Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Directions towards sustainable agriculture'
Date: 2000-02-17
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: common agricultural policy, environmental law, environmental protection

C 156/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

6.6.2000

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the
Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions on Directions towards sustainable agriculture’

(2000/C 156/07)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Directions towards sustainable
agriculture (COM(1999) 22 final) (1);

having regard to the decision taken by the Commission on 29 January 1999, under the first paragraph of
Article 198C of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee of the
Regions on the matter;

having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 7 May 1999 to direct Commission 2 for Agriculture,
Rural Development and Fisheries to draw up the relevant opinion;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 183/99 rev. 3) adopted by Commission 2 on 26 November 1999
(rapporteur: Ms Algudo; Mayor of Saint-Fulgent, F/PPE),

adopted the following opinion at its 32nd plenary session on 16 and 17 February 2000 (meeting of
17 February).

Preliminary comments

‘Development

The European Commissioner responsible for agriculture and
rural development, Mr Fischler, recently defined the concept
of sustainability in the following terms:
is
sustainable if each generation can meet its own needs without
depriving future generations of the means to meet their needs’.
He went on to note that ‘the challenge facing sustainable
development is also to promote economic performance and
social balance, at the same time safeguarding and improving
the quality of nature and the environment and our cultural
heritage’ (2). This concept is highly relevant to agricultural
production, and is endorsed by all members of the sector.

Recent events show that although the intention here is an
honourable one, how it is to be achieved is still far from clear.
There is sometimes even a paradox between this goal and
economic and demographic requirements. The sustainability
of agriculture could now be jeopardised by the weakening of
its economic base. Agriculture is a vital part of the EU
economy:

— an increase in production, using modern methods while
preserving natural resources, is therefore vital in order to
stem the spread of malnutrition and hunger in the world;

— agriculture and forestry safeguard the socio-economic
balance of the land and keep jobs in rural areas. They also
help to maintain climatic balance, natural ecosystems and
the landscape;

— agriculture is one of the oldest economic activities in
Europe. It is the origin of our cultural roots and traditions.
Abandonment of the countryside and migration to cities
and to jobs in industry have impoverished the land to the
extent that even the hydrogeological balance is disrupted.
Over time this phenomenon has destroyed whole com-
munities and the identity of many rural areas, undermining
the delicate balance and harmonious relationship between
town and country that is a fundamental element of the
new EDSP policy.

— according to the UN, world food production will need to
increase by at least 75 % over the next 30 years in order to
feed a world population that is set to rise from today’s
5 000 million to 8 500 million in 2025;

The EU is not an autarky; it is open to the world, and has to
accept the constraints which this imposes. Agriculture faces a
real challenge: how to reconcile the needs of a burgeoning
population with the capabilities of an ‘ecological’ farming
sector which cannot or could not guarantee mass production.

(1) OJ C 173, 19.6.1999, p. 2.
(2) Speech by Mr Fischler at the informal agriculture council meeting

in Dresden, 30 May to 1 June 1999.

The European model of agriculture is under threat. Over the
the CAP and a variety of national policies have
years,
increasingly focused on productivity and the use of more
intensive farming methods which have had adverse effects on

6.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 156/41

the environment, employment, product quality and spatial
development. Broadly speaking,
trend is not
conducive to sustainable agriculture, although major changes
which are reversing this trend are taking place in some
countries.

the current

up hedges, extending and consolidating plots. All this,
in
combination with farming practices, has an impact on soil,
water and air. However, ceasing to farm land also poses a
threat to landscapes and biodiversity.

Agriculture is also a victim of industrial methods. It adopts a
defensive posture even though it bears only limited responsi-
bility.

The COR opinion must take all these questions and factors
into account. The opening in Seattle of the World Trade
Organisation (WTO) negotiations makes the opinion particu-
larly timely. The EU must defend its agriculture model in
Seattle with a single voice.

1.4.
Consequently, the challenges posed by both the intensi-
fication and abandonment of farming raise questions about
the relation between agriculture and the environment and the
basis on which the European model for sustainable agriculture
will rest in future. Sustainability means managing natural
resources so that their benefits are also felt in the future, and
this is in farmers’ interests too. The use of land and natural
resources for agricultural production has also to be set against
the value society attaches to protection of the environment
and the cultural heritage.

