REEN BREXIT Setting the Bar for a Green Brexit in Food and Farming - Soil Association
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
REEN BREXIT
Setting the Bar for
a Green Brexit in
Food and Farming
REEN BREXIT 1Executive Summary
Table of Contents As the UK prepares to leave the European Union (EU), the
future of agriculture is high on the political agenda. Since
joining the EU, UK agriculture has been influenced by the
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
Executive summary 3
Introduction 4
For over twenty years, the CAP has been While the CAP has historically been linked to
I. The shadow of the Common Agricultural Policy 5 interpreted and implemented differently a deterioration in soil, air and water quality,
a. The shadow of the past: The Europeanisation of agricultural policy-making 6 across the UK’s four nations. Since the EU habitat clearance, loss of biodiversity and
Referendum result, the UK Government has the degradation of ecosystems, recent CAP
b. The shadow of the present: Devolution and internal UK policy divergence 6 repeatedly promised a ‘Green Brexit’, whereby reforms have attempted to ‘green’ agriculture.
c. The shadow of the future: CAP reform and future constraints on UK policy 8 the UK would learn from the mistakes of the These reforms have made it possible for
CAP and replace it with policies putting the EU Member States to pursue ambitious,
II. Political commitments to policy change in the UK 9 ‘environment first’. But what would this mean differentiated yet complementary policies
in practice, and are current developments for farming and food, alongside the CAP –
a. Agriculture during the referendum campaign 9
going in the right direction? belying the policy’s one size fits all image.
b. UK Government commitments on post-Brexit agricultural policy 10
This report, commissioned by the Soil The report reviews five such examples of
c. The Agriculture Bill and devolution 11 Association, aims to set the bar for a Green innovative domestic policies in Spain, Italy,
d. The Agriculture Bill: Easing or fuelling tensions? 13 Brexit in food and farming. To do so, it first France and Denmark, and how the UK could
sets out the context in which the UK will be adopt and adapt them.
III. The international trade context 15 determining policy. The CAP has shaped
IV. Setting the bar: Learning from innovative policies and practices within the EU 19 UK agricultural policy for decades and will Taken together, our review of the policy
continue to impact farming here due to the context and good practices across the
a. Spain: Strengthening fair trading practices in the food supply chain 20 close competition between the two markets. EU leads us to draw some key take-home
b. Italy: Promoting social agriculture 23 messages. Rethinking agriculture requires
Second, it highlights the political promises action beyond the silo of agricultural policy
c. France: Sharing knowledge for an agroecological transition 26 made about post-Brexit agricultural policy. (incorporating education, land use rights and
d. France: Removing barriers to agroforestry uptake 28 What have ministers at UK level promised the whole supply chain) and the adoption of
they will do for food and farming, and how a holistic approach where food and farming
e. Denmark: Embracing organic food procurement 30 does this differ from on-going debates in the policy are co-designed. Such a change will
devolved administrations? Third, it examines not happen overnight and requires long-
V. Pathways to deliver a Green Brexit in food and farming 32
what we can expect trade in agricultural term targets to secure investment and build
products to look like after Brexit, including collaboration. Finally, profound policy change
the rules and tariffs that will apply. does not necessarily require centralisation.
Instead, a shared policy framework can
accommodate and benefit from local
divergence and innovation.
This report was made possible by the generous support of the Mitchell Trust.
Report authors: Dr Ludivine Petetin (Cardiff University), Dr Viviane Gravey
(Queen’s University Belfast) and Dr Brendan Moore (University of East Anglia.)
2 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 3This report seeks to inform the design role played by trade agreements. Section
of sustainable agricultural policy after IV presents five innovative EU agricultural
Introduction
Brexit. Section I summarises the long-term policies and practices on fair trading, social
impacts the CAP has had and will have agriculture, agroecology, agroforestry and
on British farming. Section II reviews the organic food procurement. Finally, Section
commitments on agriculture made during V provides concrete recommendations for
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has played a the referendum campaign and subsequently ‘setting the bar’ in a way that makes the
by the UK Government and the devolved delivery of a ‘green farming’ Brexit in the UK
significant role in shaping farming policies and practices administrations. Section III analyses the more likely.
international context in which post-Brexit UK
across Europe; domestic ambitions have also been an policy will be embedded and the important
equal factor. A vision for food and farming that delivers
a ‘Green Brexit’ must learn from, and seek to improve
upon, experiences across the EU. Achieving an inclusive,
environmentally-friendly and sustainable food and farming
system must be the priority. I.
The shadow of the
During the EU Referendum campaign, Vote
Leave highlighted the replacement of the CAP
Since 2016, the push from the Westminster
Government to overhaul agricultural policy
Common Agricultural Policy
and changes in environmental regulations as has led to the publication of the Health and
a key opportunity for the UK if it left the EU: Harmony consultation, the draft Agriculture
Bill and the Future for Food, Farming and the
Since the UK joined the European Economic Community
‘EU regulations make life hard for the Environment policy paper in 2018. The Health in 1973, the CAP has provided an overarching framework
UK’s farmers. If we have the courage to and Harmony consultation states:
Vote Leave and take back control, we for its agricultural policy. This is set to change, with the UK
would be free to think again and could
achieve so much more for farmers and our
‘Now we are leaving the EU we can design
a more rational, and sensitive agriculture
planning to leave the CAP after Brexit.
environment’. policy which promotes environmental
enhancement, supports profitable food
George Eustice, former Farming Minister and production and contributes to a healthier
Vote Leave lead on agriculture (2016)1 society’.3
While the future UK-EU relationship in other shadow of the future. In addition, farming
Since the Referendum result in June 2016, The UK 25 Year Environment Plan published policy areas remains uncertain (in fields such and rural areas are affected by many other
the UK Government and the leadership of the in January 2018 contends that Brexit offers as trade, migration or environment), the policies. Some of these additional policies—
Department for Environment, Food and Rural a ‘once-in-a-lifetime chance to reform our picture for agriculture and fisheries outside such as land use, planning, health and food
Affairs (Defra) have committed to creating agriculture and fisheries management, how the EU is relatively clear: new domestic policy—have remained overwhelmingly
a simplified, environmentally-friendly we restore nature, and how we care for our policies will be required to replace EU the competence of the UK and devolved
agricultural policy after Brexit. This ‘Green land, our rivers and our seas’.4 frameworks. governments during EU membership. Other
Brexit’ rhetoric from the UK Government has areas—such as trade policy—are currently EU
focussed on the environmental harm caused The devolved administrations took on board As the UK debates future agricultural competences and may be repatriated to the
by the CAP and the opportunities of leaving similar objectives for a green farming future policies in Westminster and the devolved UK after Brexit.
the EU, especially for reducing red tape and and released consultations on these issues in administrations, it is key to remember that
regulatory constraints: Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. domestic agricultural policy development
is taking place in the shadow of the CAP.
