On 5/20/20, the European Commission finally unveiled its communication on the Farm to Fork (f2f) strategy, along with the Biodiversity strategy. (1) The two programs are part of the so-called.
European Green Deal
and should contribute, among other things, to the revitalization of the economy of the old continent. Analysis and comments.
Farm to fork. Goals and contradictions
‘Building a food supply chain that benefits consumers and producers, the climate and the environment’ (Communication, point 2).
The goals stated in the Farm to Fork strategy are momentous. It refers to one of the leitmotifs of sustainable development, ‘healthy people, healthy societies and a healthy planet.’ Except then giving in to pressure from the Big 4, the pesticide and seed monopolists, most recently by renewing for 15 years the authorization of an agrotoxic (metalaxyl-M) that was already a candidate for replacement as hazardous.
The horizons are broad, as the program considers agrifood supply chains in their entirety. As is already the case with the new regulation on official controls (reg. EU 2017/625), where attention is also expressed to plant health and animal welfare.
The holistic approach finds evidence in the document’s new table of contents. Where, to complement the previous draft we have already analyzed, a reference to resilience is added. Indeed, the Covid-19 pandemic showed how sustainability is also measured in the system’s ability to withstand adversity.
Resilience
Resilience is inherent in a production system based on peasant agriculture and agroecology. A model that FAO itself points to as the main way to ensure biodiversity and food security. But the CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) still reserves just 3 percent of resources for ecoagriculture. (2)
Therefore, the agroecological transition invoked in the new CAP remains a cosmetic statement. The Farm to Fork strategy omits the reference to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Farmers and Workers in Rural Areas (2018).
Instead, the new GMO empire is celebrated as a possible solution to the planet’s problems. With that same rhetoric that the Big 4 has been proposing for a quarter century, that genetic engineering would enable increased yields and reduced use of agrotoxics. Nothing could be more false, as science shows.
SUSTAINABILITY IN AGRICULTURE?
Pesticides and new GMOs
By 2030, the Commission aspires to halve the use of chemical pesticides in European agriculture. With special regard to active substances, agronomic antidotes and synergists under Reg. EC 1107/09. (2). In the wake of a positive trend that has seen a discrete reduction in risks related to pesticide use over the past 5 years (-20% according to the indicators introduced by the Directive on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides, dir. 2009/218/EC).
This refers toIntegrated Pest Management (IPM) practices. Which encourage the recovery of traditional agronomic techniques, starting with crop rotation. Perhaps even mechanical weeding practices, which could be facilitated by robotics andprecision agriculture.
From words to deeds, the Commission ‘advocates’ the inclusion of these measures within the CAP and the attached strategic plans. And it is evident how – in the absence of cogent measures and adequate public controls – the goals are unattainable. As with every commitment so far made by the European Union in international contexts, starting with biodiversity and climate change.
And here pops up the new GMOs, never mentioned in previous drafts of the document, disguised behind the acronym NBT(New Breeding Techniques). The seed monopoly – the
Soyalism
, which can extend its tentacles as far as endive – and the dependence of farmers on the Big 4, once again rears its head.
Fertilizers
It also states that it intends to reduce fertilizer consumption by 20 percent by 2030. So as to halve (minus 20 or minus 50 percent?) their losses to the environment and consequently the pollution levels of soils, air and water. In addition to the impact on the climate resulting from the excessive amount of substances used but not absorbed by crops.
Fertilization techniques should be improved, either through the use of nutrients contained in organic waste or through the use of precision agriculture. (3) Without neglecting-we add, recalling the appropriate FAO report (2019)-the value of legumes as ‘improving’ crops of soil fertility.
Organic farming
Organic farming is the only one actually able to protect biodiversity (provided that native varieties are grown and valued). As well as being able to create new jobs and attract young people to agriculture.
The F2F Strategy indicates a goal to apply organic system to at least 25 percent of the Utilized Agricultural Area (UAA) by 2030. The Commission is therefore committed to drafting an Action Plan 2021-2026 aimed at promoting the supply and demand for organic products. With the idea of introducing suitable measures into the CAP and CFP (Common Fisheries Policy) through innovative eco-schemes.
Animal husbandry
Estimates of greenhouse gas emissions are slightly revised in the final document from its previous version. Agriculture, according to the Commission, accounts for 10.3 percent (rather than 11 percent) of total emissions in Europe. And animal husbandry would account for nearly 70 percent of it (instead of 60 percent).
The need to encourage the use of sustainable feed materials in feeds is reaffirmed. Prioritizing the use of agricultural raw materials that are not derived from deforested land (e.g. GMO soybeans from Latin America. See petition of Égalité and GIFT, Great Italian Food Trade). Enhancing the use of by-products from other agricultural supply chains (including waste from the fish supply chain) and innovative feeds (e.g., algae, microalgae).
