Following discussions between agricultural representatives at the recent Copenhagen climate change talks, a communique was drafted by the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) arguing that "the specificity of the agricultural sector has to be recognised".

Jed Matz, policy director for Cattle Council of Australia (CCA), was involved in the discussions at Copenhagen.

"We're looking for different treatment for agriculture, because it is different from the energy sector and needs different rules," Mr Matz said.

"Australian cattle producers want to contribute to positive solutions on climate change. What we’re saying is, don't hamstring our ability to operate in the export market."

The wording of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) legislation before the Senate suggests that Australian beef exports will be compromised by the scheme, Mr Matz said.

"The current design will be a massive impost on industry, and provides no incentives to improve our emissions profile."

Internationally, Australia and New Zealand appear to be unique in their approach to agriculture and emissions trading.

"All of the countries we spoke to were surprised, even astounded, that Australian and New Zealand were considering capping agricultural production through emissions trading," said Mr Matz.

"As far as they were concerned, it was detrimental to be tampering with the food supply chain. The European countries remember what it’s like not to have food."

The IFAP communique was handed to the Danish Minister for Climate Change, who is chairing the Copenhagen meeting in December.

The document made a case for separate treatment of agricultural emissions, noting that "the origin, monitoring and reporting of emissions from agricultural land is inherently different from those associated with fossil fuels".

"Agriculture cannot compete with other sectors in terms of cost-efficiency in reducing GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions, unless its carbon sequestration and displacement potential are recognised."