The road to success. Developments within the negotiations on the Doha Round at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) reinforce my conviction that the way to get over the difficulties consists of concluding the agreement on the basis of the results, which have, in principle, already been acquired (see this column in EUROPE 9388). The positive effect would be twofold: definitive consolidation of what has already been negotiated (which is considerably more than the results of all the previous multilateral trade rounds) and a halt to the distrust and mutual accusations bandied around between protagonists in the negotiations, which could have serious political repercussions. I don't believe in the effectiveness of ongoing efforts to substantially increase respective concessions, for three reasons: the USA is unable to agree politically to a radical reduction of their domestic support to their country's farmers; emerging countries (in pride of place, Brazil and India) cannot significantly decrease their protection of their industrial and service sectors because the “the rule of most favoured nation” status compels them to extend any concessions to China (which would become the main winner in such a scenario); the EU, Japan, Korea, Switzerland, Norway and other countries hiding behind Europe cannot open up their borders any more to agricultural products from the whole world without killing off their own agriculture.
A crime against humanity? Two recent documents reinforce my conviction that abandoning or radically reducing agricultural production in Europe and the USA would not only provoke ecological and social disaster in the countries affected but would also constitute, dare we say, a crime against humanity. Firstly, analyses made by the “Saint-Germain group” (a think-tank of which Stéphane Le Foll is a member) indicates that agricultural production for food should increase by twice or three times as much in order to feed the world's population (which could reach 9 billion by the middle of this century) and defeat the scourge of malnutrition (which, contrary to certain optimistic evaluations, is tending to increase). This situation requires that, “the non-commercial aspects of agricultural production” be taken into account, which really means that global production based on costs should not be considered as the only element determining agricultural production. Stéphane Le Foll explained in an interview with Paul Fabra (who produced a report of it in Les Echos), that the cultural aspect of food production was of fundamental importance and, according to a British definition, ought to be “fresh, local and seasonal”. But is it possible to maintain and develop local production without a certain level of production vis-à-vis the outside world? “Of course it isn't” was Mr Le Foll's response, adding that more workers in the fields would be necessary too. This orientation implies considerable changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) so that producers are not entirely transformed into “welfare dependents”, but this is an internal matter of the EU.
I would like to add that a reasonable level of protection against the outside world is so indispensable that the EU should maintain and even strengthen its efforts to ensure that food production becomes increasingly more environmentally-friendly, respectful of quality products and animal welfare. Obligations in this respect do not come without a cost to Europe and farmers have to agree, if we are to provide protection from unbridled competition.
“Magic effect” of EU in Poland. The second document is based on the investigation of Daniel Bastien into the effects of the CAP in Poland. For part of the country, it's renaissance time. EU aid and price alignment, based on European rates, have allowed for change and investment that would have been unthinkable in the past. 15 million small farmers benefit from what has been described as “the magic effect of Europe”.
Thanks to the EU Structural Funds, relaunching alternative activities to agriculture in rural areas has seen infrastructure in the zones affected “develop more than during forty years of communism”. The territorial balance of the country will be safeguarded because, as Jan Krysztof Ardanowski, the Polish vice minister for agriculture declared: “Europe has demonstrated that the concentration of land was destroying villages, culture and traditions. We don't want migration from the countryside to the cities. Our 2007-13 plan for rural development, which is expected to be approved in Brussels soon, aims at creating the conditions for people not having to move”. The European Leader programme also helps to re-evaluate the level of education in place, as well as provide training and qualifications.
Mr Bastien, nonetheless, pointed out that “the European system of support will be under threat from 2013 due to WTO negotiations”. I would like to be able to provide reassurances to him on this subject, to Mr Bastien but above all, to Polish farmers.
(F.R.)