Tractor protests in Europe and Italy, farmers against the CAP: that's what it is

Tractor protests in Europe and Italy, farmers revolting against the CAP. That's what it is

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2023-2027, with its ten objectives, has sparked awave of discontent among European farmers, arriving in Italy, where the protest has also reached Rome in recent days. Promulgated to promote sustainable, economic, social and environmental agricultural development, the CAP is now being contested for its apparent inattention to the first points established by the EU Commission. But what are the key points of the CAP? Ten objectives are listed on the website Gamberosso.it.

The first objective of the CAP is to guarantee a fair income to farmers, seems to be just a mirage. Although agriculture represents a fundamental sector in the European economy, with its uniqueness and the challenges it entails, agricultural income remains significantly lower than other sectors, with a disparity of up to 40%. The CAP aimed to provide support through direct financing and market measures, however, economic crises in various sectors and pressures on profit margins place farmers in a totally precarious situation.

The second objective, that of increasing the competitiveness of agriculture it is instead threatened by various factors. Rising production costs, such as energy, have hit farmers hard, while bilateral trade agreements favor the import of low-cost products, undermining the market share of European producers. In particular, the agreement with Mercosur raises fears for the European agri-food sector, with the risk of imbalances in import/export.

Improve the position of farmers in the food supply chain is the third point, but this position continues to be precarious, with large price gaps between production and retail. Distortions in the value chain, often blamed on large-scale organized distribution, further aggravate the situation.

Environmental commitment of the CAP, although essential to combat climate change, is perceived by farmers as a excessive burden. The consequence of these principles is the adaptation to the objectives of the Green deal. Although sustainable agriculture is a shared goal, high production costs and reduced consumption complicate adaptation to environmental standards. The introduction of regulations, such as those on packaging, raises concerns about bureaucracy and the potential impact on agricultural business balance sheets.

One of the most debated aspects also concerns biodiversity. Farmers face increasingly stringent requirements, such as 4% of land left fallow to encourage biodiversity and eco-schemes that require 25% of direct payments linked to green practices. Although environmental protection is essential, many farmers find these measures to be burdensome and not always compatible with the economic needs of their farms.

Another point of dispute is the objective of reduction of pesticides and pesticides. Brussels aims to halve the use of dangerous pesticides by 2030, but farmers denounce the difficulties and additional costs this would entail. Some sectors are calling for an extension to 2035 to find viable alternatives. However, the reduction of pesticides can impact agricultural productivitygenerating further concerns for farmers' income.

To face current and future challenges, many are looking to biotechnology as a potential solution. The introduction of new genetic technologies could boost the agricultural sector, allowing farmers to better adapt to climate change and production needs. However, delays in the adoption of uniform regulations on the use of these technologies slow down progress and they limit opportunities for the sector. Europe has not yet adopted a unitary regulation on the use of modern genetics (NGT-Tea) and many countries, such as Italy, are putting pressure on the sector to be able to count on certain rules regarding biotech in the agricultural field.

In the context of the ongoing agricultural protests, the Italian government, together with other European governments, is evaluating farmers' requests and seeking solutions to address the critical issues of the CAP. The Prime Minister, Giorgia Melonishe surrendered willing to listen to the requests of the agricultural sector, underlining the importance of directly involving farmers in decisions regarding the agricultural transition. During her visit to Japan, the prime minister said: “We have paid attention to the agricultural world, we have done the maximum possible. I am willing to listen to their requests”. You also added: “a lot of anger comes from an ideological reading of the transition. But this is not my vision, I believe that farmers need to be truly involved in the transition.”

Looking to the future, the EU Commission will carry out periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of the CAP and ask national governments for any adjustments. With over 10 million agricultural businesses and 17 million workers in the sector, the CAP therefore represents a significant part of the EU budget, with financing exceeding 386 billion euros. Furthermore, the evolution of the CAP itself remains a crucial point for the future of European agriculture and its ability to face constantly evolving economic, environmental and social challenges.

The ten objectives of the CAP

1. guarantee a fair income to farmers

2. increase competitiveness

3. improve the position of farmers in the food supply chain

4. act to combat climate change

5. protect the environment

6. safeguard the landscape and biodiversity

7. support generational change

8. develop dynamic rural areas

9. protect the quality of nutrition and health

10. promote knowledge and innovation

READ ALSO: Tractors and protests? Farmers would be better off setting up a lobby