EN Official Journal of the European Union C 214/8

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Integrated Production in the European Union’ (own-initiative opinion)

2014/C 214/02

Rapporteur: Mr Pedro NARRO

On 12 February 2013 the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on

Integrated production in the European Union.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 12 February 2014.

At its 496th plenary session, held on 26 and 27 February 2014 (meeting of 26 February), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 143 votes to 6 with 9 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1 Integrated production is a practical example of how farming is managed with due regard to all aspects of economic, environmental and social sustainability. The EESC is keen for support to be given to food production models that prioritise efficient use of natural resources and respect for high environmental standards.

1.2 The EESC calls for agriculture to seek a balance between environmental protection, profitability and social demands. Sustainable agriculture is a basic requirement of civil society which can be achieved through various production models. The existence of integrated production is the proof of European farmers' interest in complying even more fully with sustainable production standards.

1.3 In implementing the new Common Agricultural Policy at national level, the Member States must provide fresh incentives for integrated production through rural development plans and help to integrate it into new equivalence systems to be established in connection with the so-called ‘green payment’.

1.4 The EESC calls on the European Commission to carry out an in-depth analysis of integrated production in the various EU countries. Legislative differences, the development of private certification systems and differences between countries and even regions are not conducive to the development of this production model. A Commission communication on integrated production could provide, at Community level, fresh insights regarding the scope of integrated production in Europe.

1.5 In order to make the system consistent and to provide it with a certain level of harmonisation, a debate should be launched at European level on the possibility of setting minimum Community standards. These Community guidelines would help to better promote the integrated production model among farmers and consumers and should be supported by the European development policy instruments currently under review.

1.6 The EESC notes that there is a lack of consumer information and sees a need for better understanding of the real situation in farms. The existence of numerous quality labels generates confusion among final recipients. Efforts should therefore be stepped up to bring the public into closer contact with agricultural products which respect high economic, social and environmental standards.

1.7 With a view to developing integrated production, additional efforts need to be made with regard to research, technical training, development of joint initiatives and of course communication with consumers and the farming sector, which are unaware of the potential benefits of a production model which makes optimal use of natural resources in a way that is professional and consistent with environmental needs.

1.8 The EESC believes that the system of integrated production in Europe should be of a voluntary nature. Although many elements of integrated production are becoming mandatory, only a voluntary system will be able to make farmers more environmentally-aware and their farms more profitable.

2. Introduction

2.1 The EESC's opinions have covered some of the main food production challenges facing European society: security of supply, agricultural research and innovation, climate change, dwindling natural resources and the preservation of biodiversity. It is therefore appropriate to analyse a model of production which meets the expectations of farmers and consumers: integrated production.

2.2 The new possibilities and technological advances that currently exist within agriculture may improve its environmental contribution while benefiting farmers by enabling them to manage their farms more effectively and making these farms more profitable. Farming is facing the enormous challenge of providing safe food to a world population set to exceed 9 billion by 2050.

2.3 The farming activity which takes place in this domain is fraught with complexity and difficulties, requiring farmers to be better prepared and to have the technical and environmental know-how that can contribute to preserving the environment, transparency in production and food safety. Farming is a strategic sector which is calling for consistent and coordinated development of economic, social and environmental needs.

2.4 Farm and forest land cover 80 % of EU territory. When farmers exploit natural resources, they take responsibility for preserving them and for using them sustainably. Innovation and research serve to meet this objective, which is shared by farmers and consumers, with the development of new integrated production techniques enabling resources to be used more efficiently.

2.5 The integrated production model is a form of sustainable agriculture, designed to make agricultural activity more profitable while respecting high social and environmental standards. In any case, it must act as an educational tool to help explain to the consumer a new relationship between the environment and food production. Distribution must support and recognise this model of production. It is vital for there to be a commercial interest which promotes integrated production.

2.6 The system's effectiveness is often diminished by a complex certification process which is excessively onerous in some countries.

3. The concept of integrated production

3.1 The International Organisation for Biological and Integrated Control of Noxious Animals and Plants (IOBC) defines integrated production as an agricultural system for producing food which makes optimal use of natural resources and regulation mechanisms by ensuring that farming is viable and sustainable over the long term. Under this system, biological methods, cultivation techniques and chemical processes are carefully selected, seeking a balance between the environment, profitability and social requirements.