‘Leaving the EU gives us the opportunity Brexit has indeed put agriculture and the This shadow can best be understood as
to improve our environment, to take leaps environment back on the political agenda comprising three elements: the shadow of
forward, to ensure that over a period of across the UK, offering a key window of the past, the shadow of the present and the
time—and again stressing that this is a opportunity for change. However, new
smooth transition—we will have the chance policies do not necessarily mean progress,
to make sure that our environmental or that the promised ‘Green Brexit’ will be
legislation focuses on what is right for the delivered. To seize that opportunity, policy
UK rather than on necessarily the lowest makers must deliver on their commitments,
common denominator for 28 EU Member pay careful attention to the challenges posed
States’. by devolution and be open to lessons from
innovative approaches in other countries
Andrea Leadsom, former Defra Secretary (many of them carried out in the EU27 using
(2016)2 existing flexibility provisions within the CAP).
4 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 5Box 1
a. The shadow of the past: Examples of differentiation
The Europeanisation of agricultural policy-making
within the 2014-2020
Since its inception, the CAP has set many
of the parameters for what is possible and
in soil, air and water quality, land clearing, loss
of biodiversity and the degradation of marine,
Common Agricultural
acceptable when regulating the farming
sector in EU Member States. While some of
these rules are international, not European, in
freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.5
The CAP has been reformed many times,
Policy in the UK and Ireland
origin (such as the World Trade Organization’s but in terms of its environmental impact
Agreement on Agriculture) the EU has largely the key reforms remain that of the 1990s
decided how they have been applied and and early 2000s, which saw the end to
interpreted. This centralisation of power has ‘coupled payments’ linked to production
consequences for policy-making capacity. level and attempts at a ‘greening of the CAP’
Agriculture policies have largely been to support sustainable agriculture. CAP Minimum claim size:
developed in Brussels and implemented in ‘greening’ is visible under both its pillars. England and Wales have a minimum claim size of 5 hectares, while Northern
the Member States. As the UK leaves the EU, Under Pillar 1, direct payments to farmers Ireland and Scotland have chosen 3 hectares. Outside of the UK, Ireland has
it will need to rebuild its capacity for policy are subject to cross-compliance and specific chosen to have no minimum claim size.
development, not simply implementation and greening requirements. Under Pillar 2, rural
enforcement. This requires a profound shift development programmes (RDPs) aim to
in staffing, both an increase in the number improve the social and environmental effects
of civil servants working in the relevant of agriculture by enhancing social cohesion Coupled support:
department and the recruitment of more and sustainability in rural areas, particularly Northern Ireland, Wales and England have no coupled payments while
policy experts, (as is already on-going in through the development of agri-environment Scotland and Ireland have chosen to re-introduce these payments in some
Defra). Policy-makers must also develop new schemes.6 cases (for beef calves and hill sheep in Scotland).
approaches to engaging with civil society
(which was very active in reforming the CAP Despite these reforms and subsequent signs
over the last twenty years) and engaging the of progress, the CAP has failed to reverse
different administrations of Westminster, its negative overall impact on the UK’s Capping payment size:
Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. environment. Moving forward, the EU will Northern Ireland and Ireland cap direct payments at €150,000. In Wales and
need to further reform the CAP. If the UK is Scotland, the caps are much higher (€300,000 and €500,000 respectively).
Future UK policy will also need to address to deliver a ‘Green Brexit’ in agriculture, the England has no cap.
the environmental impacts of agriculture. By UK should continue to be prepared to learn
encouraging the intensification of farming, from the CAP (both its positive and
the CAP has historically led to a deterioration negative aspects).
Agri-environment-climate payments:
These payments represent 21% of Northern Irish and 25% of Welsh Rural
Development Funds compared to 19% in Scotland, 69% in England and 38% in
b. The shadow of the present: Ireland.
Devolution and internal UK policy divergence
While the CAP started as a one-size-fits- The starting point for post-Brexit policy is
all policy, today it offers a wide degree of therefore heterogeneity: heterogeneity of the
flexibility to better accommodate the different farming system and ecosystems across the
preferences of the EU Member States and four nations7 , the resulting agricultural and
the diversity of the European farming sector. environmental focus points within the RDPs,
Crucially, this differentiation has not only the economic importance of the agri-food
taken place between countries but also within sector, the political parties’ preferences, and
them (including within the UK). In the UK, policy competence. Source: Allen et. al (2014) CAP Reform 2014-20: EU Agreement and Implementation in the UK and in Ireland,
there is not one but four implementations of Northern Ireland Assembly Research and Information Service.
the CAP for Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales
and England.
6 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 7c. The shadow of the future:
CAP reform and future constraints on UK policy II.
