The EU's Common Agriculture Policy and Sustainable Farming: a Statement by Scientists

The EU's Common Agriculture Policy and Sustainable Farming: a Statement by Scientists

Author: Alexandra-Maria Klein

Publisher:

Published: 2020

Total Pages: 0

ISBN-13:

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Abstract: The European Union's (EU) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) still fails to address the environmental and socioeconomic challenges of EU's agriculture. Agricultural ecosystems are further degrading, biodiversity is declining and agricultural Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions remain high. At the same time, farms are facing unresolved socio-economic challenges and rural areas struggle to remain viable. Knowledge, data, instruments and resources to address sustainability challenges are readily available. Missing is the CAP's appropriate design as well as prioritization, and the indispensable political will to improve these. While the Commission's 2018 proposal fell short of addressing the key weaknesses of the CAP, the amendment proposals of October 2020 by the Council and the Parliament significantly weaken the CAP's environmental instruments, while maintaining or even enhancing the inequitable and counterproductive distribution of payments. A weakened CAP puts both the environment and the future of farmers and farming at risk. Scientific evidence shows that it is possible and efficient to align sustainable farming, multifunctional agroforestry and long-term prosperity with the climate and biodiversity goals of the EU. Farmers' interests and environmental protection can be mutually reinforced and achieved through a CAP that is aligns with the EU's Green Deal and Biodiversity Strategy, while also conforming to the Paris Agreement. The proposed CAP post-2020 as it stands represents a business-as-usual model of agriculture against the viable alternative of a responsible and sustainable farm model that ensures the viability of rural communities. The narrative in support of this foundering approach, by stressing the importance of food production and the need to feed the world, is counteracted by a reality of more farmland taken for the production of fuel and feed for animals than for human consumption. The political positions also fail to represent the interests and needs of most farmers, who want to protect their living environment so in order to secure the long-term sustainability of their own farming - but rightly ask for public policy support. The CAP should provide better means to do so, and aim at a fair transition toward a sustainable future for farming. The trilogue negotiations are a last opportunity to rethink the CAP post-2020 design and propose legal texts that allow, rather than impede, environmental and social ambition in line with the EU's statement that the next CAP will be fairer and greener. Using the time gained by the transition period of two years, we strongly recommend to Member States, the Council and the Parliament to rethink the current proposal. We specifically urge to: 1. Maintain conditionality along the lines set by the Commission, and improve it by a) expanding permanent pasture protection beyond protected areas (Natura 2000) and b) maintaining or restoring at least 10% non-productive, semi-natural landscape features on all utilized agricultural area rather than only on arable land; 2. Ring-fence budgets for Agri-Environment-Climate Measures and allow Member States to expand their budgets beyond current levels; 3. Secure at least 30% of Pillar 1's budget for Eco-schemes and use current knowledge to ensure Eco-schemes are well designed (i.e., include only effective measures for biodiversity), monitored and re-evaluated to achieve measurable environmental impacts; 4. Place Areas of Nature Constraints in Pillar 1, or tie them strictly to environmental objectives and the protection of High Nature Value farmland regions, rather than unduly list them as an environmental instrument without substantive criteria; 5. Cancel a) ring-fencing for direct payments (especially coupled payments), b) the barrier on Member States' maximum investment in the environment, and c) the limitation for budget transfers to Pillar 2. These restrictions impede ambitious Member States from investing in rural areas and in public goods;Place a clear target for reducing, toward phasing out, of coupled payments (e.g. toward 5%) as subsidies that are harmful for both markets and the environment; 6. Place a clear target for reducing, toward phasing out, of coupled payments (e.g. toward 5%) as subsidies that are harmful for both markets and the environment; 7. If Direct Payments remain a political priority, and more equity among the recipients is the proposed means to address farmer's concerns, then the Council and Parliament should make the Capping and Redistribution mechanism mandatory for all Member States, and set strict capping rules; 8. Ensure the success of the new Delivery Model by means of a) linking Strategic Plans to the EU's Green Deal, b) retaining the yearly reporting of Result indicators, and c) improving the integration of scientists and other experts in the consultation processes offered by Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS). Science across all disciplines is available to address the agricultural sustainability challenge and improve the CAP. Over 3600 signatories have supported the call to improve the CAP. They underlined the feasibility of constructive changes and documented the readiness to assist in positively transforming and future-proofing the CAP and the EU's agriculture (Pe'er et al. 2020)


Environmental Policy Integration

Environmental Policy Integration

Author: Andrea Lenschow

Publisher: Taylor & Francis

Published: 2012-04-27

Total Pages: 251

ISBN-13: 1136566449

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Integrating environmental policies into the policies of all other sectors is the core European environmental policy. But there has been no thorough investigation of the political process involved. This volume provides the first. It analyses the process of policy integration - the greening of public policy - across the relevant sectors and countries. It finds significant variation from sector to sector and from country to country, and analyses the reasons for this. (Surprisingly the UK, traditionally the 'dirty man' of Europe is far more actively engaged than environmental 'progressives' such as Germany.) It identifies the obstacles to integration and offers solutions for policy formulation, decision making and implementation at the relevant political levels.


The Common Agricultural Policy and Organic Farming

The Common Agricultural Policy and Organic Farming

Author: Kennet Lynggaard

Publisher: CABI

Published: 2006-01-01

Total Pages: 218

ISBN-13: 1845931149

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The Common Agricultural Policy and Organic Farming covers how ideational change came about to enhance the understanding of change within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and to plan and implement change in European agriculture policy. The contents cover institutional change within the CAP and focus on the institutional construction policy concerned with organic farming.


The Political Economy of the 2014-2020 Common Agricultural Policy

The Political Economy of the 2014-2020 Common Agricultural Policy

Author: Johan F.M. Swinnen

Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield

Published: 2015-07-30

Total Pages: 597

ISBN-13: 1783484853

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

After five years of debates, consultations and negotiations, the European institutions reached an agreement in 2013 on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the 2014-2020 period. The outcome has major implications for the EU’s budget and farmers’ incomes, but also for Europe’s environment, its contribution to global climate change and to food security in the EU and in the world. It was decided to spend more than €400 billion during the rest of the decade on the CAP. The official claims are that the new CAP will take better account of society's expectations and lead to far-reaching changes by making subsidies fairer and ‘greener’ and making the CAP more efficient. It is also asserted that the CAP will play a key part in achieving the overall objective of promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. However, there is significant scepticism about these claims and disappointment with the outcome of the decision-making, the first in which the European Parliament was involved under the co-decision procedure. In contrast to earlier reforms where more substantive changes were made to the CAP, the factors that induced the policy discussions in 2008-13 and those that influenced the decision-making did not reinforce each other. On the contrary, they sometimes counteracted one another, yielding an ‘imperfect storm’ as it were, resulting in more status quo and fewer changes. This book discusses the outcome of the decision-making and the factors that influenced the policy choices and decisions. It brings together contributions from leading academics from various disciplines and policy-makers, and key participants in the process from the European Commission and the European Parliament.