Presented on Tuesday 7 July by the European Commission, the first EU Livestock Strategy has elicited mixed reactions from stakeholders in the sector (see EUROPE 13904/17).
While European farming organisations and some MEPs welcome the recognition of livestock farming’s strategic role for food security, rural areas and European autonomy, they are calling for concrete measures and sufficient funding to support the transition.
Environmental and animal welfare organisations acknowledge some progress, particularly regarding animal welfare (phasing out cages), but consider the strategy inadequate in view of climate and environmental challenges and the need to move beyond the intensive farming model.
EU farming organisations and cooperatives (Copa-Cogeca) welcome the shift in rhetoric from the European Commission, which now recognises the strategic role of livestock farming and protein production for food security, rural areas and the circular economy. Copa-Cogeca also welcomes the Protein Action Plan’s objectives aimed at reducing European dependence on imports. However, it believes that the strategy remains too general and lacks concrete measures to help farmers quickly. Copa-Cogeca criticises in particular the absence of a clear roadmap on making better use of livestock effluent, herd renewal, financing the transition and research into plant proteins. It is also concerned about the lack of financial guarantees to support the Commission’s announced phase-out of cages and calls for a pragmatic revision of the Nitrates Directive.
The European Council of Young Farmers (CEJA) welcomes the strategy, believing that it sends “a positive signal” by recognising the strategic role of livestock farming for food security, the vitality of rural areas and territorial cohesion. However, CEJA emphasises that the strategy’s success will depend primarily on its concrete implementation and the ability to provide support to young people wishing to enter the sector.
The European Dairy Association (EDA) believes the strategy provides a suitable framework for strengthening the livestock sectors’ competitiveness, resilience and sustainability. It also welcomes the recognition of dairy farming’s contributions to grassland management, biodiversity, the circular economy and animal welfare.
IFOAM Organics Europe welcomes the fact that the strategy recognises organic livestock farming’s benefits in terms of profitability, the environment and animal welfare. The organisation also welcomes the announced support for mobile slaughterhouses. However, in its view, the strategy relies too heavily on technological innovations and new genetic selection techniques, to the detriment of a transition towards more sustainable livestock farming systems.
Farm Europe is calling for stronger risk management tools as well as increased investment in innovation.
Among MEPs, Benoît Cassart (Renew Europe, Belgian) welcomed support for investment, innovation and biomethanisation, the Protein Action Plan aimed at reducing dependence on soy imports and the reform of animal health legislation. The elected representative nevertheless called for caution on two points: the effective application of the principle of reciprocal standards in trade agreements and financing for the transition towards the phasing out of cages for laying hens and sows. In his view, these developments can only succeed with credible checks on imported products and sufficient financial support in order to preserve the competitiveness of European farmers.
Claire Fita (S&D, French) believes that the EU Livestock Strategy and the Protein Action Plan are steps in the right direction, but remain insufficient to meet farmers’ expectations. “While progress should be welcomed, it falls short”, the MEP sums up. She feels the Commission has made a correct diagnosis by recognising the economic and territorial role of livestock farming. However, she is calling for a post-2027 CAP more favourable to extensive livestock farming, with appropriate environmental payments, coupled support, better targeting of direct payments and effective reciprocity of standards for imports. Regarding the Protein Action Plan, she welcomes the objective of increasing the share of European-origin protein in animal feed to 35% by 2035, but believes that it must be backed by concrete tools, such as guaranteed prices, multiannual commitments, suitable insurance schemes and investment in processing and storage sectors.
NGOs are generally circumspect. Greenpeace argues that the strategy fails to address the environmental and climate impacts of intensive livestock farming. The organisation accuses the Commission of downplaying the problems linked to nitrate pollution and of failing to propose sufficiently ambitious measures against methane emissions. Greenpeace is also concerned about the openness to a new method of accounting for agricultural methane (“no additional warming”). According to the NGO, this approach could reduce pressure on the livestock sector, which is responsible for more than 65% of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. It calls on the Commission to commit to a genuine reduction in intensive livestock farming rather than relying primarily on innovations deemed insufficient.
The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) strongly criticises the strategy, arguing that it offers the sector no real solution to the crisis. The organisation believes the text remains tied to an industrial model that it considers harmful to animals, the environment, small-scale farmers and rural areas.
Friends of the Earth Europe also rejects the strategy, arguing that it steers the future of the sector towards greater industrialisation rather than a transition towards more resilient, smaller-scale farming models. The organisation particularly criticises the development of biogas and biomethane projects, as well as the use of RENURE (fertilisers derived from livestock waste). In its view, these measures fail to challenge the structural causes of the environmental impacts linked to intensive farming.
World Animal Protection welcomes several measures in the European Livestock Strategy, including the phasing out of cages for laying hens and pigs, ending the systematic culling of male chicks, introducing animal welfare indicators on farms, stricter import requirements, financing for the transition and reducing long-distance transport of animals to slaughterhouses. However, the organisation regrets that the Commission has not presented a comprehensive timetable for phasing out cages for all the species covered by the European citizens’ initiative (ECI) ‘End the Cage Age’, including rabbits, ducks, geese, quail and calves. It also deplores the absence of a strategy for phasing out intensive livestock farming, which it considers responsible for animal suffering and significant pressure on the climate, biodiversity and small farms.
Slow Food welcomes several advances, notably the renewed commitments to animal welfare and the desire to reduce Europe’s dependence on imported animal feed and inputs. However, the organisation believes that the strategy remains fundamentally rooted in a model focused on competitiveness, productivity growth and technological optimisation, rather than on a genuine transformation of food systems. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)