Political commitments to
policy change in the UK
Finally, the CAP casts a shadow on future Removing the UK from future CAP
policy development. The CAP is not static – it negotiations creates a risk of decreased
is in the midst of yet another round of policy ambition at a time when the EU needs to step
reform. This means that even if the UK were up climate action and its approach to other
to keep its farming support system constant, linked environmental challenges such as
the EU would not. Policy divergence is a biodiversity loss, water and air pollution. The
given. ongoing CAP reform proposal has raised a
number of challenges. First, it offers Member The political commitments that have built the ‘Green Brexit’
This divergence is important because farmers States more flexibility. While flexibility can narrative have emphasised the opportunity to freely amend
in the EU and UK will be in direct competition lead to innovative practices being developed,
in UK, EU and international agricultural it also comes with a risk that many Member UK food, farming and fisheries policies outside the EU.
markets. If EU support is more generous, or States will reduce environmental ambition.
if it incentivises different forms of farming, Second, the reform continues to adopt
Delivering high food, farming and environmental standards
it will have a knock-on effect on UK farmers. vague environmental objectives and generic in a devolved policy area with uncertain international trade
One way of evaluating how the future CAP indicators which makes it difficult to properly
will develop is to consider the role of the UK implement commitments and easy to shirk. outcomes is a challenge that current policy-makers have yet
in past reforms of the policy.8 The UK has
played a major role in greening the CAP,
Third, it continues to move away from rural
development funding despite evidence that
to resolve.
leading a coalition of like-minded states such this funding has been best at achieving
as, at times, the Netherlands, Sweden and environmental aims.9 The current CAP
Denmark. In the mid-1980s, it was the first reform outcome is still very uncertain. A
Member State to adopt agri-environment new European Parliament, with a different
schemes and was also a pioneer in cross- political balance, will form in 2019 and will
a. Agriculture during the referendum campaign
compliance. UK environmental charities need to continue the reform work started
have also played a central role in civil society by the current Parliament and Council of ‘The EU’s Common Agricultural Policy Vote Leave emphasised farming, fisheries
campaigns for a more environmentally- Ministers. However, during the 2013 reform, (CAP) is an expensive, wasteful programme and food during the referendum campaign.
friendly CAP and have long called for the the legislative process further weakened the that dates back to the 1960s. […] British The pro-Leave group Farmers for Britain
CAP to better fit a ‘public money for public European Commission’s proposal and recent farmers would continue to be supported called Brexit a ‘once-in-a-lifetime chance for
goods’ approach that would see funding go votes in the Agriculture Committee in April after we Vote Leave. […] Because it pays significant and much-needed change in the
towards public goods (i.e. environmental or 2019 appear to show history repeating itself. much more into the EU budget than we agricultural industry’.11 Vote Leave briefings
ecosystem services) such as clean air and get out, Britain would have sufficient argued that the CAP was burdensome,
healthy soil. funds to continue supporting our farmers wasteful and expensive, and that the UK
- and could even increase funds. […] could ‘easily continue to support farmers’
The thousands of badly designed EU with subsidies after Brexit’.12 In addition, a
regulations that aim to control everything key selling point was the ability to ‘take back
farmers do would go. […] If we vote to control of the regulation of agriculture’ by
leave and take control, elected Ministers reducing burdensome regulation, singling
will be able to make the changes needed out environmental cross-compliance
and put in place new policies to help requirements in the CAP as well as EU
farmers manage risk, boost their returns laws on pesticides, genetically modified
and reward the work farming does for the organisms, and crop rotation.13 In a separate
environment’. publication on the EU single market,
environmental policy was included in a list
Vote Leave, Farming, Fisheries and Food of the “most burdensome EU regulations”,
Briefing10 including agriculture-related regulations on
animal welfare, nitrates and pesticides.14
8 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 9from income support and towards ‘public Michael Gove has consistently stated that
b. UK Government commitments on post-Brexit money for public goods’ could be detrimental the ratification of trade deals after Brexit will
to the survival of farmers, especially small, not result in a reduction of environmental
agricultural policy family farms which are heavily reliant on and animal welfare standards.28 In addition,
EU direct payments.25 Further, the new the draft UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement
governmental policy on farming aims to committed the UK not to lower the level of
adopt a holistic approach, as indicated in protection provided by ‘common standards’
‘Post EU exit the UK will be an In particular, farmers’ current obligations the Agriculture Bill, where agriculture and generally in line with the EU environmental
environmental superpower’. under the CAP to ensure good agricultural and the environment are no longer perceived as acquis. 29 Dynamic alignment with the
environmental conditions (GAEC) go beyond competing priorities but as ‘two sides of the EU would also maintain high standards.
Defra Secretary Michael Gove, House of the regulatory baseline in the UK and draw on same coin’. 26 However, ongoing discrepancies between
Commons January 201915 existing good agricultural/farming practices. Gove’s statements (‘achieving a higher
Non-regression of environmental level of environmental protection’) and
Since the referendum, UK Government Another central aim of the UK Government is standards vis-à-vis trade those of International Trade Secretary Liam
officials have made many public statements to provide certainty for farmers by ensuring Fox related to allowing imports with lower
about the shape of UK agricultural policy stable funding until 2022 (or more accurately ‘…people know when they’re buying British environmental and animal welfare standards
after Brexit. When thinking about key until the end of this Parliament) with no they’re buying food which is guaranteed have raised concerns and uncertainties as to
governmental Brexit promises made in redistribution around the UK (the process to be high quality and more sustainable. the future of environmental protection across
relation to food and farming, three are of ‘Barnettisation’).21 However, the level of That’s why it would be foolish for us to lower the UK.
central: the commitments to ‘take back support received by farmers beyond this date is animal welfare or environmental standards
control’, to deliver a ‘Green Brexit’ that uncertain. in trade deals, and in so doing undercut our
improves the environment and to ensure that own reputation for quality. We will succeed
international trade negotiations do not lead to A ‘Green Brexit’ in the global market place because we are
a weakening of environmental standards. competing at the top of the value chain not
‘Enhancing our natural environment is trying to win a race to the bottom’.
