Farmers’ protests: against whom the horn honks?

The fragility of our food system and lack of social acceptance of EU policies must be addressed in the next mandate.

The agri-discontent sweeping across the European Union is a complex issue, influenced by various national and Europe-wide factors. In eastern-European countries the protests are linked to the liberalisation of imports of Ukrainian grain; in Germany, France and Greece to cuts in diesel subsidies. In most member states where tractors have rolled on to the streets, frustration has mounted over supposedly excess EU and national regulation. Grievances have also revolved around retail and food giants reaping profits while small and medium-sized farmers are squeezed by high costs and low incomes.

A common thread running through these protests is opposition to the EU’s Green Deal and Farm to Fork Strategy, the landmark policies of its environmental agenda. While agriculture is quite heterogeneous, some farmers perceive the EU’s green ambition as another series of top-down initiatives that impose yet more bureaucracy. While perhaps the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’, it allowed the anger at broader structural issues to be in part misdirected to anti-environmental ends.

Observing farmers honking in the streets, from the perspective of agricultural labour some of the concerns definitely resonate. If farm owners are struggling, the conditions of agri-workers are just unimaginable.

Abandoning the green ambition is however not the way forward. Trade unions believe that green policies can make agriculture more sustainable and a better milieu in which to work.

‘Social conditionality’

During the last Strategic Dialogue on agriculture earlier this month, the European Federation of Food, Agriculture, and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT) reiterated that the real bugbears are those longstanding, systemic issues that make our food system vulnerable, unsustainable, rigged and unequal—yet to which the European Commission has only managed to turn a blind eye.

First, the imbalanced distribution of wealth throughout the food supply chain remains largely ignored. If the pressure from retailers and food giants goes unchecked, and a viable income is not ensured for farmers and agricultural workers, rural areas will continue to be abandoned and farmers will pursue unsustainable farming practices to maintain their margins. It is crucial that Common Agricultural Policy funds are distributed equally among beneficiaries and that the ‘social conditionality’ principle on their allocation—promoted by EFFAT and achieved in CAP in 2021—is further strengthened.

Secondly, as large financial players dive head-first into the food market, the growing financialisation has favored maximisation of ‘shareholder value’ over time, leading to worsened working conditions and increased demands for worker ‘flexibility’. While the wealthiest shareholders make record profits, price rises for consumers meanwhile hurt the vulnerable most.

Thirdly, deregulation can have a deadly impact on small farmers and agricultural workers. Occupational health and safety and other employer obligations are there to protect workers in one of the most dangerous professions in Europe. Regulations prevent workers being poisoned by hazardous chemicals and injured by dangerous machinery, while protecting seasonal and undocumented workers from being exploited.

Finally, international trade is becoming a means to expand corporate power at the expense of people and the planet. Agriculture is increasingly used as a bargaining chip in trade deals to promote export and import in other sectors. Requirements for equal standards from producers worldwide are often overlooked, putting social and labour rights at risk. No wonder that farmers feel threatened by trade agreements such as the stalled Mercosur deal: unequal standards pose a threat to fair internal competition, while accelerated deforestation of the Amazon affects farmers in the global south. The sector as a whole is on the losing side.

Just transition

The Farm-to-Fork Strategy has only been partially implemented and these longstanding issues were never addressed. If the commission would do so in the round, it would help win the social acceptance needed for the success of its environmental ambition. Instead, in an ad hoc reaction earlier this month, the commission president, Ursula Von der Leyen, definitively abandoned the sustainable-pesticides regulation—under which pesticide use was to be halved by 2030—as a ‘symbol of polarisation’.

Beyond agriculture, some of the issues echo in other sectors and for individual workers across the EU, all grappling with the complexities of a just transition. Hence the strong overlap between the demands of EFFAT and those of the European Trade Union Confederation to all parties ahead of the European Parliament elections in June.

As it stands, the Green Deal legislation lacks the robust social dimensions which should accompany its climate focus. The recently announced 2040 interim climate target—a 90 per cent net reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions compared with 1990 levels—raises critical concerns.

While trade unions unequivocally support enhanced climate action, it is crucial to acknowledge that the existing legislation, while ambitious, falls short in convincing those in affected sectors and regions. The European Green Deal currently overlooks the profound social and labour impacts of the transition.

Addressing this challenge necessitates a dedicated just-transition directive, designed to anticipate and manage change in a manner that leaves no one behind. This should encompass rigorous and granular socio-economic impact assessments, appropriate funding (including for the agri-food sector), a job-rich industrial policy, social conditionalities, anticipation of change and safeguarding of workers’ rights throughout the transition.

To do this in a truly just way will require greater spending. The commission itself estimates an investment of €1.5 trillion a year would be required to reach the 2040 target—vastly more than what is currently envisaged.

Shaping the agenda

With the June elections looming, the current discontent will definitely shape the agriculture agenda for the next term. The EU institutions should recognise that not only farmers’ concerns should be taken on board but also the demands of farm workers and their unions. The just transition needs to be an opportunity to dignify the sector as a whole.

Unsurprisingly, the farmers’ protests have been co-opted by a resurgent far right. The populists seize on any discontent and lack of social acceptance to press their divisive narrative of short-sighted responses.

The trade unions address the structural forces holding workers back, focused on solutions and opportunities rather than fuelling fear. The farmers’ protests have demonstrated that if the EU fails to tackle growing inequality the resultant discontent is fertile ground for the far right to take root.

The EU institutions must learn from this. Aligning the interests of people and planet is imperative. Any climate legislation originating from the next commission must avoid the temptation to push further a deregulation agenda which serves only the interests of big business over workers and households, immediately and over the long term.

The solution instead is to equip sectors, workers and the most vulnerable households with the plans and resources to match the challenges Europeans face, to address the defining question of our time.