1.

Introduction

Environmental considerations are a major concern of
1.1.
the common agricultural policy (CAP). This concern dates
from the Single European Act of 1986. The Amsterdam Treaty
makes sustainable development an objective of the Union, and
the Vienna European Council in December 1998 stressed the
need to ensure that environmental concerns were adequately
addressed in the decisions to be made on agricultural policies
in the context of Agenda 2000.

1.2.
The new CAP reform as presented in Agenda 2000
seeks to make the requisite structural adjustments to the
principal market regimes, and to set in place a strong rural
development policy as the second pillar of the CAP. This rural
development policy should not just be beneficial for farming.
It should involve the whole of rural society — notably the
local and regional authorities — and should facilitate the
establishment of regional development plans.

The high level of price support provided under the
1.3.
CAP so far has encouraged intensive agriculture and greater
use of
In some
fertilisers and plant protection products.
regions, the focus on intensive agriculture has caused water
and soil pollution and destroyed certain important ecosystems,
and the resulting high treatment costs have had to be borne
by the consumer and the taxpayer. The intensification of
agriculture has transformed rural landscapes, threatening their
variety and biodiversity. Today, a farmer who opts for
economically viable practices realises that this means sacri-
ficing many features of the traditional landscape — removing
stone or earth terraces and installing electric fences, pulling

1.5.
The reform proposed in Agenda 2000 is essentially
designed to develop a European model for agriculture that
respects the environment, is socially acceptable and is econ-
omically viable for farmers. General sustainable development
principles must be adjusted to the regional level by national
and regional policies that take account of the region’s particular
situation and socio-economic features. To this end, such
policies must bring about types of partnership with communi-
ties in upland areas and areas whose main economic activity is
agriculture. Local organisations can promote the dissemination
of new CAP approaches and the establishment of a new model
of agriculture that is sustainable in environmental terms and
from the perspective of farm profitability.

2.
The Commission communication outlines the causes of
the damage done to the environment by agriculture, and
suggests remedies and how to finance them.

Except

2.1.
in regions where extensification is gaining
ground, European agriculture is becoming more intensive
and more specialised. Use of chemical fertilisers and plant
protection products appears to be declining, partly thanks to
the CAP, but it remains higher than it was a few decades ago.
Fertiliser consumption increased from around 5 million tonnes
in 1950 to peak at over 20 million tonnes in the 1970s and
1980s, and is now around the 16 million tonnes mark. The
CAP could still have undesired effects because, although the
volume of products used is falling, their active ingredients are
now more concentrated and more specific. The toxic effect
which these products have on the environment remains
unclear. Plant protection products are already tested for eco-
toxicity before they are placed on the market, but further
research is still needed.

C 156/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

6.6.2000

In order to reduce the use of plant protection products, other
techniques should be developed and supported, such as
rational fertilisation of the soil or the use of natural instead of
chemical fertilisers. However, the use of natural fertilisers must
also be controlled, as over-use of them would also upset
ecological balance.

As organic produce is more costly and is produced on a small
scale, it will continue to form a small percentage of food
production for some time. If organic agriculture is to retain its
qualities, it is bound to be incompatible with mass production.
It is in this sense that organic farming is to be considered
‘marginal’.

A further question for consideration here is the introduction
of genetically modified organisms (GMO)
in agricultural
production. GMO would appear to have the potential to
further reduce the use of plant protection products. However,
research into their effect on human health does not appear to
be sufficiently advanced yet. One requirement of sustainable
agriculture is that it must produce healthy produce. For this
reason, the use of GMO in agriculture must first be approved
by the World Health Organisation, whose recommendations
then apply worldwide. Admittedly, it is not currently feasible
to make the WHO responsible for the scientific validation of
new GM products and for monitoring the cultivation of GM
crops as it lacks the necessary means, at least at present.
However, consumer information could be improved by mak-
ing the traceability of agricultural and agri-food products a
general requirement; this method is already used in many
sectors.

