AGRI

While current intensive agriculture and farming techniques cause damage to the environment, they also provide a livelihood to millions of farmers across Europe. What can the EU do to ensure a green transition and the safeguarding of nature while taking into account the livelihood of agricultural producers?

Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
Written by: Nicolas Vardon (SE)

Relevance of the Topic 

Just like the skin of our body protects us from life outside, the Earth’s topsoil is the coating that maintains all life underneath the earth’s surface. Since the 1850s when agricultural fertilisers were first developed, 50% of all topsoil has been lost due to human agricultural practices and erosion. This has had a detrimental effect on the quality of our earth’s soil, resulting in decreasing crop yields. Moreover, not only have the size of our harvests been decreasing but the quality and size of individual fruits and vegetables have shrunk due to worsening topsoil. Yet, the consequences of soil erosion and acidification are not limited to the loss of fertility but have also led to increased pollution, sedimentation1 in rivers and waterway clogging due to eutrophication2. Given that agricultural land makes up about 40% of Europe’s territory, the degradation of our soil should be looked at not just from an agricultural perspective, but also from an environmental and ecological perspective. Soil degradation has led to a staggering loss in biodiversity, with agriculture as its number one cause. However, attempts to limit this damage have required some Member States such as France, the Netherlands and Germany to take drastic steps. These steps have led to unrest in some Member States. With farmers at risk of losing their livelihoods, farmers in the Netherlands, especially those who use farming techniques most damaging to the environment and the ecosystems surrounding their farms, have caused months of unrest because of their government’s new legislation which aims to slash nitrogen production in half by 2030. With the agricultural industry providing a livelihood to 10.5 million farms and 44 million people across Europe, the sector plays an important role in the lives of many Europeans. One thing is clear, if we continue on our current path, our soil and therefore the ecosystem we live in will be irreparably damaged. However, with so many Europeans dependent on the agricultural sector for jobs and a way of life, a balance needs to be found. How can the EU save the environment while not destroying the rural way of life and leaving farmers jobless? What sort of balance should be found? 

Key Terms & Definitions

  • Food security: as defined by the United Nations (UN), this term refers to the ability to of having access to safe and nutritious food meeting dietary needs for an active and healthy life.
  • Topsoil: The upper layer of soil between 5 to 20 centimetres under the surface where nutrients are delivered to the plants and water is absorbed.
  • Ecosystem services: An ecosystem service is any positive benefit that wildlife or ecosystems provide to people. The benefits can be direct or indirect—small or large. Real-life examples include plants cleaning air and filtering water, bacteria decomposing organic waste and bees pollinating flowers.
  • Soil erosion: The gradual movement and transport of the upper layer of soil by different factors such as water, wind and mass movement, resulting in the deterioration of soil in the long term.
  • Intensive farming: Is a type of farming that relies on large amounts of resources and labour to increase production per unit area. It uses land, water and fertilisers to a large extent. It can be considered how economies of scale function in agriculture.
  • Soil acidification: The effect where soil Ph decreases over time, resulting in reduced fertility and crop quality.

Key Actors 

The Directorate-General (DG) for Environment (DG ENV): is the European Commission’s department responsible for developing, carrying out and doing follow-ups on the EU’s legislation and programmes on the environment. The DG’s main objectives are to protect the environment and biodiversity, minimise risks to human (and consumers) health, and promote the transition to a net zero-carbon emission3circular economy. It regularly consults civil dialogue groups to better shape its environmental policy. The Directorate-General also takes care of assessing its legislation as well as producing reports on and surveys on European citizens’ views on agriculture.

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB): is a group of 180 organisations working in the field of environmental protection and innovation. The EEB acts as an umbrella organisation whose aim is to give a strong voice in the EU and international processes to smaller NGOs. The organisation also has a record of working with trade unions and progressive industries to represent their opinion. This stakeholder should be considered as the civil population’s advocate as they voice their opinions and concerns.

The European Environment Agency (EEA): is an agency of the EU that supplies unbiased and independent information on the environment to the executive bodies of the EU. The EEA supplies data and indicators not only on the environment with information such as air pollution, biodiversity, land use and climate change but also on agriculture. This organisation is, in a sense, “the eyes” of policymaking.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): is a decentralised agency of the European Union which is responsible for communicating and providing scientific advice on existing and emerging food risks for the creation and adaptation of European legislation. Through cooperation with EU countries, international bodies and other stakeholders, it aims to boost the public’s trust in the EU’s food safety system. This stakeholder therefore mainly supports customers as it is mandated to look after their safety and health. 

Lastly, European Farmers: play a key role in the industry as they are the ones experiencing it. Their main priority is to sustain themselves and their families through the selling of their products. Maintaining their land’s health and fertility could be considered as something secondary as in the short run they are focused on bringing money home. It is nonetheless complicated for farmers to find the perfect balance between how intensely they should farm their land or not given the negative repercussions of intensive agriculture. In addition, it should be remembered that they play an important role in maintaining rural areas active by providing jobs and economic opportunities.

Key Conflicts

In an industry that has been revolutionised in recent years through the use of automation, independent machinery and chemicals, a common goal all stakeholders pursue is the ability to supply the food market continuously. This is one of the responsibilities and goals which is stated in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Nevertheless, this has always left the environment as a last priority for the biggest stakeholders. Given the size of the industry and its environmental repercussions on biodiversity, conflicts between the different parties arise.

