with multiple returns.
Sean Canney
Minister of State (Department of Public Expenditure and Reform)
Kevin "Boxer" Moran
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)