Taking back control a vital mission for this Government. We
are committed to ensuring we leave the Defra Secretary Michael Gove, Oxford
‘For too long, a bureaucratic system, which environment in a better condition than we Farming Conference 201827
tries to meet the needs of 28 different found it. And leaving the European Union
Member States, has held farmers back. allows us to deliver the policies required to
But now, we have the chance to design a achieve that - to deliver a Green Brexit’.
domestic successor to [the] CAP that works c. The Agriculture Bill and devolution
for all of you, rather than the entire European Defra Secretary Michael Gove, Oxford Farming
Union’. Conference 201822
Tense relationships between the spending for the whole of the UK; (iii) set
Defra Secretary Andrea Leadsom, Oxford Brexit is seen as an opportunity to deliver a UK Government and the devolved individual ceilings of support across the
Farming Conference 201716 ‘Green Brexit’. At the 2018 Oxford Farming administrations can be seen with the passage devolved administrations; (iv) create different
Conference, Environment Secretary, Michael of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ceilings of financial support in each devolved
The EU referendum slogan ‘taking back Gove, further stated that Brexit offers the and now the draft Agriculture Bill. Scotland administration; and (v) fix the upper limits
control’ has been a key organising idea for opportunity to design: refused to grant consent to the devolution spent under specific programmes by each
the UK Government over the past three years. aspects of the Withdrawal Act (as it is entitled devolved administration – despite the
For agriculture, this idea has resulted in a ‘…our own agriculture policy, our own to do so under the Sewel Convention30 ) but Agreement on Agriculture of the World Trade
willingness to move away from the CAP, which environment policies, our own economic the Act was passed anyway. Organization not imposing any such limits.31
is seen as an overly complex and ‘dysfunctional policies, shaped by our own collective Clause 28 also exceeds what is required in the
system’. 17 Any future post-Brexit agricultural interests’ and to ensure that we leave the Agriculture and environmental protection Agreement on Agriculture.32
policy is aimed at simplifying the EU model.18 environment in a better condition than we are devolved powers. There are currently
found it’.23 four heterogenous agricultural policies The utilisation of reserved powers on finance,
Three central aspects of the CAP are heavily across the UK to take into consideration. trade and compliance with international
criticised by the UK Government, all to do The Agriculture Bill removes direct payments In 2018, England, Wales, Northern Ireland agreements recentralises financial support for
with direct payments: the basic payment and builds upon Pillar 2 of the CAP, in and Scotland set the scene for their future farmers and the design of support schemes
scheme (which constitutes 70% of direct particular agri-environment schemes. To agricultural policies in consultation across the UK. The issue of concurrent
payments); greening requirements (linked to deliver a ‘Green Brexit’, farmers will need to documents. The UK Government has since powers between central government
30% of direct payments) and cross-compliance deliver ‘public money for public goods’ by, followed up its policy with the Agriculture Bill. and the devolved administrations has
requirements.19 These requirements have been for example, creating ecosystem services, The Agriculture Bill is seen by some been exacerbated by the development of
criticised for not ensuring environmental mitigating climate change and promoting commentators and the Scottish Government agricultural polices across the UK.33
protection that is high enough, being too animal and plant health and welfare.24 Farmers as a means of recentralising powers in
bureaucratic and procedural, not providing will be financially supported by ‘public money’ Westminster to the detriment of the devolved The similarities, differences and concerns
good value for money and resulting in only if they deliver ‘public goods’. This means administrations, especially with Clause 28 raised by the different policies are explored
excessive penalties. Further, it has been an end to payments directly supporting of the Bill related to the WTO Agreement on in Box 2. The policies place at their heart the
argued that cross-compliance requirements farmers’ income – a central characteristic of Agriculture. Clause 28 gives broad powers twin aims of improving productivity and
are already part of the UK legal baseline.20 the CAP and of UK agricultural policy before to the Secretary of State to: (i) conclusively delivering public goods/ecosystem services.
However, cross-compliance requirements EU membership. However, if not managed determine the classification of financial Thus, the old habit of increasing production
go well beyond standards enshrined in law. appropriately, an agricultural transition away support across the UK; (ii) set limits on of food, feed, fuel and fibre remains present.
10 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 11Box 2
Post-Brexit agricultural
Another key similarity is the focus on of the CAP. For example, a recent decision
training in all four policy proposals. by Defra to reject a crop rotation trial under
its new Environmental Land Management
policies in England, Wales, Two key concerns can be highlighted from
Box 2. First, the willingness to remove cross-
compliance requirements, in England in
scheme (ELM) raises concerns as to the actual
meaning of ‘public goods’. It appears that
Defra considered ‘good soil management’ as a
Northern Ireland and particular, could lead to a lowering of the
regulatory baseline. No governmental
commitment has been expressed to ensure
‘natural asset’ but not as a ‘public good’.34 This
stands in contrast to the Health and Harmony
consultation, which clearly highlighted
Scotland. regulatory standards would actually be
maintained. Second, if public goods/
ecosystem services are defined narrowly,
‘improved soil health’ as a public good.35
Doing more of the same will not suffice to
tackle the challenges faced by agriculture.
this would prevent the creation of schemes This contrast highlights the difference
that would encompass multiple aspects of between ambitious policy statements and the
the countryside and could reduce what is practicalities of achieving a policy based on
currently feasible under the RDPs. This could public money for public goods and the issues
be highly detrimental to the future of rural relating to what constitutes a public good,
England Wales Northern Ireland Scotland areas and decrease rural vitality. as well as the assessment and evaluation of
such public goods for financial support (e.g.
The UK and the devolved administrations whether support will be based on habitats,
Stage in ‘Health and Harmony’ ‘Brexit and Our Northern Ireland ‘Stability and are at risk of missing some of the key species, specific achieved steps, or some
consultation Land’ consultation Future Agricultural Simplicity’ opportunities presented by being outside other metric).
policy process completed (Feb.-May completed Policy Framework’ consultation
2018). (July- Oct. 2018). engagement completed (June-Aug.
completed (July-Oct. 2018).
Draft UK Agriculture
Bill.
2018).
Strategy document
d. The Agriculture Bill: Easing or fuelling tensions?
from Agriculture
‘The Future for Food, Champions (May
Farming and the 2018).
