Brussels – The European Union’s agricultural and food systems are increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, and current policies are falling short of the necessary changes to mitigate the risks, according to a new report from the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC). Released on March 11th, the report warns that the entire food chain – from fertilizer production to consumption – contributes roughly one-third of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions although simultaneously being heavily reliant on stable climate conditions. The findings underscore the urgent need for systemic change and stronger political incentives to build resilience and reduce emissions across the sector.
The report’s central concern is the lack of progress toward the EU’s ambitious climate goals for 2040 and 2050. Existing measures are insufficient to address the growing climate risks facing farmers and to ensure food security, the ESABCC states. With upcoming revisions to the EU budget, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the climate framework for 2031-2040, policymakers have a critical opportunity to align agricultural policy with climate objectives. However, the advisory board emphasizes that incremental improvements through technology and farming practices alone will not be enough.
A Systemic Shift is Required
The ESABCC report calls for a fundamental, systemic transformation of the EU’s agri-food system. This includes a phased reduction of CAP payments that incentivize greenhouse gas-intensive practices, coupled with the development of alternative income support mechanisms aligned with climate goals. A key recommendation is the introduction of a greenhouse gas pricing system for the agricultural and food sector, based on the “polluter pays” principle. Revenue generated from such a system could be used to support farmers and incentivize carbon removal initiatives.
Beyond pricing mechanisms, the report stresses the importance of targeted support for farmers to facilitate the transition, addressing both financial and knowledge-based barriers. Strengthening instruments to help farmers manage unavoidable climate impacts, promoting healthy and climate-friendly diets, and reducing food waste are also highlighted as crucial steps. Crucially, the ESABCC emphasizes that this transition must be gradual and equitable, with specific support for farmers and regions facing the greatest adaptation challenges.
Environmental Groups Echo the Warnings
Environmental organizations largely support the ESABCC’s assessment and recommendations. Sven Harmeling, of CAN Europe, described the 300-page report as “groundbreaking,” noting that it suggests a systemic shift could reduce non-CO₂ emissions from agriculture by more than a third by 2040 compared to 2005 levels. Harmeling suggests this could serve as a basis for discussions and proposals from the EU Commission regarding agriculture’s role in achieving the EU’s 2040 climate target, with a particular focus on emissions from livestock.
WWF also voiced support for the “polluter pays” principle, arguing that harmful subsidies should be eliminated and CAP funds redirected towards climate action. The organization pointed to its own recommendations for aligning European agri-food systems with climate goals, available in their position paper.
However, not all responses were uniformly positive. Carbon Market Watch (CMW) welcomed the ESABCC’s broad approach but cautioned against viewing emissions pricing in agriculture as a silver bullet. Without a robust and comprehensive design focused on avoidance, it could “open a Pandora’s Box,” according to a LinkedIn post. CMW also raised concerns about the potential for carbon farming credits, arguing they offer limited long-term climate benefits and are methodologically questionable, as detailed in their position paper.
The Role of Industrial Agriculture
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) emphasized that the food and agriculture system is a major driver of greenhouse gas emissions, exacerbating the climate crisis. Without structural changes, the EU cannot achieve its climate targets and risks relying on “uncertain, costly, and risky technological solutions and technologies for carbon removal,” according to IATP’s analysis. Sophie Scherger of IATP stated that a shift away from the current scale and orientation of industrial livestock farming is “unavoidable.” Farmers need support, clear guidance, and sustained political commitment to navigate this transition successfully.
The ESABCC report highlights the interconnectedness of climate change and food systems, emphasizing that a resilient and sustainable food supply is essential for both environmental and economic stability. The recommendations presented represent a significant challenge to the status quo, requiring a coordinated effort from policymakers, farmers, and consumers alike.
The next key step will be the European Commission’s response to the ESABCC report and its integration into the ongoing revisions of the EU budget, the CAP, and the climate framework. The Commission is expected to present proposals for the next CAP period in the coming months, offering a concrete opportunity to implement the advisory board’s recommendations. The debate over the future of European agriculture and its role in addressing the climate crisis is only just beginning.
What are your thoughts on the future of sustainable agriculture in Europe? Share your comments below and help us continue the conversation.