3.2 We are essentially talking about a voluntary model based on the practical and ongoing application (through the transfer of knowledge and experience between technical services, the farmer and the farm itself) of innovation and technology tools which, when used effectively, make it possible to achieve the standards of quality, safety and respect for the environment that present-day society wishes to see.

3.3 The concept of ‘integrated production’ is frequently used as a synonym for ‘integrated farming’ and in many countries the two terms are used interchangeably. However, despite the fact that they are parallel systems with many elements in common, they are actually quite different, representing two separate models from which the farmer can choose. Integrated production adopts a sector-based approach with different rules according to the product in question, whereas integrated farming refers to the overall management of a farm.

3.4 Integrated production covers the environmental, ethical and social aspects of farming, as well as the issues of quality and food safety. It is currently considered to represent one of the highest international standards of food production. Taken as a whole, integrated production guidelines and related tools have proven to be useful and have been a source of inspiration for farming organisations looking to produce high-quality food that respects high environmental and social standards.

3.5 Apart from the abovementioned objectives, integrated production also helps support the farming sector through the incorporation of expert advisory services, responsible for planning the cultivation activities which producers have to carry out on their farms in accordance with the methodology established in integrated production regulations. The aim is to put general concepts such as innovation and technology into practice and to apply them on an ongoing basis.

3.6 Integrated production combines traditional methods with modern technology. It incorporates the latest know-how and techniques — the result of an active and ongoing evaluation and review process. One example is precision farming which, by applying the most advanced GPS technology, saves the farmer money and reduces contamination by using fewer nutrients and pesticides. Before the farmer decides when, how and where to produce, preliminary analysis is carried out on the conditions of the soil, climate, water, nutrients, etc.

3.7 Integrated production facilitates rapid transfer of knowledge between agricultural producers, technical advisers and public authorities, limiting the scope of certain risks in farm management.

3.8 This production model provides consumers with a higher level of quality and safety, giving them confidence in the products they are going to acquire and consume; the aim is to optimise respect for flora and fauna by using less aggressive methods, preserving biodiversity through appropriate management of natural resources.

3.9 In the case of farmers, this system may lower production costs and improve and modernise farm management. It may thus make farms more profitable by enhancing the value of their products, it may improve the quality of rural life and it may help maintain the population of rural areas — a necessary step.

3.10 Integrated production is undoubtedly a key element in applying the concept of sustainable farming and may provide a reference point for where the EU farming model should be headed.

4. Integrated production in the EU

4.1 At present, unlike the system for organic or fair trade products, there is no European legal framework for integrated production or any Community guidelines for this voluntary model of production.

4.2 However, in recent years there have been many public initiatives in the area of integrated production, in some cases with national or regional regulatory frameworks (Portugal, France, United Kingdom, Belgium and Spain). In other cases, there have been private initiatives controlled by large-scale distributors (1). This contrasting situation has created distortions in terms of the definition, objectives and development of integrated production.

4.3 In light of this, in 2001 the European Initiative for Sustainable Development in Agriculture (EISA) was set up, with the aim of promoting and championing certain consistent principles of integrated production in the EU. One of the organisation's first tasks was to create a European Common Codex for Integrated Farming (2) which has been used by the FAO to establish sustainable practices in farming. In 2002, AREFLH (Assembly of the European Regions producing Fruit, Vegetables and Ornamental Flowers and Plants) indicated that it was in favour of European regulation and in April 2013 it published the guide to European integrated production practices (3).

4.4 As is the case with other production models, in order for products obtained under the integrated production system to have a guarantee label, accredited certification bodies must check and certify these products. The guarantee label can be used by those products which meet the general standards and the specific technical standards for each crop. In some cases (Denmark, and the Netherlands), certification is not carried out for a specific product but for the entire farm that practises this form of production. For the time being, national and regional quality labels exist side by side.

5. Key issues for integrated production

At present, there are various doubts, issues and question marks surrounding the role of this production model in European farming. For the EESC, it is essential to clarify some of the more controversial aspects which, through ignorance or biased information, may cause greater confusion across society.

5.1 The relationship between conventional and integrated farming

5.1.1 The models of conventional, organic and integrated production are legitimate, they have differences and similarities and in any case represent respectable options for food production.

