Thread by @GuyPeer3

Last week I gave a talk at #ECCB2022_Prague, entitled “(How) can the EU Common Agricultural Policy #CAP still address the crisis of farmland biodiversity?”. Here I give a short summary of the presentation. 🧵

1/x we are facing several interlinked crises: #ClimateCrisis (extreme events like droughts, heat, floods), we are losing #biodiversity, #pollinators and natural pest control; we face soil erosion and land degradation, water scarcity and loss of water quality.

2/x Environmental factors are THE key factors leading to crop failures and risks to food security. Farming and farmers are at the core of a major conflict around land: both as a driver of losses and the sector most affected by it. We need to act fast, as it has impacts on us all.

3/x The CAP is key to achieve environmental targets, in fact *the* key policy to achieve the targets e.g. of the #EUGreenDeal, #climate etc. Yet it fails to do so. Biodiversity is performing worst in farmland areas, agri greenhouse gas emissions are stagnating or increasing.

4/x Strikingly, the CAP is failing on farmers too. Just to look at employment, we lost >3 million farmers between 2005-2013 alone, mostly small farms.
This pattern is global, CAP is not the only cause, but a system that pays by per ha certainly doesn’t help reversing it.

5/x Following 3.5 years of a CAP reform, we finally have a new Green Architecture. We have Eco-schemes, & slightly enhanced conditionality. In fact the toolkit of relevant instruments is even larger, but I painted it grey to mark that we are making poor use of these instruments.

6/x but are things getting really any better? Not really.
In 2014 we demonstrated that Greening is doomed to fail. It is not due to errors, it was designed to fail.
science.org/doi/full/10.11…

In 2017 we demonstrated Greening is indeed failing, explained why, and recommended how to rectify them.
(as expected, farmers chose ineffective measures. And fallow land was not recovered from its crash following the 2008 abolition of set-aside).
conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…

7/x Instead, Commission cancelled Greening, proposed Eco-schemes & cut on Pillar 2. We evaluated the proposal. In 2019 we demonstrated it's not ambitious enough, e.g. budgets heavily biased to income & competitiveness. We proposed a better path. Ignored.
science.org/doi/full/10.11…

8/x In 2020 we understood we need a clear statement from science: this will not work, and we have no time to lose. > 3600 scientists signed a call for 10 actions to reform the CAP and put it on track, for both people and nature.
besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…

9/x With much media attention, we were finally heard! We participated in meetings, and invited to collect evidence-based recommendations for the CAP on how to meet its own biodiversity objective. > 300 experts from 23 MSs contributed happily & voluntarily.
conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…

10/x Among the recommendations are principles for success:
Landscape features & semi-natural areas (esp. grasslands)
habitat diversity & multifunctionality
spatial planning & regionalization
collaborative & result-based approaches
communication, education, farmer engagement.

11/x Scientists also provided recommendations for implementation by the Member States, and for monitoring and performance evaluation by the Commission.
You can read all these here
conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11….

12/x However, meanwhile, the Initial (weak) proposal by the Commision was watered down significantly both by the @EUCouncil and @EUparliament.
The CAP 2023-2027 has some improvements and opportunities, but is surely *not* a „reform“.

13/x National Strategic Plans were submitted, revised by some Member States and are now approved by the Commission.
Yet evaluation by @BirdLifeEurope & @Green_Europe (partly based on our work), & Commission observation letters, show MSs aren't ambitious.
birdlife.org/wp-content/upl…

14/x Instead of revising Strategic Plans, some MSs (backed by lobbies) seem to take the approach used in previous CAP: shift to brute force.
The method is: ignore requests, demand urgent approval.
Farmers need the money, and there's a war, Commission cannot hold them hostages.

15/x And indeed, meanwhile there is a war. A dreadful war of aggression on Ukraine, posing a human tragedy and a nother major shock on food, feed & energy systems. At the same time, the war is cynically used by lobby organizations to drive counter-productive policy responses.

16/x One key example is the Derogation on Ecological Focus Areas: based on misinformation, policymakers chose to ignore the majority of arable land that is used for feed and fuel, and instead, place pressure on marginal land areas.

17/x This can be pinpointed as one of the worst decisions the parliament has taken, since fallow land has very low production potential, but losing it bears high risk of worsening crop failures. Placing further pressure on already collapsing ecosystems is almost suicidal.

18/x This was just one example. Meanwhile Commission added a derogation on GAECs 7 & 8 for 2023, and approved a 5% Shift of budget to Pillar 1 to support agrochemical inputs & feed (feed. Food security?!).
Various scientists tried to warn. We were ignored.
slakner.wordpress.com/2022/03/12/tac…

19/x We see massive amounts of misinformation, and amounting pressures to delay envi regulations (Nature Restoration Law, pesticide regulation, Green Deal, Farm2Fork).
Sum up:
3.5 years 4 small reform vs 2 weeks 4 1st misinformed derogation: here's where political will resides.

20/x so what can each of us do about it? Well, a lot. Each of us has our lines of expertise and the region where we work in.
Let’s start by being proactive and offering help – to administrators, to farmers, to whoever needs help or asks for it. Because the new CAP *is* complex.

21/x We also need to use our science, esp interdiciplinary science to...
- mediate/moderate (concensus seeking in a polarized debate)
- promote win-wins (e.g. collaborative implementation)
- explore various scenarios (see below);
- identify and address misinformation.

This is a key issue for science: when faced by misinformation, it is in our capacities and mandate to combat it as experts. This is where much power in science resides.
Here's a call: we need a task force to combat misinformation.

22/x Scientists should also communicate our own science, not just deliver & rely on others. We are not stakeholders.
It’s our job to explain the needs of bees, butterflies, birds, and to study and communicate how they relate to the needs farmers and society.

23/x We also have the responsibility to expose current risks to production and food security. If others are not aware (yet) to the risks of losing our life-supporting systems, then it's our job to explain, e.g., that standards are there for a reason.

24/x We also need to rapidly help expand monitoring efforts. #CitizenScience is one way to do it. But we also know best which indicators to use, where and how. There are vast tracts of land to cover, and we have poor knowledge of its status.

25/x Based on sound science, we should learn to place clear demands. For evidence-based policy, for action, and for transparency.
Mind you, Member States are pressing to make the next CAP *less*, not more transparent.

26/x Scientists should also look at the bigger picture and develop a long-term vision. We are currently working at the periphery of problems, trying to combat harmful subsidies or improve AECM and Eco-schemes.

27/x The bigger problem is an elephant in the room, one that is sitting on a large bucket of money.
The bucket is Direct Payments, used to support business-as-usual farming.
While the elephant supports few farmers while misrepresenting farmer interests on their behalf.

27/x So: It’s time to look beyond CAP 2027.
Two failed reforms and the war in Ukraine show that the CAP has become a playground for vested interests, and the ship is rocking in turbulent waters. No matter how much effort we make to tweak it, the CAP as it is cannot be reformed.

28/x To conclude: If you are riding on a dead horse, dismount.
It’s time to give up on the CAP and seek other scenarios.

29/x Some options ahead:
1. Phasing Direct Payments (see UK)
2. establish a food *policy* to address demands (not just a strategy)
3. Fund for nature for non-productive land. If we want to rewet, rewild or restore, people should be compensated, But this is no longer CAP.

30/30 And we need a different governance of environmenal/nature budgets, outside the CAP.
Finally, once we place a set of new instruments,
4) we can end the CAP.

To wrap up: The CAP is here since 1957. With 65 years of age, as it is for most people, it’s soon time to retire.