Furthermore, steps must be taken to ensure that mistakes by
the agricultural
industry, such as increasing the level of
technical and economic dependence and a further reduction in
the genetic variety of crops, are avoided when modern
technologies, such as genetic engineering, are applied.

2.2.
Community measures are helping to develop organic
farming, which benefits the environment and is growing fast.
The number of organic farms rose from 35 476 in 1993 to
93 830 in 1997. In certain countries with a stronger gastron-
omic tradition, such production is increasingly being promoted
by local authorities, which see the development of local quality
products as a way of boosting the economy of the region and
local communities, and also as a requirement for stimulating
investment to modernize and innovate the sector. However,
organic farming remains marginal;
in 1997 it still only
accounted for around 1,6 % of the total UAA and 1 % of farms
in the EU-15. This trend may be expected to continue, not
least thanks to the EU financial support provided under
Agenda 2000. This support should be backed by steps to
promote demand for organic produce and provide consumers
with information (which should be stepped up, as in the case
of GM products). Whether the content of the information is
good or bad, the consumer has a right to be informed.

Consumers are greatly drawn to the idea of ‘organic’ produce,
and for this reason the Commission is considering the
introduction of a special logo for such produce. It is vital that
the Commission clarify this initiative. The logo should only be
granted to producers who meet precise specifications and can
afford their cost. Moreover, the scheme should be open to all
Member States, so that organic farming is subject to the same
quality criteria and is recognised on the same terms throughout
the EU. This would make the concept of organic produce
clearer for the consumer, and would improve the relation
between the area farmed organically and the volume of
produce marketed. Rather than a logo, what is needed is a real
quality labelling system that is used throughout the EU.

A further way of recognising the quality of agriculture is to
introduce arrangements for tracking a product from its origin
to final consumption and detecting any shortcomings in the
chain. However, such measures cost money. This raises the
question of who is to finance them.

2.3.
Some traditional cultivation methods also deserve to
be recognised as a feature of sustainable agriculture, as they
make little use of plant protection products and respect the
capabilities of the land. Such methods are often used to grow
traditional local and regional products on small family-run
farms where they provide a source of extra income. The
original features of these products should be identified, the
relevant standards harmonised, and a quality label introduced
using common labelling for the same type of product. The
farmer’s expertise and professionalism will be recognised and
promoted.

Agricultural enterprises of all forms play a vital socio-economic
role in maintaining and even developing rural communities.
Until now, EU aid has mainly gone to large farms. The modern
mechanised farming methods which these farms have had to
adopt — because of the economic arguments in favour of
intensification and the need to adapt production to consumer
demand — are partly to blame for the drop in agricultural
employment.
In order to ensure that rural areas retain
their function, the Common Agricultural Policy should give
particular support to small farms which help to protect the
environment. The horizontal regulation, which provides a
bridge between market policy and rural development policy,
enables Member States to play their part too.

6.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 156/43

2.4.
Irrigation in the EU’s arid and semi-arid regions has
traditionally developed in harmony with the environment and
has promoted sustainable development among social groups
and societies whose current well-being stems from the estab-
lishment and improvement of irrigation methods. In these
places, water has become a crucial factor in production and in
combating desertification. Water management for agricultural
purposes complies with the sustainability required in current
EU legislation provided that the emphasis is on rational use of
this resource, ensuring it is available where it is needed,
encouraging policies promoting support for research into non-
conventional water sources such as desalination and re-use,
enhancing the culture of efficient saving and distribution, and
involving the user communities in management tasks.

Safeguarding the public water supply should be the responsi-
bility of society as a whole and not just a government activity.
In this context,
inefficient irrigation, marine intrusion in
coastal aquifers, alteration of water tables, eutrophication, and
the alteration of water quality should be eschewed and policies
protecting biodiversity should be developed.