The EU’s approach has repeatedly been questioned in recent years. This is because the main way politicians have been providing help to the sector is by allocating large sums of money to farmers for their living. Nevertheless, this approach can be considered to be not the most appropriate as it is aimed to provide farmers with a stable income rather than consider the environmental costs4 of their intensive farming. This essentially means that a greater focus is given to socioeconomic issues rather than the environment. Furthermore, when it comes to the EU’s goals related to social constraints and equity, studies have shown that there is a misallocation of financial resources within the subsidy system. For instance, the majority of the payments are given to regions practising intense agriculture causing the most environmental damage to their soil, rather than to lower-income farmers in poorer areas. This does not follow the Commission’s approach of harmonising and creating solutions for Member States.

Another important point of view to consider is the farmers’ and the food companies’ situation. Farmers aim to maximise their production in terms of numbers and revenue. This pushes them to use chemical fertilisers to boost their production in the short term, but negatively affects the quality of their crops and land in the long term as explained earlier. The use of chemicals in agriculture is seen as a sensitive topic for them, as 80% of farmers admit that the adoption of sustainable and greener farming practices is driven by consumer demand, and only 46% of them believe that it will have a positive impact. With the quantity of fertiliser used in the industry staying high, there is no indication of any farmer-led initiatives to proactively transform their business model. Furthermore, this lack of anticipation regarding the soil’s health could soon have global negative spillover effects as with soil losing its ability to store carbon dioxide, GHG emissions would rise even further.

Last but not least, the opinion of consumers is crucial. With food being a necessity good5, it will be consumed either way. The population has high environmental and quality expectations of the other two actors mentioned in this section. Research shows, 94% of Europeans think it is important to safeguard our environment. This should be kept in mind as ultimately, the possible consequences could have a tremendous impact on our citizens.

Measures in place

Adopted by the EU in 2020, The European Green Deal aims to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. That means that in the next 27 years the EU wants to reach net zero emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050 in every sector of each Member State. This EUR 1.8 trillion million project touches on very broad areas such as climate, environment, energy, transport as well as agriculture. This initiative is also important for farmers as it, among other things, provides a budget for subsidies related to their activity. Bearing in mind our aim statement for this AGRI committee, this measure is mainly related to the “green transition” and “safeguarding of nature” we are looking to expand on in the resolution we will produce.

The Common Agricultural Policy is a partnership between Europe and its farmers, which was first implemented 60 years ago by the ministers of the 6 founding countries of the EU. It aims to increase productivity whilst ensuring food security and providing fair living standards to farmers. Unlike the first measure stated above, this one focuses more on social, financial and economic matters of the topic. Subsidies are again of focus here, but labour force demographics, geographical economic constraints and market decentralisation are what make this measure relevant to our research. 

National Policies play an important role in the diplomatic talks held within the EU. As governments’ goals and views are pretty volatile in the short term, it is difficult for the EU to implement a common approach to the issue. Different countries have different environmental goals, such as the Netherlands wanting to reduce Nitrogen emissions by 50% by 2030 and France reducing their Nitrogen emissions by 15%. It is indeed complicated to come up with a common approach as countries’ size, geographical location, workforce and economic interests differ.

The General Food Law contains general principles, framework and requirements that were implemented by the European Commission at a Union level following a series of food incidents in the 1990s. This policy englobes the Farm to Fork strategy which, as the European Green deal, aims to make food systems fair, healthy, and environmentally friendly. An example of a requirement implemented by the European Commission would be the mandatory use of eco-labels on ecological food products.

Food for thought

Ultimately if this issue is still present, it means that the current implemented system does not fulfil its expectations. It is therefore completely legitimate to question it and consider different points of view. How can new environmentally and ecologically friendly ways of farming be implemented in the short term while still being able to supply the amount of food needed? Should the EU proactively look at ways of healing the damaged areas of soil or rather focus on harmless farming methods? Should current farmers be held accountable for the damage they’ve caused to the environment? Should the European Union prioritise some stakeholders more than others given the current political, economic and environmental situation? Has the EU allocated enough resources to the issue? How can the EU act proactively towards new and young farmers when it comes to their business model and farming practices? Ultimately, what solutions should be considered as appropriate in order to unravel the long-term environmental threat that soil degradation presents to our ecosystems?

Links

  • Briefing on the current Agricultural situation in the EU” (2020) – A detailed piece of text, filled with interesting and valuable information regarding agriculture in the EU. 
  • Rotten” (2019) – A Netflix series focusing on the food supply chain and the issues it hides. Not only EU- based, but gives a more worldwide approach to the issue.
  • Tomorrow” (2015) – A movie which effectively analyses how specific industrial domains should be modified to fit the world of tomorrow. There is an interesting section on agriculture.
  • Can we create the “perfect” farm?” (2020) – A short Ted-ed video on the evolution of farming and its effect on the environment.
  1. Sedimentation: The deposition of rocks, organic matter and soil that has been eroded that has been transported by water, wind, air or gravity.
  2. Eutrophication: When the environment becomes too enriched with nutrients resulting in a toxic environment with overgrowth of plants and algae.
  3. When the same amount of CO2 that is emitted is absorbed by the environment.
  4. Environmental costs: are costs that are connected with the actual or planned deterioration of natural assets due to human’s economic activities.
  5. Necessity goods: are goods whose demand is not dependent on price, meaning that demand will remain the same regardless of price fluctuations.