In January, it was hard to imagine how European agriculture would ever balance the needs of farmers, consumers and the planet. Tractors were blocking motorways in protests across the continent. Yet, as the fall colors take over the landscape, the picture is quite different today.
Representatives spanning the agri-food chain, from the biggest farm lobbies to Greenpeace, worked together over months to chart a way forward in a process aptly named the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture. The outcome of their hard work, released in September, is a series of recommendations — agreed by consensus — to European policymakers to ensure the “transition [is] designed in such a way that it leads to agrifood systems that are more resilient, sustainable, competitive, profitable, and just.”
Balancing the needs of all those involved in food and farming systems is not easy. Unsurprisingly, the scope of the recommendations is broad from addressing unfair trade practices (like when a buyer exploits their market power to persistently set prices below farmers' cost of sustainable production), to supporting the next generation of farmers, to making the sustainable choice the easy one for consumers.
Yet, three recommendations stand out as critical to delivering a just transition for European agriculture:
- Developing transition plans for industrial livestock production.
- Establishing an Agri-food Just Transition Fund to support those plans.
- Reforming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to support farmers who needed it most and protect the environment upon which their businesses depend.
Given the multiple crises that the food and farming sector face, from the highly polluting nature of the current intensive industrial model to vulnerabilities caused by climate impacts and costly inputs, a transition is inevitable; whether it is just and well managed is not.
Starting to plan for that transition today, especially in industrial livestock, and ensuring that farmers are supported throughout, targeting those most in need, is essential.
Planning for the transition from industrial livestock production
Livestock production is responsible for more than half of ag-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the EU and contributes to other environmental harms, like water pollution, especially when it is intensive industrial production. Animals are often raised in conditions inconsistent with how the European public thinks animals should be treated.
Reducing meat and dairy consumption is the most practical way to address these environmental harms. Europe has already seen a reduction in livestock production as meat consumption falls. It is also good for people’s health (as Europeans currently consume more meat and dairy than recommended).
While the Dialogue’s recommendations on helping citizens achieve balanced diets and cut meat and dairy consumption made headlines, they also included the supply side of the equation.
Here, the Dialogue focused on the need for long-term planning — developed locally, a holistic approach to environmental issues, farmer acceptance and the need for adequate financial support.
At the EU level, the Dialogue recommended that the Commission develop an overarching strategy for sustainable animal farming across the bloc. At a more regional level, a territorial approach should be taken in areas with a high concentration of livestock, with plans developed locally, taking a holistic view of environmental aims (not just GHG emissions) and be supported by the Agri-food Just Transition Fund - AJTF (more on that below). At the farm level, participation would be voluntary with access to the AJTF based on long-term transition business plans.
German thinktank, Agora Agrar, has recently mapped out how such a transition in livestock densities could take place across EU countries through to 2045. Analysis that can be helpful in outlining concrete pathways the sector could take.
If planning is step one, step two is ensuring the conditions (especially the money) are in place to get those ideas off the page and on to farms, which brings us to…
Financing the transition through an Agri-food Just Transition Fund
Most farmers are living year-to-year with tight finances. They don’t have the money (nor access to capital) to finance the transition to healthier and more resilient food and farm systems, which may not pay off for several years (such as agroecological practices that can improve soil health).
The Dialogue proposed establishing an Agri-food Just Transition Fund (AJTF) to support farmers in achieving the transition. It would be temporary and established outside of Europe’s major farm policy, known as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
Supporting reducing livestock densities and improving the conditions under which the remaining animals are raised are two key focus areas proposed for the Fund.
As the Dialogue notes, the “transition [to less concentrated production] will impact the income and economic viability of livestock farmers and producers, it is important to use the AJTF to support those affected. While also reinforcing the positive externalities that the sector already provides, this support should facilitate a smooth adaptation process, helping farmers, producers, and workers.”
This support could range from worker reskilling to a shift to different production systems, new business opportunities or voluntary farm buyouts, done in a manner to ensure regional agriculture and rural businesses remain viable.
A just transition is not limited to the livestock sector, but includes all agricultural production, which brings us to the final ingredient.
Making the Common Agricultural Policy work for farmers and for nature
Income support is one of the central tenants of the CAP, yet the hectare-based system for distributing payments is unrelated to need and contributes to higher land prices. Attempts to ‘green’ the CAP have failed to spur sufficient action at the country level to achieve the EU’s nature and climate goals.
The Dialogue called for reform of CAP’s direct payments to focus on those who need it most, like small and diverse farms or young farmers. This new targeted income support would be separate from support for ambitious environmental measures, which would become a distinct supplementary income stream.
To figure out how best to target income support, the report recommends an independent taskforce be established to delve into the issue and provide recommendations in time for the next CAP (2028-2035).
The Dialogue stressed that the budget for environmental measures needed to increase to match the level of ambition sought and focus on quantified results-oriented outcomes.
As public purse strings tighten across Europe, ensuring that the public’s money is achieving real results and supporting those who need it most is critical to secure and retain political support.
What comes next?
Europe has started an important conversation about transitioning its agriculture system - one that other countries should begin based on their own context.
For Europe, the task now is to turn the Dialogue’s recommendations into action.
The European Commission, the bloc’s executive branch, is not wasting any time and has already started to heed some of the Dialogue’s recommendations.
The in-coming Agricultural and Food Commissioner (akin to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture) has been tasked with CAP reform along the lines outlined in the Dialogue, with a full proposal expected by mid-2025.
More broadly, the Commissioner has also been asked to develop a ‘Vision for the Future of Agriculture and Food’ by early March 2025.
This Vision needs to go beyond painting a picture of the future but include a concrete work plan for achieving it, building on more of the recommendations from the Dialogue.
The stakes could not be higher. As the Dialogue stressed: “[f]inding societal consensus on the future of agriculture and food is an important building block in strengthening liberal democracy and halting its corrosion in Europe.” Effective action is needed not just for the future of agriculture, but also to protect the political future of the European Union.