Environment’ Policy The move towards ‘public money for public policy change. The key element will be
Paper (Sept. 2018). goods’ has been generally welcomed by the implementation and delivery of such
stakeholders. With this new approach, policies across the UK. Such a forward-
England has set an innovative pathway for looking approach requires innovative
Key themes Public money for Public goods based An environmentally Maintain the design of a future agricultural policy pathways to deliver a ‘Green Brexit’ in
public goods based on on payment by sustainable environmental and the setting up of financial limits (related agriculture building on the already existing
payment by results/ results/outcomes. agriculture sector standards based on
outcomes. based on payment payment by results/
both to the types of schemes allowed and diversity of farming policies in the UK.
by results/outcomes. outcomes. at which level of funding such schemes
would be supported). As such this pathway However, leaving the EU and the CAP
Productivity (Clause Economic resilience. Productivity. Production efficiency. is likely to be followed by the devolved means abandoning a shared framework
1.2, Agriculture Bill). Economic resilience. Natural capital. administrations. However, numerous of agricultural, environmental and trade
Supply chains. Simplification during
the transition. concerns have been raised following this policies. Some of these areas of policy are
planned policy overhaul (Box 3). While devolved (agriculture, environment), while
all four nations of the UK appear set on others are not (such as trade). While more
‘greening’ their agricultural policies, policy diversity can be desirable to a certain extent,
Change No direct payments. No direct payments. Some direct payments Some direct payments divergence after Brexit could mean very common frameworks are necessary to
(but more limited than (but more limited
to policy under CAP). than under CAP). different shades of green existing side by avoid a race to the bottom and to foster a
instruments side (Box 2). race to the top in environmental, food and
Mentions regulatory Regulatory baseline Regulatory baseline Regulatory baseline. farming standards.
baseline but also building upon the and incentives. Overall, the four nations of the UK must
willingness to abolish Well-being of Future
cross-compliance Generations (Wales)
carry forward the opportunity created
and greening Act 2015 and the by leaving the CAP and embrace ‘public
money for public goods’ as a driver of
Concerns and Focus on productivity Focus on productivity Focus on productivity Focus on productivity
and natural and natural and natural and natural
gaps capital rather than capital rather than capital rather than capital rather than
sustainable food sustainable food sustainable food sustainable food
production. production. production. production.
English RDP funds Welsh RDP funds Northern Irish RDP Scottish RDP funds
from the CAP are from the CAP are funds from the from the CAP are
broader in scope than broader in scope than CAP are broader in broader in scope than
the delivery of public the Public Goods and scope than the new the new suggested
money for public Economic Resilience suggested schemes. schemes
goods. schemes.
Table adapted from Hart & Maréchal36 and Petetin, Dobbs, Gravey37
12 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 13Box 3
Ongoing tensions
III.
Governmental promises Ongoing developments and concerns
The international trade
Taking back control •Control for the UK Government but not necessarily
for the devolved administrations. Example: no co-
context
design in Agriculture Bill.
•The unwanted consequences of free trade deals when
modifying UK policies and legislation.
In addition to leaving the CAP, the UK will change its trading
Simplification •The drafting of environmental land management relationship with the EU. As part of the EU Customs Union,
contracts could result in increased bureaucracy.
the UK currently faces no tariffs and no non-tariff barriers to
Holistic approach •No links between agricultural policy and a food trade within the EU. Goods that can be commercialised in
strategy in UK governmental policy/Agriculture Bill.
the UK can also be sold across the EU.
Green Brexit •Discrepancies between statements by Defra Secretary,
Michael Gove and International Trade Secretary Liam The UK also has easy access to labour for But in response to EU tariffs, the UK could
Fox: Free trade deals and problems with imports that the agri-food industry from within the EU. decide to apply lower tariffs – or even no
lower environmental and animal welfare standards. While the exact nature of the future trading tariffs. This is what the unilateral trade
relationship between the UK and the EU has liberalisation scenario assesses. In this
not yet been negotiated, it is noteworthy that scenario, net exporters are still harmed by
In line with EU •The Secretary of State, Michael Gove, is keen to UK agri-food products exported to the EU high EU tariffs, and net importer sectors such
would face very high EU tariffs under World as beef and dairy are also negatively affected
environmental and embrace gene editing technology (which could lead
Trade Organisation (WTO) rules (what some because they are put in direct competition
animal welfare standards to a difficult trading situation with the EU).
commentators have called ‘falling back on with products from across the globe at lower
WTO terms’). prices (and potentially lower standards).
Cross-compliance •The relevant legal instruments (acts, regulations and
requirements are statutory instruments) could be repealed. Box 4 reproduces modelling results from the In March 2019, the UK Government
guaranteed by UK legal Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute detailing announced that it would not apply tariffs to
baseline the expected impacts of three scenarios: a 95% of goods imported to the UK in the case
bespoke deal with the EU, WTO terms and of a no-deal Brexit.44 However, tariffs will
Maintaining UK •Defra Secretary, Michael Gove and former Farming unilateral free-trade.42 remain for most agricultural products (apart
environmental and Minister, George Eustice, refused to amend the from i.e. eggs, wheat and potatoes) to ensure
animal welfare standards Agriculture Bill to ban imports of food produced with Tariffs under the ‘WTO default’ scenario a certain protection for British farmers from
lower production standards. They have argued that discussed above are the EU’s current WTO world markets.
these amendments should be included in the Trade ‘Most Favoured Nations’ (MFN) tariffs – i.e. the
tariffs that the EU must apply across the board The multiple trade scenarios will have
Bill.
to all goods coming into the EU market if they different consequences for domestic
are not covered by a Free Trade Agreement. agriculture and differential environmental
Public money for public •No agreement on the definitions of public goods – This scenario assumes that the UK would impacts requiring a policy response. But
goods creating uncertainty. apply the same high levels of tariffs. This overall it is vital that any future trade policy
•The assessment of the delivery of public goods scenario would have a differentiated impact supports UK agriculture.