The nitrates directive (1) sets out the ‘polluter pays’ principle
and this is a principle which must be adhered to.
It is
regrettable that all Member States with the possible exceptions
of Denmark and Sweden have not yet properly implemented
the various stages of application of the directive, or are behind
schedule in doing so. All those Member States which have not
yet fully implemented Directive 91/676/EEC should do so
as soon as possible, completing the following stages of
application:

— transposition of the directive into national law (by Decem-

ber 1993);

— monitoring of the quality of fresh and sea water (same

deadline);

— designation of associated ‘vulnerable zones’

(drainage
basins with intensive farming or high livestock density).
Same deadline, and revision every four years;

— establishment of a national code of good agricultural

practice, to be applied voluntarily;

— in each vulnerable zone, framing of an action programme
(making code mandatory) — first programme to be
established in 1996 at the latest and revised in 1999;

— report, every four years, on the water situation, revision of
zones, and evaluation of the effectiveness of the action
programmes.

If Member States do not all comply fully with the obligations
laid down in the directive, this could give rise to unfair
competition between EU producers, since farmers in countries
which apply the directive are penalised if they do not comply
with its rules, while farmers elsewhere are ‘free’ to choose their
farming methods even if these harm the environment.

The Commission must use all available means — sup-
plementing them if necessary — to ensure that the obligations
established in Directive 91/676/EEC are effectively enforced
throughout the EU. At present, such means take the form of
checks and the establishment of a tax. Without such action,
application of
the ‘polluter pays’ principle would create
inequalities between farmers with easily foreseeable conse-
quences both for farmers’ financial situations and for the
whole future of farming.

Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 (2) establishes a Community
2.5.
aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture. It seeks to
encourage alternative use of farmland for afforestation and the
development of forestry activities on farms, thereby helping to
reduce soil erosion.

2.6.
Other steps can also be taken to help protect the
environment, such as the cultivation of crops for non-food
purposes in order to encourage the use of products derived
from renewable raw materials, and the use of renewable energy
sources (biomass/biofuels). In addition to the aid provided for
afforestation, the development of the non-food sector should
be backed by fiscal measures (to be decided). Here account
must be taken of total energy and the eco-balance sheet.

2.7.
The European Council has introduced a number of
sectoral measures to improve protection. Agri-environmental
measures encourage ways of using agricultural land that are
the
compatible with the protection and improvement of
environment, the landscape and its features, natural resources,
the soil and genetic resources. These are to be supplemented
by measures for disadvantaged areas, with a view to keeping
viable communities on the land and supporting sustainable
farming and the sustainable management and development of
woodlands. Maintaining and supporting agricultural enter-
prises of all forms, as mentioned in 2.3 above, is crucial for
sustainable agriculture and for the sustainability of
local
communities.

(1) Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning
the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from
agricultural sources (OJ L 375, 13.12.1991, p. 1-8).

(2) Council Regulation of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid
scheme for forestry measures in agriculture (OJ L 215, 30.7.1992,
p. 96-99).

C 156/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

6.6.2000

2.8.
The array of agri-environmental measures proposed by
the Commission does not appear to be any more binding than
the current measures. However, the CAP reform under Agenda
2000 makes direct payments from the CAP conditional on
respect for certain environmental requirements decided by the
Member States. The Member States should take control of
these eco-requirements so that the EU does not systematically
adopt measures which might not be suited to certain national
circumstances.

The CAP instruments are only one aspect of Community
policy for protecting the agricultural environment. Most
Member States have other measures of their own for preventing
pollution and preserving their natural heritage.

To face the challenges that lie ahead, farmers must make a
careful analysis of their methods and make better use of
production factors, without intensifying production or aban-
doning land. It is necessary to steer EU agriculture towards
sustainable development by establishing an EU model of
agriculture that respects the environment and is economically
viable and socially acceptable, and where local bodies can be
expected to play an active and proactive role in terms of
providing support and encouragement for sustainable local
development.

Aid for the beef and dairy regimes will be granted on an area
basis to the Member States, who will distribute it to promote
the environmentally compatible types of production which
they wish to support. In the arable sector, the Commission
proposes to retain the set-aside measure, allowing voluntary
set-aside for up to 10 % of the base area for up to five years.

In line with the conclusions of the Cork conference on rural
development, regions are invited to draw up integrated
programmes for the sustainable development of rural areas.
The agri-environment measures would form a compulsory
part of these programmes. The programmes will encourage
the introduction of environmental measures which go beyond
basic respect
for the environment, will help to diversify
economic activities (e.g. tourism), and will provide specific
support for farms that show concern for the protection of the
environment. The measures will also include training for
farmers in how to protect the environment better and to use
production methods compatible with the preservation of the
countryside.

