The need for a paradigm shift and the difficulty of finding the right balance between the future economic performance of agriculture, the added value of a sustainable food policy and environmental requirements was again highlighted, on Thursday 4 February, during a public hearing in the European Parliament on the EU’s ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy.
The floor was given to the experts, at the second joint meeting of the Committees on Environment (ENVI) and Agriculture (AGRI) to add to the widely-initiated reflection on the draft report on a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system by Anja Hazekamp (GUE/NGL, Netherlands) and Herbert Dorfmann (EPP, Italy) (see EUROPE 12644/7).
Law professor Olivier De Schutter argued that the CAP should be aligned with the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy. He pointed out that agriculture was responsible for 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and called for measures to reduce them, including a “shorter” food supply chain. The EU/Mercosur agreement is “irrelevant”, according to De Schutter, who called, once again, for a new “Common Food Policy”.
Claude Vermot-Desroches, President of the NGO, oriGIn, (‘Organisation for an International Geographical Indications Network’), referred to geographical indications (GIs) in the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy. He mentioned the “very negative” impact of Nutriscore on GIs. Unlike other products, traditional GI recipes cannot be changed, he said. Hence his request to exempt GI products from the Nutriscore system.
Contradiction between environment and agriculture? Massimiliano Giansanti, president of Confagricoltura and vice-president of Copa-Cogeca, criticised the recurrent attacks on farmers and said that the Farm to Fork strategy must take into account the fact that farmers protect the environment and can avoid polluting the land. There needs to be an overall vision for agriculture, he argued. He called for a scientific evaluation and impact studies on the initiatives foreseen in the strategy.
Anja Hazekamp criticised Copa-Cogeca for wanting to “remove” the quantified reduction targets for pesticides, fertilisers and greenhouse gases in livestock farming. “It is to deny the negative effect of agriculture on the environment”, she stressed. “Farming practices that are bad for the environment are killing agriculture”, she said.
Tilly Metz (Greens/EFA, Luxembourg) supported Olivier De Schutter and criticised unsustainable models. She argued for a holistic and integrated approach and criticized the agricultural lobbyists for not wanting to change things.
Reciprocity. Paolo De Castro (S&D, Italy), another rapporteur (from the European Parliament Committee on International Trade), pointed out that the strategy’s “ambitious” objectives risked “putting our producers at a competitive disadvantage in relation to international competitors, especially when there is a lack of convergence and reciprocity in terms of production standards and compliance with those standards”. He also noted that consumers will see a steady increase in the prices of agricultural products. Mr De Castro also asked the Commission to present the impact studies on the strategy.
Paradigm shift. Professor Johan Rockström, Director of the Potsdam Climate Institute, referred to the IPBES report on the links between biodiversity loss and zoonotic pandemics and the final report on “The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review”, presented the day before. He reported an acceleration of human pressure on livestock and livestock breeding (69% less livestock population since the 1970s). According to him, this break in the food chain has impacts on human and global stability and health.
Recent estimates show that the hidden costs of the global food system exceed its global market value. “We produce food that is less valuable than the costs in terms of death and destruction of the earth’s natural capital. We have more than two million dead mammals and more than 100 million obese people”, he said.
And to plead for sustainable systems with which “we will be able to feed 10 billion people by 2050 (compared to 2010) against three billion currently. According to him, “we must put the Sustainable Development Goals, healthy diets and a sustainable agri-food model at the centre of the guidelines in Europe and in the world”. A healthy diet includes: cereals, vegetables, fruit, protein, dairy products, added fat, according to The Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems, he said.
Room for improvement. Professor Mariane Penker, from the Institute for Sustainable Economic Development in Vienna, said the Farm to Fork strategy contained some good things, including a focus on sustainable consumer choices, reviewing producer behaviour, avoiding “unhealthy food” protecting the environment, biodiversity and improving animal welfare.
But she regretted that the strategy only considers food as a commodity and therefore “pays much less attention to food as a common good, rooted in a territory, in the culinary heritage and covering local needs, and as a human right”.
Both concepts require policies that guarantee access to healthy food for all, allow equitable access to the means of production - such as land and seeds - and protect all individuals, especially vulnerable groups from exploitation. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang and Lionel Changeur)