(whether delivery will be assessed through e.g. across the UK farming sector. Sectors where
the presence of habitats/species, environmental the UK is a net exporter, such as sheep and
outcomes, or intermediate steps towards outcomes). barley, would suffer most. In contrast, sectors
where the UK is a net importer, such as beef
•Multi-annual (EU and CAP) vs. yearly budget (post- and dairy, could see increased domestic
Budget demand if the price of imports rises sharply
Brexit UK).
as a result of tariffs.43
•Support only guaranteed until the end of this
Parliament (not necessarily 2022 – it could be earlier).
•Uncertainty relating to the overall amount of financial
support that will be available after Brexit.
Devolution issues •Shift in authority to Westminster in the Agriculture
Bill to comply with international agreements.
•Tensions between reserved powers (especially trade
and finance) and devolved powers.
Sources: Engel and Petetin38 ; Dobbs, Petetin and Gravey39 ; EFRA Committee evidence40 ;
14 Petetin41 . soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 15Box 4
IMPACT OF DIFFERENT
TRADING SCENARIOS
ON UK AGRI-FOOD SECTORS
(AFBI MODELLING)
Beef Sheep Pigs Poultry Milk & Wheat Barley
Dairy
Price
Production
Output value
(output value = price x production)
BESPOKE FREE TRADE
AGREEMENT WITH THE EU
+3% 0% +3%
• UK retains tariff and quota free access -1% 0% -1% +1% +1% 0% 0% 0% 0% +2% 0% +1% -1% 0% -1% -2% 0% -1%
to the EU and EU retains tariff and
quota free access to the UK
• UK maintains EU tariff structure to
rest of the world
• 5% trade facilitation costs
on UK-EU27 trade
+29% +10% +17%
WTO DEFAULT
• MFN tariffs applied to imports -38% -11% -30% -4% -1% -4% -6% -1% -5%
from the EU
• TRQs from 3rd countries retained +44% +22% +18% +28% +11% +15% +37% +7% +30%
• MFN tariffs applied to UK exports
destined for the EU
-50% -10% -45% -36% -11% -29% -17% -6% -12% -12% -3% -9% -12% -2% -10% -6% -1% -5% -8% -2% -7%
UNILATERAL
TRADE
LIBERALISATION
• Zero tariffs applied
on imports to the
UK from both the
EU and the rest of
the world
Source: Davis, J., Feng, S., Patten, M., Binfield, J. 2017. Impacts of Alternative Post-Brexit Trade Agreements on UK Agriculture: Sector Analyses using the FAPRI-UK
Model. https://www.afbini.gov.uk/publications/afbi-report-post-brexit-trade-agreements-uk-agriculture
16 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 17IV.
Setting the bar: Learning
from innovative policies
and practices within the EU
There are a number of experiences and good practice cases
of innovation in agricultural policy across the EU Member
States happening under the umbrella of the EU and the
flexibilities provided by the CAP. Some of these policies take
advantage of the different options offered by the CAP, while
others build on national policy competences to complement
European policies. This section draws lessons for the future
of British agriculture from five examples of innovative
practices: fair trading practices in Spain; social agriculture
in Italy; agroecology and agroforestry in France; and public
procurement in Denmark.
18 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 19Box 5
Eight components of
the Spanish fair trading
practices pricing model
a. Compulsory baseline rules for all
operators included in the 2013 Act:
Self-regulation or voluntary measures
included in the 2016 Code:
Spain: Strengthening fair 1. T
he establishment of a food contract or 5. T
he Code creates a voluntary control
trading practices in the
the contractualisation of commercial system that offers the opportunity to go
relationships in the food supply chain. The beyond legal requirements for operators
Act enshrines the mandatory use of written who wish to adhere to it.
food supply chain
contracts to regulate sales, provide legal
certainty and guarantee operator’s rights. 6. C
lauses on specific commercial practices
There are two main provisos: for primary producers: operators in the
• The value of the contract must exceed food supply chain undertake to respect
€2,500. the following aspects in their commercial
• There must be an imbalance between the relationships with primary producers:
The establishment of balanced, just contractual relations contracting parties. • To encourage the adoption of measures
is central to a fair and transparent food supply chain. UK that help to achieve the sustainability of
2. U
nfair trading practices: the Act defines the primary sector and to remunerate
Governments can learn from the Spanish case that better and establishes a list of specific unfair proportionally the value provided to the
agri-food supply chain regulation that recognises power trading practices. To stop them, the Act
prohibits the following practices:
supply chain by agricultural production.
• To pay special attention to compliance
imbalances in the food chain offers primary producers’ • Unilateral modification of the contractual with the applicable regulations on
terms (unless by mutual agreement of food-related information furnished to
higher levels of protection. the parties). consumers about the origin of products
• Additional payments over the (in particular fresh fruits and vegetables).
Spain is one of the most active EU countries instruments. It adopts a holistic approach to agreed price.
in this area. The Spanish agricultural solving unfair trading practices by fostering • The demand for commercially sensitive 7. The Code establishes a dispute resolution
production sector is highly fragmented and fair, balanced and loyal relations between information from the supplier beyond the system. When a dispute arises, the
mostly comprised of small and medium- the operators within the food supply chain relevant product. operators agree to resolve the conflict or
sized enterprises. Spain has adopted a mixed (Box 5.). A tenet of this mixed approach is the • The improper use by an operator of discrepancy within 10 days or 20 days
model of regulatory/statutory instruments focus on the first and last actors of the supply another's business initiative for its own for companies larger than SMEs from the
and voluntary initiatives to rebalance the chain, the agricultural producers and the profit and initiatives constituting unfair presentation of the request. If no resolution
deficiencies within the supply chain. The consumers. advertising. occurs, the dispute will be submitted to a
model is based on both public enforcement mediation or arbitration system.
and private control. The legal basis for this Existing information indicates a progressive 3. T
he creation of an infringement and
new model is Act 12/2013 on Measures to improvement of Spanish commercial penalty system to achieve balanced and Monitoring and surveillance body:
Improve the Functioning of the Food Supply relationships in the food supply chain since loyal relationships between operators of
Chain.45 the creation of the mixed model. To date the food supply chain. The Act creates a 8. T
he model is monitored by the Food
more than 100 operators have adhered penalty procedure that includes three types Supply Chain Observatory, which has a
The Act regulates contractual relationships to the 2016 Code. However, a number of of sanctions that can be imposed: minor, double role:
in the food supply chain and acknowledges supermarkets still have not adhered to it (e.g. serious and very serious infringements. • To guarantee the reviewing and
the ‘asymmetries in bargaining power’ and Carrefour, Lidl and Aldi). strengthening of the law by identifying
‘a lack of transparency in price formation 4. A
n autonomous public enforcement improvement pathways.