Therefore, it is intended to promote research on innovative breeding methods that can reduce the share of agricultural land currently taken up by animal husbandry (estimated at around 68 percent of UAA).
Antibiotic resistance and animal welfare
The sale of antibiotics for livestock use (including aquaculture) is also expected to be halved by 2030. An ambitious goal, ‘curiously’ not considered in the recent ‘
veterinary medicines package
‘ (EU regulations 2019/4, 5, 6). Therefore, once again it is a question of evaluating the effectiveness of the instruments. (4)
Animal welfare is listed as one of the guiding criteria to which European animal husbandry must come to be guided. With a view to the preservation of biodiversity, the decreased use of medicines and the improvement of safety and quality of food of animal origin. It plans to propose the revision of the current rules, in 2023, with a focus on the transport and slaughtering stages as well. (5)
FOOD SECURITY
Food security-that is, the security of the food supply-is a hot topic precisely in the Covid-19 era. The pandemic has revealed the extreme fragility of the Western economic system, as noted above.
A paradigm shift is urgently needed. First and foremost, it is necessary to ensure the autonomy of the people in the production of primary goods, starting with food. Therefore, strengthen short supply chains, whose value is strategic precisely to prevent sudden shortages of essential foods.
Once again the European Commission calls out biodiversity loss andclimate emergency as imminent (or rather, current) and lasting (and potentially irreversible) threats to food security and livelihoods.
The rhetorical exercise includes a reminder of the crucial role of workers in the agribusiness sector and the importance of mitigating social conditions (inequalities) that affect the availability of healthy and nutritious food. But the ultra-trillion-dollar investments (>1 trillion) announced in the European Green Deal do not relate to any policies to mitigate the prevailingsocial injustice.
Poverty and social exclusion
plague Europe, now more than ever. The Commission plans to develop an Observatory and Emergency Plan to ensure food security in crisis situations, but refrains from considering the crisis of civilization around us. Still awaiting, among other things, dutiful solidarity with the countries most afflicted by the new coronavirus.
FOOD INDUSTRY AND DISTRIBUTION
Sustainability in food industry and distribution should be promoted through an EU Code of Conduct for responsible business and marketing practice, which the Commission would like to develop soon.
The nutritional suitability of food is a crucial element in the face of theepidemic of obesity, overweight and related diseases(Non-Communicable Diseases, NCDs). The Commission, 11 years behind the specified deadline for adopting nutrient profiles, is finally committed to meeting it.
A Corporate Governance Framework should stimulate operators to reformulate foods to improve their nutritional properties. And to adopt those responsible business practices that UNICEF also recommended, in early 2020.
The question remains as to how a soft law instrument will achieve the expected results after the sinking of the EU Platform for Action on Diet, Physical Acries and Health in May 2019. Indeed, this platform, established in 2005, aspired to improve the nutrition of European citizens through voluntary commitments that nevertheless proved to be unsuccessful.
Origin labeling, sustainability, food waste
New marketing standards should then be developed, with the idea of addressing the three themes of:
– Origin labeling of food products and their primary ingredients. The possible extension of origin labeling on meat and milk used as ingredients in other products and other foodstuffs, not better defined, is scheduled for 2022. However, without appealing to the lucid initiative of European citizens #EatORIGINal! Unmask your food!
– food waste. Still awaiting consistent data on the extent of waste at each stage of the supply chain from the 27 member states, Brussels plans to propose shared targets for its reduction by 2023. However, without mentioning the need to address this issue with a systems approach, as the research instead suggests,
– sustainable labeling framework. By 2024, the European executive is expected to propose a voluntary labeling scheme to enhance the sustainability of food products. With the desirable goal of bringing into compliance a plethora of indications that too often turn out to be mere greenwashing operations, as they report data of relative value compared to the socio-environmental criticalities of individual supply chains.
Short supply chain, green procurement
Short supply chains receive brief consideration in relation to the needs to reduce dependence on long-distance food transportation and support the resilience of local food systems. According to a 2019 estimate, about 1.3 billion tons of primary agricultural, fish and forestry products are transported by road each year in the European Union. (6)
A program to promote foods that express ‘sustainable’ production and consumption-in line with SDG(Sustainable Development Goal) 12-is expected to be presented within the current year. Minimum requirements for sustainable and organic food procurement in schools and public institutions, as an evolution of Green Public Proc urement (GPP, or ‘green procurement‘), should also be defined in 2021.
