Brussels, 16/09/2009 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 15 September in Sweden, during their informal meeting, European agriculture ministers discussed the impact of climate change on agriculture and the role the latter could play in fighting this phenomenon. Sizeable consensus was obtained about the need for agriculture to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and contribute towards the EU's goals in this area by drawing on a variety of current measures and planning a number of others. No minister, however, called for precise and binding measures to be imposed on farmers. Countries in southern Europe highlighted the problem of water shortages.
During the final press conference, Eskil Erlandsson, Swedish Minister of Agriculture, pointed out that “the climate determines to a great extent which crops are grown and what stock farming is like around Europe”. The minister stated that “we are rapidly nearing Copenhagen. I believe that discussions on how we should mitigate the effects of climate change, which we are already seeing, will increase. The issue of agriculture will enter into these discussions in a natural way”. He considers that the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was an important tool for responding to climate change problems and mentioned the importance of forests (carbon sinks).
Erlandsson asserted that “there was a consensus that we must act proactively within the EU and support farmers in adapting to the demands made on them by the transition in response to climate change”. He also said that the Council agreed on the urgency of improving cooperation and the exchange of best practices in the EU regarding solutions that enable farmers to mitigate climate change and adapt to it. Producers also need to be informed about these matters.
Many agriculture ministers, including those from France and Ireland, pointed out that they would need to double world agricultural production by 2050 in order to feed the 9 billion people on the planet. Some ministers warned against the temptation to reduce agricultural production as a way of fighting climate change. The figures show that “since 1990, overall European agricultural emissions have fallen by 20%. This is partly because we have fewer cattle”. There were, however, demands by some for additional European funds to be geared towards farmers to help meet this challenge.
The Portuguese minister, Jaime Silva, supported a tax on water. He also underlined the importance of launching a debate on the role of the CAP in the future EU financial framework (post 2013). His Irish counterpart, Brendan Smith, said he was in favour of an “EU strategy on global agriculture emissions and food production”.
Several countries, including Poland, said that measures to tackle climate change in agriculture had to be financed out of funding from regional policy and the second pillar of the CAP (rural development). The first pillar includes direct aid and market spending. Spain explained that it intended to grow 1 million hectares of protein crops to create carbon sinks, and underlined the urgency of improving the irrigation system.
The United Kingdom has a concrete objective for farmers (reduce emissions by 2020 by 3 million tonnes of CO2). The action plan in this country, however, for achieving this objective, is non-binding. No-one dares propose anything that could be binding on farmers.
The direct effects of climate change on agronomic practices were also highlighted (especially drought in Southern Europe). Northern countries, thanks to a small rise in the temperature, are expected to be able to increase agricultural output.
Almost all the different member states explained that they had used the opportunities provided in the rural development programmes, and welcomed the decisions taken in the framework of the CAP health check (increase in funding to rural development programmes through modulation) and the European recovery plan (funding for meeting new challenges, including climate change).
Most of the ministers called for better cooperation, improved information exchange and an efficient system for sounding the alarm to prevent the spread (due to climate change) of foreign pathogens and epizooties (such as foot and mouth disease).
Mariann Fischer Boel, European Commissioner for Agriculture, stated that “climate change will be one of the main challenges to agriculture over the next few decades”. The commissioner explained to ministers that they had to produce more food, in more climatically difficult conditions and with fewer greenhouse gas emissions. She pointed out that the EU is committed to reducing these greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 (compared to 1990 levels). She also averred that the EU was prepared to reduce them by 30%, “in the context of an international agreement”. The commissioner pointed out that agriculture should provide the cornerstone to the edifice and said that since 1990, overall emissions in Europe from farming had fallen by 20%, which was not just due to fewer cattle. She highlighted “very positive causes” for this decrease, such as better use of technology and “higher production of plant and animal products for every kilogramme of greenhouse gases emitted”.
Do more to reduce methane gas emissions?
The commissioner believes that agriculture can do more to: - reduce emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide; - store carbon in soil; - provide biomass to produce energy from renewable materials. There is still a lot to do to manage water better. Fischer Boel stated that “if we ask farmers to do all these things, we have to support them”. She also pointed out what instruments the EU has available: - rural development programmes (investment aid to help save energy, aid to renewable energy production, more efficient use of fertilisers and forest planting); - CAP health check and European Recovery Plan (more money to combat climate change).
The commissioner conceded that not all measures included in the rural development programmes were coherent. Therefore, many measures aimed at reducing CO2 emissions were “valid but we have to go further”. CO2 emissions from farming are only 1% of all greenhouse gas emissions in Europe. This proportion is 4% for methane, which should subsequently be reduced, mainly by way of improvements in cattle rearing. Ms Fischer Boel also called for: - more win-win options to help farmers make money while protecting the environment; - making intensive efforts at training and educating farmers about climate change.
For the post-2013 period, the commissioner suggested looking at greater incentives in soil management (particularly for protecting carbon rich soils, such as grasslands). The commissioner concluded to the press that the debates had demonstrated that “agriculture is not part of the problem but part of the solution” in helping reduce the effects of climate change.
COPA, the organisation representing European farmers, and COGECA, representing European agricultural cooperatives, pointed out that the predicted climate change over the next 50 years would have a negative effect on crop yields, livestock management and location of production, would threaten farm incomes and cause land abandonment in some parts of Europe. Padraig Walshe, the president of COPA, consequently outlined some ideas in this connection: - new crops that are more resilient to water scarcity or wet conditions; - more efficient use of energy intensive inputs such as fertilisers; - agriculture as an alternative to fossil fuels and oil-derived products; - carbon capture in soils; - biomass that can enhance the resilience of the ecosystem. Mr Walsh warned that without an appropriate policy, climate change is likely to lead to lower yields and thus lower production and employment, as well as much greater volatility in food supplies and prices. He concluded: “Farmers have already suffered enough with the recent crises in the EU cereals, dairy and pigmeat sectors and they do not have sufficient income to sustain investments in this at the moment. Farmers must have sufficient funds in order to enable them to invest to meet the challenge of climate change.” (L.C./transl.rh)