The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP 2013-2020) of the European Union has come under fire from non-governmental organisations (NGOs) for its perceived failure to foster a sustainable global food and farming system.
Despite witnessing an expansion in food production and a notable increase in agro-food exports, persistent issues such as hunger, environmental degradation, and social injustices continue to mar the agricultural landscape. Critics argue that the CAP’s policies, including its support for industrialised meat and dairy production and its failure to address unfair competition in global markets, have contributed to these challenges, exacerbating rather than alleviating them.
The European Commission’s View and Assessment
In response to the criticisms levelled against CAP, the European Commission has staunchly defended the policy, asserting that it embodies principles of sustainability and contributes to economic growth, productivity, and competitiveness in the agricultural sector. The Commission contends that CAP encourages the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices while prioritising climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. Furthermore, it argues that the reformed CAP 2020-2027 represents an improvement over its predecessor, with a renewed focus on environmental and climate objectives and a commitment to supporting global development goals such as food security.
Critique of External Effects of CAP Subsidies
Despite the Commission’s assertions, critics argue that CAP subsidies perpetuate overexploitation and environmental degradation, both within the EU and beyond. While subsidies bolster farm incomes and production levels domestically, they also contribute to market distortions and unfair competition in global agricultural markets. Moreover, schemes such as Voluntary Coupled Support (VCS) have been criticised for exacerbating these issues by distorting markets and hindering development in affected countries. Calls for reform emphasise the need to redirect subsidies towards supporting small-scale farmers and promoting sustainable agricultural practices.
Critique of CAP Trade Dimension
CAP’s impact extends beyond domestic agricultural policy to its trade relations with other countries, particularly those in the Global South. The EU’s agro-food trade surplus, buoyed by CAP, has significant implications for developing countries’ agricultural markets and food systems. Trade liberalisation initiatives prioritise EU interests over sustainable development in partner regions like Africa, leading to the displacement of local farmers and the erosion of biodiversity. Furthermore, the promotion of industrial agriculture schemes exacerbates land conflicts and environmental degradation, undermining food security and local autonomy.
Critique of CAP Externalities on the Planet and Increasing Land Conflicts
The externalities of CAP policies manifest in various forms, including ecosystem degradation, climate change, and land conflicts worldwide. Land-grabbing for EU feed imports, for instance, has led to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and the violation of indigenous land rights in many regions. Livestock farming, a major emitter of greenhouse gases, places significant strain on resources and ecosystems, exacerbating environmental degradation. Similarly, the expansion of bioenergy production exacerbates climate issues and compromises food security. Addressing these challenges requires urgent reforms to mitigate environmental damage and promote sustainable agricultural practices.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Global food production exerts immense pressure on the Earth’s ecosystems and poses significant risks to the stability of the global food system. To ensure sustainability, it is imperative to promote agroecological and organic farming practices both within and outside the EU. This can be achieved by introducing sustainability criteria, such as agrobiodiversity and climate indicators, into CAP Strategic Plans, as well as EU intervention measures and investment flows.
Addressing land-grabbing is essential to safeguarding land rights and preventing environmental degradation. Introducing mandatory due diligence for all operators in food supply chains and forest-risk commodities can help prevent land grabs. Additionally, establishing accessible complaint mechanisms and procedural guarantees for affected communities can ensure accountability and provide avenues for redress.
Unfair competition with small-scale farmers in the Global South must be halted. This can be achieved by phasing out all trade-distorting CAP payments and shifting towards more equitable agricultural policies. Promoting local and integrated feed production, adopting comprehensive definitions of dumping that encompass social, economic, environmental, health, and animal welfare criteria, and expanding monitoring of trade impacts on sensitive agricultural commodities are crucial steps in this direction.
Furthermore, strengthening sustainable development clauses in trade agreements through prescriptive language, non-regression clauses, and enforceable provisions to halt land grabbing and deforestation is paramount. By implementing these recommendations, policymakers can foster a more sustainable, equitable, and resilient global food system that benefits all stakeholders, from small-scale farmers to consumers, while safeguarding the planet’s ecosystems for future generations.
Article first published in SDG Watch Europe (2019) Spotlight Report on Sustainability in Europe, Who is paying the bill? (Negative) impacts of EU policies and practices in the world. See the full report here