NUTRITIONAL SAFETY
The diets of European citizens cannot be considered healthy and balanced, the European Commission notes. However, which, as mentioned above, merely hypothesizes non-binding measures. Voluntarily applied guidelines whose utter uselessness is amply demonstrated by the 15-year total failure of the EU Platform for Diet, Physical Activity and Health .
Ultra-processed foods-as the FAO recently pointed out (2019)-are the real problem to be addressed. The European Commission’s own Joint Research Center (JRC) found that more than 68 percent of the top products sold in the EU to children and minors are junk food.
Excessive intakes of sugar, salt and fat are therefore listed by Brussels as the first problem to be addressed. We agree, and that is why we need to introduce bans on the promotion of junk-food, including on social networks. But the empires of Ferrero and Coca-Cola would never allow such an effective public health measure, which the executive in fact does not even adumbrate.
Meat consumption, the new war on commission
Red meat and sausages suddenly appear in the latest version of the f2f strategy alone on the list of negative nutrients. Placing a commodity category on a list of nutrients is not only a gross error but a declaration of war.
It is a war on commission, indeed on commission. Where the European executive militates alongside BEUC (the confederation of consumer associations in the EU) and other NGOs-which are still (shamefully) exempt from the burden of making public the names of their ‘patrons,’ much to the chagrin of governance-as contractors in the service of the financial plutocracy.
Indeed, big finance, as already shared, has invested billions of dollars on the globalized lab meat business. Laboratory meat, made with enzymes and genetic engineering by the very few able to make colossal investments in nature’s abomination.
After the Extinction Rebellion or the European Commissioners on duty execrate traditional protein sources, Bill Gates and Google Ventures can then bring to market the
Impossible Burger
and rule the planetary market with them, in a monopoly regime that belongs to the history of both.
CONSUMER INFORMATION
The consumer, in the Commission’s view, is aware of his or her choices and a key player in change. No thanks to Brussels, which with its ‘Planet Earth Origin’ regulation (reg. EU 2018/775) obscenely concealed the origin of primary ingredients on food labels.
The summary nutrition information on the Front-of-Pack will in any case be prepared according to a common scheme that should apply throughout Europe. In biblical time, 8 years behind the deadlines specified in the Food Information Regulation (FIR, reg. EU 1169/11). The Nutriscore solution is already available and has been shown to stimulate consumers to choose more nutritionally balanced foods, but its proposal is on the 2022 agenda.
Expiration date and minimum shelf life will be subject to possible revision, in 2021, with the aim of reducing food waste. Still waiting, among other things, for the Commission to follow up on our complaint against the ‘by law’ early expiration date that Italy illegally introduced, for fresh pasteurized milk, back in 2004.
New consumer information tools si narra will be considered. Regulatory prerequisites are not lacking, as we have seen, and technology today offers the possibility of sharing useful and reliable information through QR-codes. We look forward to it, remembering the needs of people with visual impairments who could thus draw on the news useful for shopping.
Farm to Fork
The draft Action Plan attached to the f2f Strategy Communication indicates a total of 27 reforms of EU regulations affecting various aspects related to the agrifood supply chain. In addition to the above, the following are noted:
– MOCA (materials and articles intended to come into contact with food (or food contact materials, FCM). The proposal for a harmonized framework for the regulation of MOCAs, which has been awaited since as far back as 2004, is scheduled for 2022 (sic!),
– food fraud. In 2021-2022, better late than never, the executive aspires to strengthen the coordination of national authorities in charge of combating food fraud, under the coordination of OLAF.
‘It is clear that the transition must be supported by a CAP that focuses on the Green Deal.’ (Communication f2f, point 2.1)
CAP and its National Strategic Plans are referred to as essential tools to realize the Farm to Fork strategy. (7) By 2020, the Commission intends to draft recommendations to member states, emphasizing the interconnections and complementarity between the 9 objectives of the CAP and the Green Deal.
FINANCE, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION
The InvestEU Fund 2021-2027 is then expected to offer guarantees on additional investments of about € 650 billion.
Research and innovation are cited as the key to change. The agro-ecological turn (hopefully) should also be supported through the European Innovation Partnership – Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI).
Effective and widespread Internet connectivity is considered essential for improving agricultural techniques (not just precision farming) and quality of life, in rural areas especially. As well as fostering and new job and economic opportunities. By 2025, the goal of covering 100 percent of these areas with high-speed broadband connections should be realized. Perhaps even with respect to health and safety needs-which have been neglected so far in relation to 5G-and the freedom of people’s self-determination in this regard, we would add.
Support for farmers and SMEs should be provided through specific networks and appropriate services. The Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems – AKIS could prove useful in connecting all players in the supply chain, promoting innovation. And why not, we add, bringing real-time transparency to the value chain.
