EU agriculture ministers met today at an ‘Informal Council’ in Horsens, Denmark to discuss environmental considerations, which have proven to be the most controversial element of forthcoming EU farming reforms. Farming groups, with the support of some politicians, have argued that new ‘greening measures’ being brought in under the reformed Common Agricultural Policy will affect productivity and profitability.

However, Mette Gjerskov, Danish food and agriculture minister and host of the talks, said, “Discussion at the agricultural Minister’s green think tank showed consensus that there really is no choice between productivity and sustainability.” She continued, “Earth’s resources are limited and vulnerable. We need to take care of them, and Europe should be a frontrunner.”

Presentations by international experts from OECD, WWF, Copa Cogeca and Unilever emphasized the global environmental challenge and underlined that there is only one model for future growth – a green one.

image expired

The Danish minister said that adopting environmentally sensitive methods does not necessarily mean production will suffer. She said, “I noted that my colleagues do not question whether to have a green transition or not. But when and how. There is broad consensus that we need more for less.”

However, she did acknowledge, “At the same time there are concerns for farmers; it is important to create jobs and export.”

Speakers at the event looked at measures to ease transition towards a greener and more sustainable economy. Copa Cogeca speaker and Vice-President Albert Jan Maat said farmers must be allowed to choose from a list of options, rather than remain subject to blanket greening measures, if Europe’s diverse environment is to benefit from the reforms. The Copa spokesperson pointed out that “Imposing the same three measures on all farmers from Scotland to Sicily, as proposed by the EU Commission, is neither practical, nor the best way to achieve environmental benefits.”

Representatives from Copa Cogeca continued to push the industry line that production must increase at all costs to maintain national and pan-European food security. The union’s vice president suggested adding further greening measures to the pillar two rural development fund in place of making a proportion of direct payments dependant on meeting certain environmental criteria, as the European Commission has suggested.

Mr Jan Maat also called for more European spending to go into research and for research and development breakthroughs to be put to use quicker.

However, although some continue to quibble over forthcoming measures, many politicians and campaign groups have adopted a stalwart position, arguing that the environment must be taken into account in any forthcoming policy decisions.

They argue that environmental considerations are essential if policy-makers are to combat problems Europe is already facing, including soil degradation, loss of biodiversity and a reduced availability of fresh water, and those that climate change and a rising population will bring. They argue that, as the CAP accounts for the largest single expenditure of European public money, these considerations must form part of the CAP conditions.

Friends of the Earth's Food Campaigner Kirtana Chandrasekaran commented on the discussions, "Politicians must not use concerns about a one-size-fits-all approach to agricultural reforms as a smokescreen for weakening efforts for a more planet-friendly approach to farming. There's no reason why EU farming plans can't contain strong, legally-binding environmental measures that take regional circumstances into account. Pitting food production against protecting the environment would be extremely short-sighted - the biggest threats to our future food supplies are climate change and the loss of essential pollinators such as bees."

Tweet