and potentially unfair and anticompetitive Between January 2014 and the end of body, the Agency for Food Information • To provide a better knowledge of markets
commercial practices’ that negatively affect 2016, the Agency for Food Information and and Control (AICA), implements the new and analysis of the basic structure of cost
competitiveness in the food sector.46 The Control (see Box 5.) carried out almost 4,000 approach, checks compliance with legal and prices and the factors responsible for
2013 Act also sets the foundations for a self- controls and inspections. The most common provisions and ensures fair commercial their evolution.
regulating private system, which resulted infringements are breaches of payment relations between farmers, food industries
in the creation of the 2016 Code of Good deadlines (44% of the overall number of fines), and distribution companies in the agri-
Business Practices in Food Contracting.47 followed by the absence of written contracts. food sector.
This system is quite comprehensive, A key obstacle remains the unequal
combining synergic statutory and voluntary negotiation footing of the parties to a food
20 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 21contract. The economic and organisational increase their power. Cooperatives and
strength of one of the contracting parties producer organisations of agricultural
(industry, distribution) against the fragility producers introduce economies of scale,
of the other (farmers) when negotiating more efficiency and competitiveness.48 Only
the contractual conditions is a continuing with these organisations will it be possible
problem. to reinforce the negotiating position of
agricultural producers in the market, creating
Agricultural producers (who act as the first better prices and fairer conditions in
link in the chain) should take advantage of agri-food contracts.
the incentives and opportunities to group
around organisations and associations to
Lessons for the UK b.
Fair dealing practices play a key role in the
2018 Agriculture Bill. The relevant clauses
development of best practices in commercial
and contractual relations between operators Italy: Promoting social
build upon the existing Groceries Code
Adjudicator49 (GCA), which was established
by the 2009 Groceries Supply Code of
in the chain should be encouraged – leading
to higher levels of protection. Third, a rapid
and efficient dispute resolution system could
agriculture
Practice.50 However, neither the Agriculture be established as well as a monitoring and
Bill nor the Code of Practice acknowledge surveillance body that identifies potential
the weak position of farmers in contract problems and assesses the quality of
negotiations. Furthermore, the Bill oddly commercial relations. This could be achieved Social agriculture occupies an increasingly important place
restricts fair-dealing requirements to the first
purchaser of agricultural products. This is
by widening the remit and powers of the GCA
– as put forward by Sustain.51
in the Italian agricultural sector. Lessons from Italy for the
an important first step. Nonetheless, to deal UK Governments indicate that support for social agriculture
with the issue of unfair trading practices,
the entire food supply chain should have the can stimulate economic diversification in rural areas,
same requirements. while linking communities and enhancing mental and
Three lessons can be drawn from the physical health.
Spanish example. First, better regulation of
the agri-food supply chain would improve
the position of primary producers (with Underpinned by the values of solidarity and Italy has 400 social agricultural cooperatives
a strong focus on local, seasonal and inclusion, social agriculture is a practice of (out of 14,000 cooperatives in total) involved
sustainable products). This could be achieved local development that aims to be socially, in the entire agricultural supply chain. They
by acknowledging the weak position economically and ecologically sustainable. have 4,000 employees across Italy (out of
of producers and encouraging them to It generates two types of production: 320,000 total) and a production value of €200
form producer organisations. Second, the services such as those related to health, the million.52 Italy has strong regional, social
environment and education; and products farming networks. The Italian regions, in
such as food, fibre and energy. particular Tuscany, have been very proactive
in embracing this type of agriculture.
Social farms are often linked to sustainable In 2011, Italy initiated a National Forum
farming practices, including organic farming, on Social Agriculture to promote social
local food systems and short food supply farming as an innovation to the agricultural
chains. They are able to create niche markets system.53 To reinforce the role of social
with their produce that has an important farming, in 2015 Italy passed a law to promote
social value and link agriculture to the service social agriculture’s contribution to local
economy with a focus on care, education, communities and rural areas.54 The Act
therapeutic uses of farming and training also established an Observatory on Social
(see Box 6). Farms and relevant agricultural Agriculture.55
techniques and practices – e.g. horticulture,
livestock husbandry or woodland Social farming is also an instrument of re-
management – can promote human mental appropriation by the individual of their social
and physical health, as well as quality of life. role from two perspectives:
In addition, they offer the opportunity for
women to create their own employment, • A professional perspective: to facilitate
strengthening rural women’s economic reintegration in the labour market through
empowerment. the acquisition of agricultural techniques
and practices;
22 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 23Box 6
The structure of social
agriculture in Italy Lessons for the UK
In the UK, social agriculture has the capacity community farms and gardens, school
to increase the multifunctionality of farms, wildlife and roof gardens, community
agriculture, as well as on-farm economic orchards, community-run allotments and
diversification, whilst stimulating rural community-supported agriculture schemes.