The present opinion must not overlook the ‘human resources’
aspect, as this is an essential part of the new rural development
policy. Support for the transfer of farms will continue via the
measures for helping young farmers entering the sector, who
must also be involved in the discussions, and via the measures
for encouraging early retirement. These measures, in combi-
nation with training schemes, will help to make the most of
the human potential in rural areas.

Farmers must be ready to observe basic environmental stan-
dards without compensation. However, if they deliver a higher
level of environmental service, it is only fair that this service
should be remunerated by appropriate agri-environmental
measures.

The agri-environmental programmes offer payments to far-
mers who undertake on a contractual basis to provide
environmental services and maintain the countryside. The
payments are based on the costs incurred and income foregone
by the farmer in carrying out the environmental activity.

The horizontal regulation laying down common rules for
direct support schemes under the CAP would apply to the
payments granted directly to farmers, with the exception of
those provided for under the rural development regulation.
Member States are to take the agri-environmental measures
which they consider appropriate ‘in view of the situation of
the agricultural land used or the production concerned’.

The agri-environmental measures cover ways of using farm-
land which protect the environment and all its features (fauna,
flora, soil, water, landscape, etc.). However, aid is only granted
for measures which go beyond the application of good farming
practice, which implies that the farmer already respects basic
environmental requirements.

In addition to the powers available under the horizontal
regulation, several specific environmental measures are pro-
posed for the common market regimes. These concern the
conditions under which direct payments are delivered. For beef
and veal, extra assistance would be given to extensive farms
with a maximum stocking density of 1.4 LU/ha, based on the
total number of adult bovine animals and sheep and goats.
The basic premium is only for animals up to 2 LU/ha.

3. Conclusions

Sustainable agriculture is postulated on respect for the environ-
ment. The Commission’s proposals offer Member States and
regions the instruments they need to ensure that basic
environmental standards are respected and to promote the
conservation and improvement of Europe’s unique environ-

6.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 156/45

mental heritage. Agriculture fulfils a number of roles: provision
of food, occupation of the land, upkeep of the landscape and
the natural environment. Sustainable development will only
be possible if the economic viability of agriculture is guaranteed
and if environmental concerns are taken into account in a
manner that is compatible with the economic prospects of the
sector.

The COR considers that the whole of European agriculture
must be compatible with the environment. Some key principles
must be introduced and respected. To achieve this goal,
European agriculture must:

a) apply ‘green’ techniques to its farming methods (rational
use of fertilisers, preference for natural fertilisers, extensive
agriculture, crop rotation, etc.), especially in river catch-
ment areas;

b)

in cooperation with European or world health bodies, test
the ecotoxity of plant protection products before they are
placed on the market. Farmers will then have a list (ideally,
an exhaustive list) of the products that they can use
without harming the environment;

c) provide a precise definition of ‘organic agriculture’, by
drawing up a detailed list of specifications and making
regular checks that they are respected;

d)

supplement organic agriculture by recognising traditional
local speciality products;

Brussels, 17 February 2000.

e) adopt a common agricultural policy which respects the
environment and recognises the professional skills of
income rather than
farmers, offering them a decent
meeting the requirements of sectoral organisations and
agricultural, agri-food and financial
food
produced and imported into the European Union should
be of
the highest hygiene and welfare standard. All
countries within the Union should adhere to and comply
with these standards;

lobbies. All

f)

reduce the use of nitrates in soil treatments;

g) establish proper constraints and provide financial compen-
sation if these exceed what is normal, so that farmers will
continue with their initiatives and will want to stay in the
sector;

h) oblige all Member States to adhere to Community measures
concurrently. Those who fail to do so should be subject to
financial penalties;

i) not forget farmers when devising and financing social
policies (support for small farms, replacement of farmers
who retire, maintenance of social infrastructure for rural
communities, training for farmers);

j) use agricultural production methods that help to conserve
natural resources: soil (soil conservation techniques), water
(irrigation methods entailing low water consumption,
action to prevent pollution of surface waters, etc.), fauna
and flora.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Jos CHABERT