Thread by @LHreports

THREAD. Looming food crisis caused by invasion of #Ukraine seen by “Big Ag” (agricultural lobby & their political allies) as an opportunity to throttle the EU’s Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy. But this could compromise future food security + puts animal feed over food. We explain:

Big Ag’s argument is: the war threatens EU’s food supplies so we should roll back environmental considerations in #F2F & #CAP, like curbing the use of chemical fertilisers & pesticides and keeping some land to restore & protect nature

But take cereals, one of the key commodities at stake: The EU is a NET EXPORTER of cereals & has a self-sufficiency rate of 112%. Last year, the EU exported 44.8m tonnes & imported only 19.7m tonnes. Source: EU data.

61% of EU’s cereals go to animals, according to the feed industry. Only 23% is used directly as food. So a drop in cereal imports would mainly affect animal feed. What we face in the EU is not a food crisis but a meat production crisis

Animal products, such as pork and dairy, made up 23% of EU’s agri exports in 2020, meaning they’re raised for the global market, not local consumers. Nonetheless, a powerful and concerted attempt by Big Ag is framing the current crisis in terms of EU food sovereignty:

i) On Feb 26, The German Farmers' Association (DBV) called for the Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy to be reviewed, especially the requirement to set aside some land to protect biodiversity.

ii) Two days later, we saw notes from EU’s Agriculture and Fisheries Council, suggesting that “CAP and other EU policies” should be reviewed “to increase European production capacity for agricultural products and to ensure our food sovereignty.”

iii) On March 2, France's leading farming lobby @FNSEA (member of @COPACOGECA) said the Ukraine war puts Europe's green agriculture ambitions in doubt, because of the urgent need to produce more food now.

But the EU is mostly food secure. This doesn’t mean there aren’t consumers who need help. But if “food sovereignty” was the real issue, then adjusting our meat-heavy diets would a) allow Europe to increase production of food for humans…

impact.economist.com/sustainability…

… and b) reduce dependence on animal feed imports from Russia and Ukraine. Not a popular opinion but arguably more sustainable than doubling down on intensive farming methods that fuel climate change. Food systems account for one-third of man-made emissions.

Scrapping targets to protect nature and to curb usage of polluting synthetic fertilisers, like some of the lobbies are asking for, would worsen climate change, which was already presenting a serious threat to global food security even before the war.

Just last week, the latest report from @IPCC_CH warned that climate impacts will undermine our ability to produce food. While people in Africa, Asia, Central and South America and small island nations will fare the worst, Europe’s farms will also see lower yields.

The lobbying seems to be working. "If food security is in danger, then we need to have another look at the objectives of the Farm to Fork strategy and correct them," said EU Agriculture Commissioner @jwojc on March 2

“We must give the European population the certainty that this war will not lead to empty plates in Europe,” Dorfmann, EPPs agriculture coordinator said in a press release today. His spokesperson confirmed to @POLITICOEurope this was a call to forget the Farm to Fork “for now”

Meantime, the real food crisis from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will hit food-insecure places like #Yemen and Lebanon particularly hard, where impact will be “catastrophic” – acc to David Beasley @WFPChief, WFP’s executive director in piece by @thinink

thenewhumanitarian.org/analysis/2022/…