More carrot than stick, more money than controls. This is what the representatives of the European Union’s agri-food sector are asking of Brussels. Their wishes are summarized in a strategic document presented on September 4 and delivered directly into the hands of the President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen. After the violent protests of farmers based on manure and burning tires, which reached the heart of the European capital, the European executive had taken several steps back, especially in terms of environmental constraints.
To find a compromise and put an end to the tug-of-war, von der Leyen has entrusted German professor Peter Strohschneider with the task of drawing up an action plan in consultation with large and small producers, scientists, NGOs, financial and consumer organizations. It is not a plan that the Commission will fully adopt, but Strohschneider will most likely have an advisory role, which means that the work he started will not end here.
The requests
The rural sector is asking for adequate remuneration, greater recognition in the food production chain but above all economic incentives to contribute to environmental sustainability. The key word repeated several times by von der Leyen is “trust” towards farmers, the same ones who have challenged the European institutions on several occasions, taking to the streets both in individual Member States and entering the heart of the European institutions.
Trust translates into simple terms in the promise to reduce both controls and bureaucracy. “The agricultural community is among the first victims of these crises, but at the same time the sector has many solutions to mitigate or sometimes even reverse the effects,” the German politician recalled. Food producers are asking for fewer constraints in having to demonstrate their concrete commitment to the energy transition and are aiming to receive specific funds, outside the Common Agricultural Policy, to devote themselves to production practices that have a lesser impact on nature.
Although Professor Strohschneider has repeatedly spoken of a “broad consensus” on the recommendations and measures requested, serious doubts remain. Even the previous CAP reform, the one developed in the name of the Green Deal and environmental protection, had received unanimous consensus, only to then witness a strategic retreat by the agricultural unions of Copa-Cogeca, which then resulted in the demonstrations of recent months.
Where does the Future of Agriculture report come from?
While the European quarter was filled with tractors and angry farmers, with statues torn down and manure thrown into the streets, Ursula von der Leyen announced a meeting in which the main organizations with an interest in the agri-food sector (from Copa-Cogeca to Greenpeace and Slow Food) would participate to formulate shared recommendations. “The Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture” immediately appeared as a move to buy time and breathe from the growing pressure of the agricultural sector a few months before the European elections.
The European executive also quickly offered concessions to the agricultural lobbies, gathered under the umbrella of Copa-Cogeca, by eliminating some environmental restrictions. Meanwhile, the bill on the reduction of pesticides was miserably shipwrecked.
The main recommendations from the agricultural world
Now 110 pages of recommendations have been delivered to von der Leyen, who promises to make them the basis for a new agri-food strategy to be presented within the first 100 days of her second mandate at the helm of the EU. The final report, divided into ten guiding principles and 14 recommendations, presses European decision-makers especially on two issues: fair income for farmers and the incentives needed to achieve the ecological transition of the rural sector, considered essential, but also particularly costly in a period shaken by inflation and the prolonged impact of the war in Ukraine.
EU aid for agriculture to consortia and large companies: only crumbs for small farmers
At the heart of the demands is the definition of the Common Agricultural Policy. One of the main recommendations calls for direct support to be given to farmers “who need it most”, rather than linking subsidies to the number of hectares owned or to compliance with environmental standards.
New criteria should therefore be introduced in view of the definition of the CAP 2028-2035. Thanks to this new targeted support, the report states, it will be possible to “prevent the abandonment of agricultural holdings and help guarantee farmers a decent income”. The measure should offer support especially to small businesses, young farmers, new entrants to the sector and those operating “in areas subject to natural constraints”.
The Temporary Transition Fund
Another key point concerns the establishment of a special fund, called “Temporary Transition Fund”, which draws on resources in addition to those provided for by the CAP, to accompany the challenges of the transition. More money therefore, connected to the specific requests in terms of sustainability. However, it is not specified how to finance it. On this point, the report simply specifies that the fund “should provide one-off investment support (in the form of loans or grants) to farmers and other actors in the food system for their transition”, including not only material investments but also the building of specific skills.
Still on the subject of funding, the authors of the report call for cooperation between the public and private sectors “to better mobilize capital for projects that enable small and large farmers and food system stakeholders to transition to sustainable practices and systems”.
Among the forms of cooperation, partnerships with private banks and investment promotion banks are mentioned, as well as an involvement of the European Investment Bank. Another specific request concerns credit protection. In a period of high risks linked to both climate change and the unstable geopolitical situation, “a dedicated pan-European EU financing platform, supported by national and EU authorities, national banks, banks and insurance companies” is requested.
Specific resources for nature restoration
Another key point regarding funding concerns the establishment of a specific fund for nature restoration, which is equipped with “adequate resources” in addition to those already provided for by the CAP “to support farmers and other land managers in restoring and managing natural habitats at landscape level. To achieve the objectives of biodiversity protection, without affecting the productivity and competitiveness of the agricultural world, “a dedicated and proportionate budget is needed that meets all ambitions in a balanced and equal way”, write the authors of the report.
Another area of interest is labeling. After the furious battle against Nutriscore, led by Italy, the request to the European Commission to review the continental system of agri-food labels to guarantee consumers “reliable, complete, valid information throughout the EU”, and that it is easily accessible and understandable, is re-proposed.
In terms of trade negotiations, see Mercosur (the highly contested agreement with some South American countries), the EU executive is asked to “better recognize the strategic importance of agriculture and food products in trade negotiations”, conducting “impact assessments” before starting agreements. Doubts remain in the agricultural world on the system of trading emissions quotas.
“While acknowledging the need for an ambitious policy, the Strategic Dialogue considers it premature to draw firm conclusions on a potential future emissions trading system for agriculture and calls on the European Commission to further engage with stakeholders and experts to assess the feasibility and relevance of such a system,” the report reads.