A GLOBAL TRANSITION?
The EU remains the world’s leading trading area for food and fish products. The Commission led by Ursula von der Leyen says it will also promote the transition to sustainable food systems with non-EU trading partners by negotiating special Green Alliances.
In practice, we wait to see if and what positions will be taken against supply chains responsible for ecocide and abuses of basic human rights:
– palm oil, GMO soybeans and Latin American meats, prime causes of landgrabbing and deforestation,
– cocoa, Turkish hazelnuts, Southeast Asian tuna, palm oil, prime causes of slavery including child slavery.
In international contexts, the Commission also states that it will uphold its security and sustainability standards to incentivize change. It will therefore be the case to promote a Constitution for the Earth, the initiative for which comes from the very country where the European alliance began, Italy precisely.
WORKERS’ RIGHTS
The precariousness of working conditions in some sectors along the supply chain resurfaced during the Covid-19 pandemic. In the F2F Strategy, the Commission commits to impose the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights so as to ensure a decent life and social protection especially for seasonal and irregular workers.
Corporalism and exploitation are deep-rooted plagues in the Old Continent. In Italy as in Spain and other countries, the abuse of laborers is associated with the uncoordinated management of peoples migrating partly because of wars in which several EU member states have participated in recent years.
These crucial aspects continue to be glossed over where it would suffice to affirm the responsibility of downstream operators in the supply chain (import, industry, distribution)-prescribing upstream traceability of working conditions (contract, hourly pay, union rights) to ensure effective respect for basic human rights. The establishment of such rules and effective control methods at the European level would also put an end to unfair competition based on worker exploitation.
CRITICALITY
Serious doubts are raised about the reliability of the targets that the Commission aims to achieve by 2030. Specifically with regard to:
– Reduction in the use of pesticides (-50%), the systematic misuse of which has already poisoned ecosystems significantly, (8)
– Extension of organic production up to 25 percent of the UAA.
A Commission official replied that these targets should be understood as ‘aspirational targets‘ because they are part of a strategy that represents a kind of vision for the future. (9) Not enough. Medium-term goals and precise responsibilities must be defined on the various levels of policy and administration.
So-called eco-schemes, presented as tools for financing sustainable practices in agriculture, are similarly generic and undefined. And national experiences on NAPs (National Pesticide Action Plans) have already proved instrumental in obtaining funding for agricultural systems that have only the name ‘sustainable’. In the face of levels of agrotoxin consumption that in pure in Italy, beyond the chatter, are incompatible with public health and environmental protection requirements.
Dario Dongo and Marina De Nobili
Notes
1) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system, Brussels, 20.05.2020, COMM (2020) 381 final
2) Joseph Vinci. Free seeds in a free state. The Manifesto. 5.4.20, https://ilmanifesto.it/liberi-semi-in-libero-stato/?fbclid=IwAR357w3k8wxe4A4I5hs-8MzjNwm-3TQSuWYLIo0_uksaa0TIp0SB63dP64A
3) ‘As stated in the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP strategic plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulation (EU) No. 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) No. 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, COM(2018)392, 2018/0216(COD), in full compliance with the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions – European Interoperability Framework – Implementation Strategy, COM(2017)134.‘ Strategy, supra note 17
4) It bases its data on the study: Cassini et al. (2019). Attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life-years caused by infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the EU and the European Economic Area in 2015: a population-level modelling analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. Vol.19, issue 1, pp. 55-56
5) Recall the EU Court of Justice ruling that – in denying the possibility of affixing the organic farming logo to hamburgers from cattle undergoing halal ritual slaughter – affirmed how slaughtering practices without stunning are not suitable for ‘Completely alleviate the pain, fear, or suffering of animals as effectively as slaughtering preceded by stunning‘. ECJ, Judgment 29.2.19, Œuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) v Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation, Bionoor SARL, Ecocert France SAS, Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO), C-497/2017
6) Agriculture, forestry and fisheries statistics (2019). Statistical Books, Eurostat
7) European Commission staff working document. Analysis of links between CAP Reform and Green Deal. 20.5.20, SDW (2020) 93 final
8) Stehle S, Schulz R.
Agricultural insecticides threaten surface waters at the global scale.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(18):5750-5755. doi:10.1073/pnas.1500232112
9) https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/commission-upholds-highly-ambitious-targets-to-transform-eu-food-system/, https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/new-food-policy-to-triple-amount-of-agricultural-land-farmed-organically-by-2030/
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
Graduated in law, master in Food, Law & Finance. You have explored the theme of green procurement and urban food policies in the International Cooperation and Peace sector of the City of Turin.
