Member states push for more farming environmental exemptions for 2024

Seven member states have pushed for further flexibility on environmental measures in the EU’s farming subsidy programme for 2024, despite no impact assessment on the previous exemptions having been made – a move lambasted by green groups.

In efforts to counter the impacts of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU previously allowed temporary derogations from certain environmental requirements in the EU’s farming subsidy programme, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), in both 2022 and 2023 – and, if the member states get their way, this could be set to continue into 2024.

The request, which was spearheaded by Latvia with the backing of the Czech, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, Lithuanian and Polish delegations, is justified by drought, which the EU member states say is causing “remarkable crop losses”.

“Prolonged and intensified drought conditions have a negative impact on most of agricultural crops and their development,” the document – which will be discussed at the meeting of EU agriculture ministers on 26 and 27 June – notes, adding that this issue is compounded by ongoing knock-on impacts of the Ukraine war.

Concretely, this would involve extending the temporary exemptions for rules on crop rotation and the use of fallow land – in other words, farmland areas set aside for biodiversity – from this year into the next, as well as more flexible rules on grazing permanent grasslands and soil preparation for crop cultivation during the autumn and winter period of 2023/2024.

How likely is a greenlight from the Commission?

According to a senior EU official, despite the previous leniencies on the CAP environmental measures, the European Commission has been ‘quite clear’ that they “don’t really see the same possibility to have these kinds of derogations”. 

“So I think I’m my guess is that we’re going to hear similar things from Commission on Tuesday,” the official said.

However, the official noted that given the rising concerns over adverse weather conditions in a range of EU member states, it will be ‘interesting’ to see what comes out of this item.

Meanwhile, commenting on the previous derogations, a Commission spokesperson told EURACTIV that the level of uncertainties related to the world food supply situation following the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine “were and remain extremely high”. 

“The Commission has continuously stressed that, food sustainability remains fundamental for food security and we continue the transitional foreseen in the green deal,” the spokesperson said, adding reassurances that ‘several safeguards’ are in place and the derogation is limited to what is “strictly necessary to address the global food security concerns”.

No impact assessment

However, an EU source told EURACTIV that, as things currently stand, there has been no impact assessment on the previous decision to derogate from environmental measures. 

However, there is an obligation for member states to report on the uptake and impact of such derogations on the environment and production by the end of the year, so the Commission can “assess the relevance of such derogation”, the source explained.

The source added that the 2022/23 season derogations were based on a “great uncertainty” with regard to how much grain Ukraine will be able to produce and export and that this uncertainty is “still valid”. 

“The size of the next year’s harvest is even more uncertain than the previous season and export flows will depend to a great extent on Putin’s goodwill to keep Ukrainian Black Sea ports open,” they said.

However, green groups warn that, in the context of the climate crisis, the EU cannot afford to sacrifice the environment on the altar of food security.

Earlier in June, more than 100 civil society organisations called on the Commission not to allow any further derogations in a joint open letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Meanwhile, a study into the suspension of the measures, put together by a coalition of green groups at the end of May, argued they had fallen woefully short of their promises. 

Birdlife’s Marilda Dhaskali told EURACTIV that it is “just unbelievable that without having done any impact assessment of the consequences of these derogations to nature and climate change,” stressing that this is actually “the cause of ‘bad weather conditions’ farmers are facing”.

“Some member states have no shame to ask for further derogation on GAEC 7, 8 [crop rotation and fallow land derogations] and even more,” she criticised.

[Edited by Nathalie Weatherald]

Read more with EURACTIV