2023-06-07 23:43:41
By Eric Dereudre, International Vice President of External Relations at Corteva Agriscience
Four years ago, the European Commission came up with the ambition to create a set of 50 measures aimed at making Europe the first continent to be neutral in greenhouse gases by 2050. These guidelines are part of the Green Dealor Green Pact.
O Green Deal starts from the premise that global warming and climate change are global challenges and presents itself as a plan to put the European Union in charge of this new economy, which will lead the way in which we face these challenges.
One of the most important pillars of this document relates to agriculture, which is described as “a healthy food system for people and the world” and includes the following objectives: ensuring food security in the face of climate change and loss of biodiversity; reduce the environmental and climate footprint of the European Union’s food system by strengthening its resilience; and leading the global transition towards competitive farm-to-table sustainability.
According to the European Commission, the “from farm to table” strategy is the central pillar of the Green Dealwhich aims to make the food system fair, healthy and sustainably friendly through actions that include a 50% reduction in pesticide use and a 20% reduction in fertilizer use by 2030.
The proposed changes are neither small nor easy to implement, as they imply profound transformations. Although the vast majority of Europeans understand that sustainability must be a priority for the future, there is no consensus on how this issue will be addressed and what must be sacrificed to achieve this goal.
These changes and restrictions fall on countries in other continents, such as Brazil, which exports billions of dollars in commodities to Europe every year. At this point lies the great dilemma of regulation: contrary to what was planned, food safety can be strongly impacted by the impositions of the Green Deal.
With Covid-19 and the War in Ukraine, there has never been so much talk about the importance of food reaching people in socially vulnerable situations quickly, safely, with quality and at affordable costs. The inspection, issuance of documentation and certifications that will be imposed on exporting countries and, consequently, on the entire agribusiness chain, may result in more expensive food, as this cost will be passed on to supermarket shelves. No society, company or country is against solutions to reduce the global carbon footprint and combat deforestation. We are all living on the same planet. However, care must be taken to prevent these actions from having the opposite effect, especially in their central aspect – the promotion of food security.
O Green Deal it also does not take into account whether major food exporters will accept these restrictions. These countries can direct their efforts to other markets such as China and Russia. The question now is: will Europeans be able to domestically grow, harvest and market all the food they need? The answer is obvious: no single country can produce everything it needs.
Free trade in food is fundamental to food security. The European Commission can impose its standards on imports, but on the other hand, this will lead to disruptions in commodity trade.
Another important discussion is about the maximum residue limit (MRL) of pesticides, a standard that every country must follow to import corn, soy, coffee, etc. It is defined by toxicological studies, to ensure that the food is safe for human consumption. That is, there is already control and regulation on the subject. O Green Deal it requires, however, that this threshold be drastically reduced, resulting in impacts on productivity and, even more importantly, the creation of new trade barriers and increased complexity of the food supply chain.
The issue of deforestation, another target of the European Union’s Green Diplomacy agenda, is another question mark. How can this be tracked? The EU intends to prohibit the purchase of products grown in deforested areas, but it does not consider policies already adopted in some countries – such as Brazil. Europe is seeking to impose a due diligence before importation, to prove that the acquisition of products from other continents is not associated with deforestation. This will include traceability and geolocation of origin, taking another step towards specialization of what has been an affordable agricultural commodity for years. What is the impact on the global food supply chain, in particular for the most vulnerable countries? In addition, there are countries, such as Brazil, that follow strict environmental laws, such as the Brazilian Forest Code, which differentiates between legal and illegal deforestation. How will this be considered without violating global trade standards?
O Green Deal it can become a barrier to world trade and a political issue between nations. We don’t want to see Europe pointing the finger at farmers in Brazil or the United States.
European guidelines will have a greater impact on people outside Europe than inside Europe: farmers, consumers, exporting countries and populations that today need quick access to high-quality food may suffer the consequences of these restrictions. Global food security today depends on open and balanced trade between countries.
Again, this is not to be against the principle of Green Deal. We are only cautious about not assessing the risks of these measures and need to know how these guidelines will be implemented. Any major policy must always be preceded by an impact assessment.
#Green #diplomacy #imposition #Eric #Dereudre #Vice #President..