Behind the scenes the agricultural lobby is a sprawling, complex machine with vast financial resources, deep political connections and a sophisticated network of legal and public relations experts, argues the Financial Times in a Big Read analysis. “The farm lobby has been one of the most successful lobbies in Europe in terms of relentlessly getting what they want over a very long time,” says Ariel Brunner, Europe director of non-governmental organisation BirdLife International. Industry groups spend between €9.35mn and €11.54mn a year lobbying Brussels alone, according to a recent report by the Changing Markets Foundation, another NGO.
Food systems are responsible for between 21 and 37 per cent
of greenhouse gas emissions depending on what is included, according to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Over half of those emissions come
from animal faming alone. Yet agriculture remains one of the last sectors in
developed countries still to face binding limits on its carbon emissions. It is
one of the few industries not covered in the EU’s emissions trading system,
although proposals are under discussion.
The regular meetings between Copa-Cogeca, the umbrella body
for farming unions and co-operative bodies across the EU, and the bloc’s
officials show that the reach of the agribusiness lobby has been “institutionalised”,
says BirdLife’s Brunner. Patrick Pagani, acting secretary-general of
Copa-Cogeca, counters that lobbying is normal practice and “transparent”
because the body publishes videos of its presidents’ main points.
Farmers in Europe say they are being strangled with red tape
at a time when many are struggling with rising input costs following the
Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, which inflated energy and fertiliser
prices. The EU’s Green Deal climate law, drafted in 2019, set out proposals to
cut pesticide use and improve food systems, as well as reduce emissions from
industrial-scale farms.
In the EU, lobby groups are already staking out positions
ahead of the next major revision of the Common Agricultural Policy, which will
take effect in 2028. The present iteration has been criticised by farmers for
its attempts to tie payments to better environmental performance and cuts to
pesticide usage. Following widespread protests, European Commission president
Ursula von der Leyen has pledged that the next CAP will be “targeted” and find
“the right balance between incentives, investments and regulation”.
Who benefits?
Research suggests
that big farms and landowners reap far greater benefits from
subsidy packages than small-scale growers, even though the latter are often the
public face of lobbying efforts.
That has led to some tensions within the sector. It has been suggested that the agricultural
lobby “hijacked” the spring protests and put the emphasis on deregulation,
which served the interest of the biggest industrial farms and agribusinesses,
when the main concern of ordinary farmers was insufficient incomes.
FNSEA, France’s largest farming lobby has been accused of
having ‘ no interest in securing income for farmers” but “a huge interest” in
driving pesticide usage, because FNSEA is headed by Arnaud Rousseau, chair of
agro-industrial company Avril. At the EU
level, Marion Picot, secretary-general of CEJA, the bloc’s main body for young
farmers, says its members often feel drowned out by more dominant voices in
Copa-Cogeca. “We are trying to make sure that young farmers are visible in
other farming groups.”
In farm policy, it often seems that benefits go to those
already doing well.
Alan Matthews sets out his views on the future of EU agripolicy in the light of the European Parliament elections here: https://www.europenowjournal.org/2024/08/15/thinking-the-future-of-agrifood-policy-in-light-of-the-eu-parliament-elections/