Types Models Activities Aims Funding
areas and increasing rural vitality. Such a
(both not-for type of agriculture could be promoted by Three ways forward could promote social
profit) reinforcing the focus on rural areas and their agriculture in the UK. 1) supporting measures
multifunctionality within the drafting of to encourage favourable conditions for
future agricultural policies. social agriculture. 2) improving knowledge
Social co-operatives Green care, i.e. • On-farm child and • Provision of Payment or monetary
care-based social elderly care health, social and compensation for
exchange between the actors involved in
agriculture • Educational educational services the services paid by In 2018, Care Farming UK – the main UK social agriculture would encourage best
services (food and • Promoting human public bodies civil society organisation dealing with social practices and mutual support. 3) improving
environmental) mental, emotional, farming – was dissolved and merged with the economic and financial sustainability of
• Therapies social and physical the Federation of City Farms and Community social agriculture.
wellbeing
Gardens to create a new organisation called
Social Farms & Gardens.57 They work with
Social co-operatives Inclusion, i.e. • Rehabilitation • Integration Partial support
and ‘social-private’ employment- • Professional • Engagement of from public
organisations oriented; acquiring training disadvantaged and bodies (directly or
skills and job • Employment vulnerable groups indirectly), including
prospects in production rural development
activities (e.g. funds
people with
mental or physical
disabilities,
offenders, homeless
and marginalised
people)
• Increase
employability
• Personal development and empowerment: Agriculture is a sector uniquely placed to
personal capabilities are valued and provide social inclusion and improve the
enhanced to increase self-confidence and durability of rural communities :
independence.
• With farming comes responsibility (rearing
The main economic and social challenges animals; taking care of living organisms);
faced by social agriculture are threefold: farm • Similarity of the agricultural products
profitability; the economic comparisons created (these products do not indicate the
between conventional and non-conventional characteristics of the people involved) -
farming components; and the viability of creating commercial opportunities.
rural communities.56 • Involvement of relevant communities
and professionals to improve working
conditions and creativity on the farm.
24 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 25Box 7
12 Pillars of the French
agroecology project
1. Reform agricultural training 6. I ncrease support for organic
2. S
hare good practices by setting up agriculture
EEIGs 7. Strengthen local supply chains
c. 3. R
educe the use of phytosanitary
products
8. Reduce use of antibiotics
France: Sharing
9. Implement changes in seed
4. Provide advice evaluation
knowledge for an
5. O
verhaul public support 10. I ncrease carbon sequestration
programmes to support an 11. Foster beekeeping
agroecological transition
agroecological transition 12. Support agroforestry
On-going evaluation of agroecology teaching practices, others are leading the way by
shows mixed, albeit encouraging results. setting up EEIGs. Since 2015, close to 500
The French agricultural education system has been According to the French Agriculture Ministry, EEIGs have been created, bringing together
reformed based on a simple idea: if farmers are to produce agroecology requires a ‘holistic consideration over 9,000 farmers interested in transitioning
of each farm in order to take account of to agroecology and complementing changes
differently, the education system needs to teach them how every aspect of its operation and the balances to formal training with peer-to-peer support
to do so. Reforms in France offer hope that many challenges within its agro-ecosystem’.60 Some teachers
adopt this holistic approach to challenge
and shared innovation.63 Second, key actors
in the French agricultural system are slowly
facing UK farming can be overcome through changes to the ‘common sense’ such as inviting farmers coming on board and developing their
to re-think what is a clean, tidy field, or a own agroecology programmes – from the
design and delivery of the agricultural curriculum. clean, tidy hedge – to learn to work ‘with’ ‘Chambres d’Agriculture (local farming bodies
not ‘against’ nature.61 They also change with elected representatives from different
pedagogy to place a greater emphasis on farming trade unions), to major agri-food
Agroecology has become extremely popular of this trend. The Act formalises some preparing students to deal with uncertainties actors such as the fast food chain McDonald’s
in international debates on agriculture. It of the commitments and objectives of and controversies in their professional life. (which works with 39,000 farmers in France)
has been embraced by a variety of actors, the agroecology project called ‘Produce But agroecologist supporters have also faced or one of the largest cooperatives in France,
from alternative farming movements such Differently’ pushed by the Ministry for backlash and resistance on the ground, with Terrena (22,000 farmers).64 Awareness of
as La Via Campesina to the UN Food and Agriculture since 2012. This project rests on the transition rejected by some farmers as a agroecology among farmers is increasing
Agriculture Organisation (FAO). With such 12 pillars, with reforming farmers education ‘new religion’ with its ‘missionaries’.62 across the board: 50% of farmers had heard
a variety of supporters it is not surprising coming first (see Box 7). of the concept in 2014, a proportion which
that many definitions of agroecology exist. But this is also changing. First, while some increased to 83% by 2016.65
Some definitions focus on techniques: Between 2015 and 2018 the French farmers remain reluctant to change their
how ‘agroecological techniques, based on agricultural education system (which
mimicking natural cycles, reduce the need brings together up to 450,000 students) was
for external inputs and help create growing
ecosystems that foster more regenerative
ways of producing food with nature’.58 Others
profoundly reformed to put agroecology
at its core, by building on a simple idea: if
farmers need to produce differently, the
Lessons for the UK
adopt a more holistic reading of agroecology education system needs to be able to teach
The French agroecology project shows, firstly qualifications’66 ). The 2014 Agriculture, Food
as ‘a way of redesigning food systems, them how to do so. This required further
that a profound shift in agricultural practices & Forest Act echoes on-going discussions
from the farm to the table, with a goal of education for teachers, changes to degree
takes time beyond one parliament, requiring in the UK with all four policies mentioning
achieving ecological, economic, and social content and the creation of regional networks
cross-party support to provide certainty for training and knowledge exchange as key to
sustainability [that] links together science, of farming colleges and farms interested in
all involved. Second, training is critical to deliver future farming. Third, farmers are
practice, and movements focused on social participating in pilot projects to demonstrate
teach new practices and demonstrate their more likely to apply these new practices
change’.59 new approaches. Farmers can, in addition to
successes, both through formal courses if they are supported by other actors in
engaging with the different life-long training
and peer-to-peer learning. No rethinking the supply chain – no systemic change is
In recent years, France has adopted ambitious opportunities, set up their own groups to
of agricultural practices is possible without possible if only public actors are involved.
environmental objectives and principles. share good practices for sustainability, known
a new approach to how farmers are trained
The 2014 Agriculture, Food & Forest Act, as economic and environmental interest
(or not trained – currently in Northern
which aims to help French farming pursue groupings (EEIGs).
Ireland ‘62% of working owners and 40% of
an agroecological transition, is one example
employees [hold] no formally recognised
26 soilassociation.org REEN BREXIT 27You can also read
