Searches such as the “NextGenerationEU” and the “Future of Europe Conference” led EU to develop new strategies for the 2050s, mainly on environment and economy.
In the first stage, titles such as “European green consensus”, “An economy in the service of the people”, “Europe for the digital age”, “Supporting the European way of life”, “A stronger Europe in the world”, “The new driving force for democracy in Europe” output fore.
The first of these, the “European green consensus” will be the focus of this article. The EU, which embraces sustainability in environmental and social issues the most, took this sensitivity one step further in October 2019 by formalizing the European Green Deal package.
For years, the EU GREEN Deal has been a set of policy initiatives, committing to take firm and ambitious steps in environmental and social sustainability issues, especially in the fight against climate change, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, use of renewable energy. The targets legalized in 2019 consist of the following 7 policy areas: 1. clean energy, 2: sustainable industry, 3. construction, 4. from farm to fork, 5. pollution elimination, 6. sustainable mobility and 7. biodiversity.
The European Commission announced the details of “from field to fork” and “healthy and environmentally friendly food” subjects within the framework of “sustainable food systems” on 20 May 2020. With the transition to the new food system it will be possible to provide environmental, health and social benefits which will be effective and useful to recover from the COvid-19 crisis.
Here are the various aspects of food production and supply: 1. a neutral or positive environmental impact; 2. Access to adequate, nutritious and sustainable food and 3. the preservation of the affordability of food in a fair economic environment.
The following actions have been determined to make the agricultural sector more sustainable:
• Elimination of CO2 emissions;
• Improving energy efficiency;
• 50% reduction in the use of chemical pesticides by 2030;
• At least 20% reduction in fertilizer use by 2030;
• Measures for a more sustainable animal sector, animal welfare and phytosanitary
• 50% reduction in EU antimicrobial sales in farming and aquaculture by 2030;
• 25% in organic farming and a certain increase in organic aquaculture by 2030;
• Measures to increase the sustainability of fish and seafood production;
• Clarifying competition rules and monitoring unfair trade practices, etc.
Organic farming area in the EU increased from 8.3 million hectares in 2009 to 13.8 million hectares in 2019. This constitutes 8.5% of the total agricultural area used. Of course, the same increases were observed in the turnover and in the last ten years, it has reached €41 billion from €18 billion.
The emergence of organic agriculture is based on a logic that no one can deny. Organic agriculture, which was initiated due to the health and environmental problems caused by chemicals such as fertilizers and pesticide used in classical agriculture, unfortunately falls behind classical agriculture in terms of yield. As seen in the graph [1], organic wheat yield remains only 40% of the yield obtained in classical agriculture in some countries. The main reason for the low yield per unit area in organic agriculture compared to conventional agriculture is that genotypes and varieties that will provide maximum yield in a limited nutrient environment have not yet been developed.
It is certain that the organic products sector, which finds higher prices than conventional products, will have many problems. For this reason, certification bodies have to constantly prepare new standards. Many issues such as bio-labeling, pesticide-fertilizer residue monitoring and setting threshold values force the authorities to be vigilant. If import-export is also included in all of these, it becomes clear that the job will not be easy. As a matter of fact, the organic certified wheat imported by Italy from Romania, but not complying with the rules, and Germany’s organic certified 40 tons of strawberries are just a few examples that are reflected in the newspapers . Although organic farming offers some sustainability benefits, “fear-focused marketing campaigns” exaggerate the benefits and demonize acceptable alternatives .
In today’s world where EU countries are in 5 different economic groups in the fight against the pandemic and some of them have problems especially in accessing sufficient food, to what extent is the right move by supporting organic agriculture? It cannot be denied that organic products will only be consumed by high-income masses due to their high prices. In other words, the poor are “absent” in the organic product market. However, organic agriculture is supported by many countries, including Turkey. However, no difference is observed in terms of nutritional values in organic-classical products , and therefore organic supports has started to be questioned recently. As a matter of fact, the UK has stopped spending the funds in this category . I wonder, while supporting the organic market, which is not benefited by that poor population and only 4% of the population benefit from the organic market, “Does the EU support the rich instead of the poor?” Especially, according to 2019 data, 21.1% of the population is experiencing poverty and social exclusion in EU .
Nazimi Acikgoz
Note: This paper has been summarized from a blog: https://nazimiacikgoz.wordpress.com/2021/04/27/ab-organik-tarim-hedefini-genisletiyor/
Tags: Organic farming profits, organic farming support, covid-19 and organic farming, organic farming in the EU, EU pesticide directive, EU fertilizer directive