5.1.2 Conventional farming incorporates some of the practices or techniques present in integrated farming. In fact, the obligation to adopt an integrated approach to pest management as of 2014, introduced by the directive on sustainable use of pesticides (4), is another area of similarity between the two production models. Integrated production is the direction in which, little by little, conventional production is headed. This is a positive influence which must be preserved.

5.1.3 However, integrated production provides substantial added value, which is based on the conscious decision of the producer to opt for a model which involves rigorous certification based on strict controls requiring advice from highly qualified professionals, personalised training, energy efficiency and reduction of the carbon footprint, use of technological systems to manage risk, fertilisation, pruning, land management, etc.

5.1.4 At present, there are many farmers who are moving towards integrated production with the aim of optimising the production capacity of their farms while increasing soil fertility, eliminating or reducing pesticide waste and improving crop health (5).

5.1.5 Conventional and organic farming are regulated at European level, including with a quality label for organic farming. On the other hand, integrated production takes place exclusively at national or regional level where there are major differences and growing legislative confusion.

5.1.6 The growing importance of integrated production justifies making an additional effort to explain this production model effectively to European citizens.

5.2 The EU’s role in developing integrated production

5.2.1 The EU should carry out an in-depth analysis of integrated production in Europe providing an insight into the current situation and its potential development. Of the tools available to the EU, it would be especially important for the Commission to draw up a communication which could deal with the challenges of this model and the role of the EU in this respect.

5.2.2 The heterogeneous nature of national and regional regulation on integrated production leads us to ask whether steps should be taken at Community level to harmonise existing legislation in some way. At present, the EU focusses its support for integrated production on rural development plans and operational programmes of CMOs, such as the one for fruit and vegetables. The new CAP will be based on their sustainability: it therefore makes sense for integrated production to make a positive contribution to the practical coordination of the new green payment through delegated acts. The new European Innovation Partnership may also provide fresh opportunities for this model of production (6).

5.2.3 In the past, the systems of organic farming and fair trade have been the subject of a similar debate on whether or not it is appropriate to legislate. A large number of regional and national quality logos which identify integrated production exist side by side and there is therefore an open debate as to whether it is appropriate to create a new Community logo or to simplify existing ones. Prior to this, the EU must ensure better communication with consumers regarding existing logos with a view to promoting the quality or origin of the product in question.

5.2.4 The sector for integrated production is varied and diverse, but it unanimously calls for minimum Community guidelines on the matter which bring consistency and greater awareness.

5.3 Seeking better communication between consumers and farmers

5.3.1 Integrated production is currently on the rise because more and more farmers are accepting the need for profitability to be backed up by measures to improve farming's contribution to the environment and to conservation of natural resources. Despite the growing interest from the farming sector, there is ignorance in society about what integrated production means for a sustainable farming model and what it can contribute to it.

5.3.2 The EESC notes the existence of shortcomings in the promotion of this production model and calls for better training for farmers and steps to encourage producers to develop joint initiatives to safeguard the environment. Farmers must offer consumers as much transparency as possible regarding their production methods and try to show how innovation can be used for sustainable farming. In many EU countries, there are initiatives aimed at giving the consumer a greater insight into the reality of farming and improving their knowledge of an activity as important as food production.

5.4 Towards a new standard of production?

5.4.1 Integrated pest management is an element of integrated production which will be made compulsory from 2014, as laid down in Article 14 of Directive 2009/128 on the sustainable use of plant protection products. This obligation for all farmers represents a very important step towards the development of integrated production in the EU and entails a new standard of European production as regards pest management.

5.4.2 Although certain classic elements of integrated production are being gradually turned into obligatory farming practices, this must not alter the voluntary nature of the integrated production system, so that farmers can be integrated on the basis of their respective economic, environmental or geographical conditions. The decision by a farmer to switch to integrated production entails significant changes in the way they manage their farm and, above all, major investments in technical advice, training, controls, materials and specific products.

Brussels, 26 February 2014. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Henri MALOSSE

(1) EUREPGAP, QA, QA G.A.P., BRC, Nature’s choice

(2) A Common Codex of Integrated Farming. The EISA Integrated Farming Framework was published in 2006 and revised in 2012.

(3) www.areflh.org.

(4) Directive 2009/128 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides

(5) In Spain, as stated in the rural development plans, most beneficiaries are farmers with holdings of less than 10 hectares, mainly in areas with specific handicaps.

(6) http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eip/index_en.htm.