Every year, the EU promotes European agriculture with almost 60 billion euros per year. The agricultural atlas of the Heinrich Böll Foundation shows that hardly any of this money is used for healthy food, the protection of the environment, climate and biodiversity or the preservation of small and medium-sized businesses. On the contrary, only 20 percent of the companies benefit from 80 percent of the funds – and this largely without conditions. But the atlas also proves that it would be wrong to simply abolish the promotion of agricultural policy. Because the conversion to a sustainable and globally just agriculture is not in vain.
The European edition of this atlas combines elements from various already published national editions, giving both an overview of Europe as a whole as well as insights into the agricultural structures in various EU member states. This atlas aims to strengthen civil society and social movements throughout the continent, thereby advancing the ecological and social transformation in our agricultural and food systems.
Table of contents:
TWELVE BRIEF LESSONS ON AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN EUROPE
Set in Brussels since the 1960s, the Common Agricultural Policy is one of the EU’s oldest policies. Despite its extensive funds and regular reforms every seven years, it is poorly attuned to the needs of Europe’s hugely diverse farm sector. Payments tied to area disproportionately benefit large, industrialized farms and promote productivity. Goals to minimize and adapt to climate change, protect the environment and promote rural development are poorly served.
A mini-Brexit took place back in 1985 with the UK budget rebate, which violates the principle of solidarity in European integration. But the payments made to farmers under the Common Agricultural Policy are hindering further threats of withdrawal from the European Union.
France is the largest recipient of Common Agricultural Policy funds. But there are significant disparities among the country’s regions, between types of production, and among farms.
BIODIOVERSITY INTENSIFICATION VS CONSERVATION