Evolution of global agricultural policies

Evolution of global agricultural policies

The global agricultural system is the scene, especially in recent years, of a notable evolution whose repercussions will be much more evident in the near future.
The change affects not only the way of producing food and other ecosystem services but the relationship with the consumption and use of these.
It is increasingly clear that it is no longer possible to consider food, livelihoods, health and the management of natural resources separately.
It is a holistic approach, in which agriculture is placed at the center of the objectives of the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. These objectives underline the urgent need to undertake concerted actions and pursue policies aimed at transformative change.
In this sense, agroecology becomes the global and integrated approach that simultaneously applies ecological and social concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable agricultural and food systems. It seeks to optimize interactions between plants, animals, humans and the environment, while also addressing the need for socially equitable food systems within which people can exercise choice over what they eat and how and where food is produced.
Agroecology therefore represents an overall and integrated system to guide public policies towards sustainable agriculture and food system. It improves public efficiency by promoting the design and implementation of integrated and inter-ministerial policies, bringing together agricultural and food sectors that are often disaggregated.
It is increasingly clear, in fact, that the loss of biodiversity and the collapse of ecosystems are closely linked to the climate emergency, representing the main threats to the survival of the planet in the coming decades, in terms of both probability and impact.
A recent study by the European Environment Agency (2019) confirmed that the intensification of agriculture in recent decades has represented one of the main causes of the reported problems. As they demonstrate:
– the Farmland Bird Index, index of avifauna in agricultural areas (-34% of common species in agricultural areas, from 1990 to 2017);
– the European Grassland Butterfly Index, the index of butterflies in meadows. These bioindicator insects have almost halved in a quarter of a century (-39%, from 1990 to 2017), although the death rate has almost stabilized since 2013.
Furthermore, the latest reports foreseen by Natura 2000 and the Birds and Habitats directives also record a dramatic increase, from 69% to 72%, in habitats with an “unfavourable” conservation status.
The European Court assessed whether Objective 3a of the Strategy up to 2020 was specific, measurable and achievable, relevant and time-bound and whether the previous CAP 2014-2020 was consistent with it.
The first weakness is that the policies in question refer to different time frames. CAP and EU budget follow a seven-year cycle, Biodiversity Strategies cover 9 or 10 years. The major gaps were noted regarding feasibility, relevance and measurability (the 2011 Strategy in fact had a deadline, set for 2020, and contemplated specific measures).
Among other things, there are no precise and current indicators to evaluate the progress of the actions. Of the 13 streamlined European biodiversity indicators (SEBI), the Commission has only regularly updated 5. For the remaining 8, however, the latest data date back to 2014 at the latest.
Furthermore, the concept of “agricultural area of high natural value” (High Natural Value, HNV) was introduced by the European Commission in 2005 for the monitoring of areas characterized by low intensity agriculture. But the Commission itself – given the substantial lack of data on the extension of HNV areas in the latest reports on rural development (June 2019) – decided to exclude it from the post-2020 CAP.
In the absence, among other things, of the coordination provided for in the Biodiversity Strategy with Objective 2, it was not possible to act correctly to restore 15% of degraded ecosystems.
Entering the economic context of the issue, the share of the general EU budget dedicated to biodiversity, according to the Court of Auditors, was determined on the basis of unreliable coefficients (through “adaptation” to the “Rio markers” of the OECD – Organization for Co-operation and Economic Development). In the 2014-2020 CAP, the Commission claims to have dedicated 8.1% of the EU budget, equal to 86 billion euros, to biodiversity, but since 2017 the Court has complained about the ineffectiveness of the support.
Let us remember here that biodiversity, in addition to its ecological value, is increasingly recognized as having a fundamental economic value.
According to the report Dead planet, living planet, published in 2010 by UNEP (the United Nations Environment Programme), biodiversity and ecosystems provide human beings with services worth an estimated 72 trillion dollars every year. According to the World Bank, in the same year global GDP did not exceed 64.7 trillion.
Returning to the concrete applications of the CAP, direct greening payments, for example, have incentivized the change of agricultural practices in only 2% of arable land and 1.5% of permanent grasslands. The general failure of the Biodiversity Strategy up to 2020 with respect to Objective 3a was reiterated, moreover, by the European Commission itself in the 2015 mid-term review.
The notable inconsistency between strategies, economic evaluation of biodiversity and its concrete applications in agricultural policies is evident, despite the two European strategies Farm to Fork and Biodiversity 2030.
In this sense, agroecology is precisely the fundamental tool for the realization of the European Union’s Green Deal, as outlined in the two strategies, proposed by the EU Commission and approved by the European Parliament. Agroecology should have been fully included in the new Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2027 to promote sustainable practices in agriculture and is an essential tool for research and innovation in the agri-food sectors, with particular reference to adaptation and mitigation climate change and the protection of biodiversity; however, the understanding of this discipline and its potential repercussions still requires long sedimentation times.
Agroecology is, in fact, based on bottom-up and territorial processes, helping to provide contextualised solutions to local problems with people at the centre. There is no single way to apply agroecological approaches: it depends on local contexts, constraints and opportunities, but there are common principles that have been articulated in the framework of 10 elements.
In fact, FAO developed the 10 Elements of Agroecology framework to help countries promote transformative change. The 10 elements are interconnected and interdependent and represent a simplified, yet holistic, way of thinking about reality. They describe the essential components, key interactions, emergent properties and enabling conditions desired in agroecological transitions towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. The 10 elements are a useful analytical tool to facilitate decision-making by practitioners and other stakeholders when planning, implementing, managing and evaluating agroecological transitions.
These are mainly Goals 2 (Zero Hunger, Food Security, Nutrition and Health), 1 (Poverty Reduction), 13 (Resilience to Climate Change), 15 (Biodiversity), 8 (Youth Engagement), 5 (Gender Self-Determination) and 10 (Human rights) of Agenda 2030 which, in synergy, determine the process of agroecological change.
Although Agenda 2030 appears to be an orientation framework that is still little understood at a global level, its enactment since 2015 has generated an unprecedented legislative impact.
In order to follow this evolution in real time, FAO has generated a database called AgroecologyLex, which is a web platform specialized on different legal frameworks, policies and programs regarding agroecology in different countries.
This database was created in collaboration with FAOLEX, which is the world’s largest database on policies and legislation related to agriculture and renewable natural resources.
It is a constantly updated database that allows users to have the full text of the document as well as a detailed extract of the contents, mainly focused on the specific aims and objectives, institutional frameworks and main forms of support, in order to support transitions from conventional agriculture to agroecological approaches.
AgroecologyLex is updated in real time and can be consulted via the WEB link: https://www.fao.org/agroecology/policies-legislations/en/.
A first brief view of this database allows us to understand how from 2015 onwards the regulatory system on agroecological and/or resource sustainability matters has increased significantly.
Among these regulations we obviously find the L.R. 21 of 29 July 2021 of the Sicilian Region. The reference to the standard in question can be viewed via the link: https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/details/en/c/LEX-FAOC212703/.
In the entire framework of the database, it is immediately clear that the Sicilian standard represents the first integrated approach that connects the aforementioned objectives of Agenda 2030 and the European strategies on the matter in a single standard.
Obviously this is a first step, as the agroecological field cannot be contained only within a law. We need involvement, cultural, political, scientific, technical, social evolutions and so on; however, this rule represents the track on which the train of ecological transition can travel more quickly.

Guido Bissanti