Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on The link between climate change and agriculture at European level
Date: 2008-07-09
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, agricultural policy, bioenergy, biofuel, biomass, climate change, energy consumption, greenhouse gas, job creation

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/59

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The link between climate change and
agriculture at European level’

(2009/C 27/14)

On 25 October 2007 the French Presidency of the Council wrote to the European Economic and Social
Committee under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to request an exploratory
opinion on

The link between climate change and agriculture at European level.

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 4 June 2008. The rapporteur was Mr Ribbe
and the co-rapporteur was Mr Wilms.

At its 446th plenary session, held on 9 and 10 July 2008 (meeting of 9 July), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 94 votes to 30 with 13 abstentions.

1. Summary of EESC conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The EESC was requested to draw up an exploratory
opinion on The link between climate change and agriculture at
European level by a letter
from the French presidency of
25 October 2007. The Committee was specifically asked to
discuss biofuels issues.

1.2
The EESC is extremely concerned by the negative effects
of climate change on European agriculture and consequently on
economic performance in many rural areas. Southern Europe is
likely to be particularly hard-hit, in view of the expected long
periods of drought and even water scarcity. At worst, these
problems could result in total cessation of agricultural activities.
However, farmers will also face serious problems in other parts
of Europe due to climate change, for example in the form of
major disruption to seasonal rainfall patterns. In addition, there
is a risk of problems arising from new or more widespread
plant diseases and pests.

Politicians must

1.3
climate policy into other policy areas.

therefore act swiftly and incorporate

1.4
Agriculture is not only a victim of climate change, but
also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions; the main impact
comes from emissions not of CO2, but of methane and nitrous
oxide resulting from changes in land use and agricultural
production itself. The EESC urges the Commission to conduct a
more detailed analysis of differences between various types of
agricultural land use in terms of climate impact, so that policy
options can be developed, for example in relation to support for
farmers. In this context, it welcomes the Commission's declara-
tion of its intention to integrate climate protection more closely
into the future common agricultural policy.

1.5
Agriculture can significantly contribute to combating
climate change, for example by ensuring that the remaining

carbon sinks in soils are not only retained but also developed
through systematic use of
compost, by reducing energy
consumption and by producing biomass for energy needs using
environmental methods.

The EESC does not feel that the EU's emerging future
1.6
biofuel strategy, which according to Commission statements will
to a large extent involve imports of agricultural raw materials, is
the right way to achieve climate change targets in an economic-
ally efficient way while creating new jobs in farming and gener-
revenue. Rather, a judicious new biomass
ating additional
strategy should be drawn up to replace the biofuel strategy;
instead of focussing on imports, this would aim to substantially
increase the conversion of agricultural by-products/waste into
useable energy, and give farmers an active role in newly reorga-
nised decentralised energy cycles.

2. Main elements and context of the opinion

2.1
Agriculture is probably the economic sector which is
most strongly dependent on natural (including climate) condi-
tions, and which uses, influences or changes them to the largest
extent.

It

is based on systematic use of

2.2
the photosynthetic
capabilities of plants to convert solar energy into energy that
can be used by humans in the form of food or fodder. In addi-
tion, energy captured by photosynthesis has always been used
for heating purposes (e.g. biomass in the form of wood).

2.3
Climate conditions, which have mainly been favourable
for agriculture in Europe up till now, are a decisive factor
reflected in the highly varied structures and diversity of
European farming. What this means is that any change in condi-
tions must affect agriculture and the associated environmental,
economic and social regional structures.

C 27/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2009

3. General observations

Agriculture as a victim of climate change

in particular

Climate changes,

the predicted rise in
3.1
temperature and,
to an even greater extent, changes in the
amount of rainfall, will have a devastating effect on agriculture
in some parts of Europe. Especially in southern Europe, long
periods without rain, or even droughts, and the resulting poten-
tial desertification could make agricultural production impos-
sible.
large-scale fires are a very serious
threat to agricultural land (1). Rural economies in such areas are
seriously threatened. All scientific studies suggest that climate
change will have an impact on pests and diseases, which will
significantly reduce yields on the main food crops. Changes in
the life cycle of pathogens will give rise to:

In addition to this,

— changes in the geographical distribution of pathogens,

— changes in the incidence and severity of diseases,

— changes in the disease control strategy.

3.2
In this context, the EESC would refer to the Commis-
sion's various publications and initiatives on this subject, such
as the communication on Addressing the challenge of water scarcity
and droughts in the European Union (2) and the ideas and plans
which it describes, the Green Paper on Adapting to climate change
in Europe; indeed, the Commission has emphasised that there is
a need to develop coherent land-use strategies. In addition, there
are activities in progress in many countries.

3.3 Most Europeans and indeed political decision-makers are
probably unable to imagine what would happen if, for example,
farming had to be abandoned across large areas of southern
Europe due to insufficient water supplies and extreme tempera-
ture conditions. This would also have negative repercussions for
employment in the regions concerned owing to changes in land
use.

3.4
The EESC therefore calls on all decision-makers to do
everything they can to contain the negative impact on agri-
culture through a comprehensive and radical climate protection
programme. It also essential that measures be taken to adapt
agricultural activity to climate change. The agricultural sector
will have to adapt efficiently and rapidly to future climate
changes, since the success or failure of these measures will deter-
mine whether farming can continue.

3.4.1
According to the most recent OECD and FAO report,
research and innovation must be key factors in combating
climate change. Among the adaptation activities to be carried
out, consideration should be given to promoting new plant
species and varieties better adapted to climate change. Especially
relevant here are advances in the improvement of plant and
animal material.

The contribution of agriculture to climate change

3.5
For the EESC, it is necessary not only to discuss the nega-
tive repercussions of climate change for agriculture, but also to
keep in mind that agriculture itself contributes to climate
change and to take steps to reduce the climate-harming effects
of agriculture.
It is also important to take into account the
various ways in which agriculture can help to combat climate
change.

3.6
The Committee therefore appreciates that the Commis-
sion has identified climate policy as one of four new challenges
for the CAP in its communication on the CAP Health Check (3).

3.7
Based on the IPCC definition, emissions originating
directly from agriculture account for 10-12 % of total emissions.
Altogether, it is estimated that agriculture contributes between
8.5-16.5 billion tonnes of CO2e to global emissions of green-
house gases (4), i.e. 17-32 % of the total (5).

3.8
For Europe, the share of agriculture in greenhouse gas
emissions is estimated to be much less than the corresponding
figure for global emissions. The Commission mentions a figure
of 9 %, based on the methods of calculation used by the IPCC.
Since 1990 agriculture in the EU-27 has cut emissions by 20 %,
and the EU-15 by 11 % (6). However, IPCC calculation methods
do not take into account greenhouse gas emissions resulting
from changes to land use, energy used to produce fertilisers and
plant protection products, or tractor fuel. Thus, whereas e.g. the
Commission puts the contribution of farming to German emis-
sions at 6 %, the German federal government has produced an
estimate of 11-15 %, taking into account all emissions resulting
from agriculture.

The various implications of agricultural greenhouse gases

3.9
Agriculture only accounts for a small proportion of net
CO2 emissions. The main reason for this is that plants initially
absorb CO2 and convert it into organic matter. When biomass
is used, the carbon which has been temporarily absorbed is
released again as CO2. Hence, the carbon cycle is to a large
extent closed.

(1) e.g. fires in Greece in 2007 which destroyed olive plantations, among

other things.

(2) COM(2007) 414 final, 18.7.2007, EESC opinion OJ C 224, 30.8.2008,

p. 67 adopted on 29 May 2008.

(3) COM(2007) 722 final.
(4) CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent.
(5) Cool Farming: Climate impacts of agriculture and mitigation potential,

Study by Greenpeace, December 2007.

(6) Source: European Environment Agency, EEA Report 5/2007.

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/61

3.10
According to the Fourth Assessment Report by the
IPCC (7), the main climate policy concern in agriculture should
be methane and nitrous oxide emissions. In Europe, around
40 % of total CH4 and N2O emissions originate from agri-
culture, and it is these greenhouse gases which have a particu-
larly strong impact on climate; the global warming potentials of
nitrous oxide and methane are about 296 and 23 times respec-
tively that of CO2.

3.11
of particular relevance to climate change:

There are basically four aspects of agriculture which are

a) conversion of woodlands, peat bogs, wetlands or grassland

into arable farmland,

b) greenhouse gas emissions from cultivated land and livestock,

c) energy use in farms and in upstream and downstream
sectors, for example in the form of fuel, and energy used in
the manufacture of chemical fertilisers, pesticides and other
products (8), and

d) production of biomass for energy.

3.12
Overall, conversion of hitherto uncultivated areas to
agricultural use is of by far the greatest importance, and is a far
greater cause of greenhouse gases than agricultural production
and energy use. Every time that arable fields are created, green-
house gases are released, as arable land stores the lowest average
amount of carbon dioxide in its soil, except for deserts, semide-
serts and built-up areas (9).

3.13
The debate on the destruction of rainforests in the
Amazon Basin or Indonesia is therefore seen as being of funda-
mental importance. The EESC would point out that Europe and
European agriculture have something to do with large-scale
deforestation in those parts of the world (10).

3.15
Climate policy is concerned with six main carbon
sinks (11). Of these, surface biomass and soils are of the most
relevance to agriculture. Given that agriculture is based on
annual harvests of the biomass which it produces, it does not
create any new relevant surface carbon sinks in the form of
biomass.

As a result of converting woodland, peat bogs and
3.16
grassland into arable farmland, carbon stored in the soil
is
released. Hence, it is important for European farming that areas
which still retain large reserves of carbon are preserved. To this
end, incentives must be developed through appropriate support
instruments to encourage the right farming methods.

Based on our current knowledge, climate change alone
3.17
is sufficient reason to impose an immediate ban on conversion
of peat bogs and woodland.

3.18
Over the past few decades in Europe, there has been
large-scale conversion of grassland into arable land; despite
various restrictions (12),
this process is not yet over, and is
indeed regaining momentum in some regions due to increased
energy farming.

3.19
The reason for increased conversion of grassland to
arable land is that farmers' profit margins on arable land are
significantly higher. Using land for grazing is more labour-inten-
sive, and grass alone is no longer sufficient to enable cattle to
achieve the ‘desired’ high yields. Livestock is therefore dependent
on energy feedstuffs, production of which requires a signifi-
cantly higher energy input.

The EESC will play close attention to how environ-
3.20
mental and agricultural policies deal with this situation,
for
example in the context of legislative proposals relating to the
CAP Health Check. The Committee calls for an intensive debate
on ways of making land use which is climate-friendly and
compatible with nature conservation economically attractive to
farmers once again.

Changes in land use/carbon sinks

3.14
One major problem is that large areas of land are built
on and hence lost to agricultural production and as carbon
sinks. The EESC is disappointed that the planned directive on
soil protection, which could make a substantial contribution
here, has not yet been adopted.

(7) IPCC WG III Chapter 8 (2007), Agriculture.
(8) Including fodder.
(9) Soils are the second-largest stores of carbon dioxide, after the seas. The
EESC is aware that the there are some quite major discrepancies in
figures from different sources, but the following are some statistics:
arable land contains about 60 tonnes of carbon dioxide per hectare,
grassland and woodland soils contain twice as much (in woodlands,
additional carbon dioxide is also stored in trees), and a hectare of moor-
land can store up to 1 600 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

(10) For example, production of soya as fodder for European livestock and
palm or jatropha oil production for energy purposes (‘bio’ fuels).

Greenhouse gases from agricultural production

3.20.1
The use of nitrogen fertilisers of both synthetic and
organic origin is the main culprit for emissions of nitrous oxide.
Whenever there is intensive use of nitrogen fertilisers, there is
always a risk of plants not being able to absorb them quickly or
fully enough, thus releasing nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.
Up until now, environmental policy was mainly concerned with
the resulting pollution of ground and surface water, but now
climate change is an additional reason for a more critical look at
nutrient cycles.

(11) Oil, coal and gas reserves, surface biomass, carbon stored in soils, and

oceans.

(12) Such as cross-compliance criteria.

C 27/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2009

3.20.2
In a study on nitrous oxide emissions, climate
researcher Professor Crutzen analysed nitrous oxide emissions in
the production chain from rape to biodiesel (13), and reached the
conclusion that in certain conditions rape methyl ester can have
a more harmful effect on climate than diesel from crude oil,
precisely because of its high nitrous oxide emissions resulting
from the use of chemical fertilisers.

Another source of agricultural nitrous oxide emis-
3.20.3
sions, which is less significant
is the
decomposition of organic matter in soils, particularly in arable
farming.

in quantitative terms,

3.20.4 Most agricultural methane emissions in Europe are
caused by ruminant livestock, and cattle in particular. The EESC
is aware that methane emissions from ruminant animals are of
growing international importance (14), and that at global
level
the problem will become more serious as numbers of cattle rise.
It is true that cattle stocks in Europe have decreased over the
last few years (15), but it should also be borne in mind that
Europe is a net importer in this field.

Eating meat has

3.21
an impact on climate. Around
10 plant-derived calories are needed to produce one animal-
derived calorie. Rising consumption of meat requires increased
cultivation of fodder, which in turn requires more energy and
increases the pressure for higher yields from agricultural land.
With relatively high levels of meat consumption, Europe
imports a large part of its fodder requirements, cultivation of
which is often responsible for very serious problems (e.g. soya
in the Amazon Basin). The EESC is therefore in favour of
framing and implementing a European strategy on proteins.

Not only the volume of meat produced but also live-
3.22
stock farming methods are relevant here. For example, meat and
milk may derive from energy-extensive pasture farming, with
cows using grassland — whose importance for climate protec-
tion has been underestimated — during the growing season.
However, meat and milk also originate from energy-intensive
farms which do not use grassland and in which cattle are
mainly fed corn silage or other energy-rich arable fodder crops.

directly by people and instead are ‘upgraded’ to animal products,
the less significant this advantage becomes.

3.24 Whereas organic farms refrain from using industrially
manufactured, water-soluble
and plant
protection products, for example, the energy consumption and
climate impact of conventional farming is exacerbated by the
use of such substances.

fertilisers

chemical

Some comparative studies of agricultural performance
3.24.1
in terms of general energy and materials consumption, as well
as carbon sequestration, show that average energy and nitrogen
inputs are less for organic farming than conventional agri-
culture. Even if the higher yields of conventional agriculture are
taken into account, the global warming potential of organic
farming is less (16). This is, for example, why the German federal
government considers support for organic farming as a contri-
bution to climate protection (17).

3.24.2
sions.

Some other studies have reached different conclu-

Therefore,

information on certain aspects of

3.25
the
problem is still sparse and contradictory; partly in view of this,
the EESC urges the Commission to conduct a detailed analysis
of how the various forms of agricultural and non-agricultural
land use differ in terms of climate impact, so that policy options
can then be developed, for example in the field of support for
farmers.

Contribution of agriculture to solving climate change problems

Thus agriculture can contribute in many different ways
3.26
to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from current levels. This
includes things like not converting forest, moorland, wetlands
and grassland into arable land, and reducing nitrous oxide and
methane emissions through sustainable land management and if
possible long-term land cover (catch crop cultivation), multiple
crop rotation (e.g. to minimise pest problems), appropriate ferti-
liser use, etc.

Energy use in agriculture

The advantage of agriculture is that it directly converts
3.23
solar energy into useable crop-based energy; however,
the
greater the input of energy from fossil fuels into the production
process, and the fewer plant products which are consumed

(13) ‘N2O release from agro-biofuel production negates global warming
reduction by replacing fossil fuels’, in: Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 7,
11191-11205, 2007.

(14) Around 3.3 billion tons CO2e/year.
(15) Global cattle stocks: 1 297 million head of cattle (in 1990),
1 339 million (2004), EU (25): 111.2 million (in 1990), 86.4 million
(2004), China: 79.5 million (in 1990), 106.5 million (in 2004).

3.27
For a long time, energy inputs were not really regarded
as problematic, especially as energy was available very cheaply.
The EESC sees an urgent need to focus more in the future on
particularly energy-efficient
forms of management and to
promote these. Organic farming and so-called low-input produc-
tion (e.g. extensive pasturing) can make a contribution here.

(16) For example, see the feature on ‘Klimaschutz und Öko-Landbau’
(Climate protection and organic farming) in: Ökologie & Landbau,
1/2008.

(17) The federal government's reply to the parliamentary question put by
the BÜNDNIS 90/Die Grünen Group on ‘agriculture and climate
protection’, Parliamentary Paper 16/5346, paragraph 13.

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/63

3.28
Experiments in the field of so-called mixed cultivation
have produced promising results. For instance, different types of
crop are cultivated in the same field with pulses and oil plants,
which means less use of fertilisers and pesticides, as well as
increased biodiversity and promotion of compost.

Using agricultural waste products and,

4.2.3
for example,
biomass from landscape management provides high energy
potential in Europe, but this is only being harnessed to a limited
extent because specialised (i.e. more energy-intensive) cultivation
of energy crops is more cost-effective. Assistance policy has so
far sent out the wrong signals here.

Compost use is crucially important for climate change.
3.29
In future, there should be more of a focus on achieving the
most stable and highest compost content on agricultural land in
particular, which often necessitates changes in crop rotation.
The EESC calls on the Commission to evaluate studies available
jointly with research institutes in the Member States and if
necessary to commission further studies, in order to seek and
support optimum procedures.

3.30
This also means considering the importance should be
given to solid dung use. It must also be clarified whether whole-
plant utilisation, as planned for second-generation biofuels,
might not undermine the objectives of humus creation.

4. Bioenergy/biofuels from agriculture

The French presidency has requested the EESC to look at
4.1
the subject of biofuels
in conjunction with this opinion.
Obviously, the Committee is happy to oblige, but would also
refer to its existing opinions on the subject (18) setting out in
detail its critical position on the current biofuels strategy.

Given the high CO2 emissions of coal, oil and gas,
4.2
thought is rightly being given to using more energy produced
directly by plants The EESC has on several occasions essentially
approved the use of bioenergy, but would like to point out
some basic principles that it considers indispensable.

4.2.1
The EESC stresses that the right to adequate food is
explicitly recognised as an important part of the broader human
rights. The production of basic foodstuffs has to take priority
over energy production.

It is also important that no land should be used for
4.2.2
growing energy crops that is currently either a major carbon
sink or of key importance for biodiversity. The EESC is pleased
that the Commission has acknowledged the need for energy
crops to be subject to sustainability criteria. The EESC's opinion
on the proposed directive on renewable energies will include a
detailed discussion of whether
sustainability
criteria are sufficient or not. The EESC is in favour of applying
appropriate sustainability criteria to fuels in general, irrespective
of where they come from, as well as to animal feed.

the directive's

(18) OJ C 44, 16.2.2008, p. 34, and opinion TEN 338 on the proposal for a
directive on renewable energy (COM(2008)019), under preparation.

it

is

4.2.4 When using bioenergy,
to ensure
maximum efficiency. For example, there is no point in making
biogas from maize produced by energy-intensive cultivation if
the heat produced through electricity generation cannot be sold,
as in this case about two thirds of the energy actually produced
is immediately lost again.

important

4.2.5
Current production of energy crops often requires an
initial high energy input, and the resulting plants or oils must
undergo further energy-intensive industrial processing. This
leads to poor or even negative net energy and climate balances
of many biofuels that can be ruinous.

4.2.6
For this reason the Commission's Joint Research Centre
(JRC) was doubtful in its study Biofuels in the European Context
about the possibility of achieving even the Commission's own
goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by having a 10 %
share of biofuels in the energy mix. Other studies (19) have come
to the same conclusion.

4.2.7
The JRC study also raises a crucial point, which the
EESC believes must become a principle of policy-making. The
biomass produced should be used where it is most needed. The
watchword is ‘efficiency’ (20). Why should the molecular struc-
tures of energy-intensive crops be changed by industrial proces-
sing, if they can be used to produce energy directly? The JRC
notes that stationary heating and power generation uses as
much oil as diesel vehicle engines in the EU. If energy crops
were used here, 1 MJ of biomass could replace about 0.95 MJ of
fossil fuel. But 1 MJ of biomass replaces only about 0.35 to
0.45 MJ of crude oil when used in the transport sector.

4.2.8
However, greenhouse gas emissions from the transport
sector can be reduced by using electric vehicles running on
energy produced by the burning of biomass.

In its opinion Energy mix in transport (21) the EESC notes
4.3
that the internal combustion engine will be replaced by electric
traction in the transport sector. It makes no sense to manage
crop-based energy as inefficiently as is the case now for biofuels.

(19) e.g. that of the Scientific Advisory Board of the German Federal

Ministry for Agriculture.
(20) OJ C 162, 25.6.2008, p. 72.
(21) OJ C 162, 25.6.2008, p. 52.

C 27/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2009

A comparative study carried out by Empa (22) calculated
4.4
that for a VW Golf to go 10 000 km using biodiesel, rape
would have to be cultivated over an area of 2 062 square
metres. By contrast, solar cells could produce the energy needed
for a journey of 10 000 km on an area of 37 m2, which is
around 1/60th of the area required with rape.

5.3
At the same time, a shortage of skilled labour is forecast
for many European countries, especially of workers who are
able to take up leadership roles or operate complex technology.
In addition, shortages of skilled labour are aggravated by the
fact
that existing jobs are unattractive. The Committee has
already explicitly commented on this development and pointed
out that a discussion of job quality is necessary (24).

4.5
It must also be questioned whether it is worth refining
plant oils for use in internal combustion engines. Why are
engines not adapted to the plant oils' molecular structure?
tractors and
Engines have already been developed, e.g.
trucks, that can run on pure plant oil and meet all the emissions
limits set and planned by the EU. More support is needed for
such innovations.

for

4.6
The oils required for such engines can be cultivated in a
mixture with other crops, processed in the region, and used
locally. This means that farmers could, with environment and
climate-friendly low-input processes, not only produce their
own motive power, but also initiate new, regional energy cycles.
This would
industrial
processing.

energy-intensive

further

bypass

4.7
The EESC therefore feels that what Europe needs is not
so much a simple biofuels strategy as a well-thought-out
European biomass strategy;
this could be far more climate-
friendly and productive of new jobs than the currently emerging
biofuels strategy, which is likely to rely heavily on imports of
energy crops.

5. New jobs with
agricultural policy

climate-friendly

agriculture

and

Job-creating potential of bioenergy

The potential

for environment

5.4
friendly production of
biomass for energy in Europe was investigated in a 2006 report
carried out by the European Environment Agency. If biomass
from waste (e.g. household waste) and forestry is included,
15-16 % of estimated primary energy needs of the EU-25 could
be produced in this way in 2030. This could guarantee or even
create 500 000 to 600 000 jobs in rural areas.

5.5 Whether bioenergy creates new jobs and if so, how
many, closely depends on the strategy adopted. The Scientific
Advisory Board of the German Federal Ministry for Agriculture
forecasts that the most beneficial effect in terms of climate
protection and job creation will be achieved if the focus is on
‘producing bioenergy in heat-led cogeneration systems or
heating systems based on woodchips or on biogas derived from
liquid manure and waste materials’. However,
if support for
bioenergy means a shift from livestock farming or, as current
trends suggest, a reliance on imported biofuels, the employment
impact on rural areas will be negative.

to

of

Examples

transition

successful

closed-loop
5.6
bioenergy systems show certain types of bioenergy production
to be economically, environmentally and socially advantageous,
for both agriculture and regional labour markets. (The munici-
palities of Mureck and Güssing (both in Austria) as well as
Jühnde (Germany) have achieved renewable energy supply levels
of up to 170 %). This impressive environmental performance is
accompanied by a positive impact on the local labour market
(local crafts), without even counting jobs for farmers delivering
raw material (25).

5.1
It is true that climate change is threatening agriculture in
parts of Europe, but at the same time it can also represent an
opportunity for agriculture and for Europe's workforce, if agri-
culture is serious enough about its role in relation to the new
trends in climate policy and promotes that role.

5.7
Since income and wealth differentials between urban and
rural areas can be expected to widen further, particular attention
must be paid to rural areas in employment policy. Sustainable
production of energy crops and their conversion into energy
can secure and create jobs in rural areas, if value added then
remains in the region.

5.2
Agriculture remains an important source of employment
in the European Union. One Commission communication
contains a detailed discussion of employment trends in rural
areas (23).
that despite being a relatively small
employer, agriculture is very important
in rural areas. The
Commission expects jobs in agriculture (full-time equivalents) to
decrease from the current 10 million by 4-6 million.

It points out

Guaranteeing high-quality jobs in agriculture

5.8
The goal of climate protection can be achieved only with
the help of skilled labour. Businesses must provide the right
training framework for them to achieve this.

(22) Empa is a research institute for materials science and technology
belonging to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich.

(23) COM(2006) 857 final, Employment in rural areas: closing the jobs gap.

(24) OJ C 120, 16.5.2008, p. 25.
(25) For more information, see www.seeg.at.

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/65

Setting and guaranteeing social standards

It

5.9
imported
is generally assumed that demand for
biomass from developing countries and emerging economies
will increase further. In this situation, potential cost advantages
must not be used if that means destroying the environmental
and social
fabric in producer countries. The production of
bioenergy must therefore comply with the ILO Core Labour
Standards and its employment protection standards (26).

Involvement of workers and trade unions

5.10
Structural change in agriculture will have a considerable
impact on the quality of jobs and incomes. Workers and trade
unions must therefore participate in this process of change.
Since models of worker involvement vary widely within Europe,

more consideration must be given to the participation concerns
of agricultural workers within the current European and
national structures. This is particularly important because these
forms of communication and idea-sharing can protect and
preserve jobs.

5.11
The European social dialogue committee for agriculture,
which was set up in 1999, is a representative grouping of social
partners for questions of employment and future development
of the new role of agriculture, serving as a qualified expert and
advisory body. The EESC recommends that the Commission
strengthen the role of this body, not least in relation to climate
policy. As experts on climate-related issues in agriculture, the
social partners should have more say at national level on the
committees that monitor the development of rural areas.

Brussels, 9 July 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(26) http://www.ilo.org/global/What_we_do/InternationalLabourStan-

dards/lang–en/index.htm.