Redefining the future of European agriculture: Balancing progress and protection

Climate action, food security and biodiversity – these concepts are rightly at the heart of the EU’s agriculture policy, and they are the key to protecting and developing European farmlands for the benefit of future generations, writes Nicola Mitchell, CEO of Life Scientific.

They are also the subject of enormous debate, as farmers, scientists and policymakers grapple with the right way to balance objectives that are sometimes seen to be in opposition.

Just recently, France’s Senate adopted its ‘Farm France’ bill with the aim to uphold France’s ‘food sovereignty’ and ensure food supplies are not distorted by foreign competition. Meanwhile, Germany has committed to implementing integrated pest management as part of its toolbox to slash its use of synthetic pesticides. This comes as the EU is revising rules under the Farm to Fork Strategy designed to minimise the ecological impact of European agriculture and promote healthier food systems. Of all the initiatives under discussion, the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation (SUR) stands out. Its stated goal? Simply to slash the EU's chemical pesticide use in half by 2030 in an effort to alleviate agriculture's ecological impact.

While applauding the drive to preserve Europe’s ecology, we must ask if such a crude target should and can be achieved, and raise questions about a regulation that poses a significant risk to food security, farmers' livelihoods, and ultimately, the future of European agriculture as a whole.

Our farmers, our stewards

Europe's farmers are the custodians of our rural environment, which we all depend on to bring food to our tables. Their ability to safeguard our agricultural heritage, however, hinges on equipping them with effective tools to protect their crops. Put simply, at a time of rising food prices and insecurity, an indiscriminate goal of cutting pesticide use in half over the next seven years would leave farmers vulnerable to pest and weed damage, in turn endangering food security, rural stewardship and the overall viability of European farming.

Evidence provided by Slovenian MEP Franc Bogovič paints a dire picture. In the worst-case scenario, we might face up to a 30% drop in apple and olive output, a 23% plunge in tomato production, and a 15% fall in wheat harvest. It's not hard to imagine how such shocks could trigger shortages and increase dependency on nations with laxer environmental and quality standards.

Advertisement

And yet, SUR does not offer farmers realistic alternative pest management strategies, and does nothing to address the soaring cost of agricultural inputs from fuel to fertilisers.

Agriculture 2.0: The road to resilience

As policymakers strive to champion sustainable farming practices, it is high time they shift their focus from crude quantitative reduction targets to embracing technologies and processes that can enable a smooth transition. It is encouraging to see politicians from across the spectrum listening to the concerns of farmers and bringing them to bear in Brussels.

To win the necessary political support, the SUR must adopt a perspective that is both more ambitious and more practical, understanding the complexities and challenges of today while not sabotaging the innovative potential of tomorrow.

While alternatives such as bio-control products show immense promise, their progress is impeded by lengthy and bureaucratic authorization processes. Similarly, generic plant protection products face the same predicament. Much like their pharmaceutical counterparts, these products contain identical active ingredients in the same formulation as their branded equivalent but at a fraction of the price.

Unblocking market access barriers for bio and generic products would not only immediately reduce costs at the farm gate, but also incentivise the major multinational manufacturers which dominate the traditional plant protection market to invest in more efficient and sustainable products. These investments would then be protected by new, profit-enhancing patents, promoting a cycle of innovation and advancement in the industry that would benefit farmers and consumers as well as the environment.

In the long term, the EU should place more emphasis on the integration of cutting-edge technology like yield mapping and multisensor optical systems, but farmers will not be able to afford modernising their agricultural practices if we do not start lowering their costs now.

This holistic approach is the road to a modern European agriculture that protects our climate, our biodiversity and our food security. We do not have time to waste on the fractious and deadlocked politics which have characterised the SUR. Consistent application and smart enforcement of existing regulations will provide the right incentives for all actors to play their part in the much-needed green transition. By empowering our farmers with both state-of-the-art and more affordable tools, we can defend nature without destroying agriculture.

Share this article: