MENG LANDWIRTSCHAFT

AGRICULTURE 2.0 – A PLEAFOR A CHANGE IN DIRECTION OF LUXEMBOURG'S AGRICULTURAL POLICY

Original full article in French: Agriculture 2.0 PLAIDOYER POUR UNE REORIENTATION DE LA POLITIQUE AGRICOLE LUXEMBOURGEOISE: http://www.greenpeace.org/luxembourg/Global/luxembourg/image/2015/Agriculture/Meng%20Landwirts chaft%20(FR).pdf

Authors: Martina Holbach, Ben Toussaint, Christiane Schwausch, François Benoy, Jean Feyder, Marine Lefebvre, Raymond Aendekerk, Daniela Noesen, Roger Schauls

Photographic credits: apiculture (Bio-Lëtzebuerg); cows (Bio-Lëtzebuerg); corn field (Eberhard Weckenmann/Greenpeace; Peasant agriculture in Burkina Faso (SOS Faim Luxembourg/Marin Lefevbre).

This plea for a change in Direction of Luxembourg’s Agricultural policy is supported by the following organisations: natur&ëmwelt a.s.b.l, Bio-Lëtzebuerg – Vereenegung für Bio-Landwirtschaf Lëtzebuerg asbl, Greenpeace Luxembourg, Action Solidarité Tiers Monde, SOS Faim Luxembourg, Mouvement Ecologique and Caritas Luxembourg

Disclaimer: the views and opinions expressed are those of the authors

January 2014

AGRICULTURE 2.0 – A PLEA FOR A CHANGE IN DIRECTION OF LUXEMBOURG'S AGRICULTURAL POLICY

Luxembourg's agricultural policy has until now been largely determined by the European Union's (EU) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The objective of the CAP when it came into force in 1962 was to significantly increase European agricultural food production to ensure self-sufficiency and to be free from dependence on imports from the United States.

Various protectionist measures enacted at this time have brought about a huge increase in agricultural production.

Nonetheless, despite these immense gains in productivity, the EU –

including Luxembourg – is far from achieving its goal of self-sufficiency. The EU is, if measured in calories, a net importer of agricultural products. This situation is mainly due to the rise in imports of animal feed from Latin America.

Meng Landwirtschaft (“My Agriculture”), is of the opinion that the

goal of food self-sufficiency is neither outdated nor obsolete. On the contrary, self-sufficiency in healthy foods should be of even greater fundamental concern for agriculture and therefore Luxembourg’s agricultural policy. For one thing, it is necessary to find sustainable agriculture practices which have no harmful impact on local farmers, the rural population, the environment, biodiversity and the climate, practices which are the opposite of current intensive agricultural practices. In addition, self-sufficient agriculture creates local jobs and adds economic value.

This presents a considerable challenge, considering the current reality of Luxembourg's agricultural policy.

1

Without EU and Luxembourg government subsidies, the average Luxembourg farm would be in debt. For example, in 2011, the proportion of public finance given to 450 farmers evaluated by the Rural Economic Services was 120%1.

To meet the current food requirements of Luxembourg consumers, three times the amount available per head of population worldwide, farmland actually available in the Grand Duchy would have to be doubled.

Luxembourg's agricultural industry depends on animal produce and

predominantly on milk production. A significant amount of animal feed is imported from distant countries. Animal-based products do not just cover national consumption: for example, more than half the milk produced in the Grand Duchy is exported2.

In contrast, there is a shortfall in the production of many other foodstuffs. The consumption of organically produced food products is not met by national output.

Over the last 30 years, Luxembourg's biodiversity has fallen by alarming proportions3. 27% of vascular plants, 54.8% of mammals, 41.5% of birds, 33% of reptiles, 61.5% of amphibians, and 62% of fish have become threatened species in Luxembourg.

During this period, particularly high losses have taken place in wetlands

(80%), dry grasslands (34.9%), and orchards (58.5%). The decline in biodiversity is particularly notable in farmland.

Intensive farming is partly responsible for the disappearance of bees. Between the autumn of 2010 and the spring of 2013, the number of bee colonies in Luxembourg fell from 5,580 to 3,2584. A large part of agriculture and food production depends on pollination by bees and other insects. Up to 75% of our production output runs the risk of being cut as a result of the disappearance of bees5.

2

A recent investigation6 showed that there was significant pollution of Luxembourg's drinking water from pesticide residue and nitrates originating from farming. Certain drinking water sources have already been closed because of these excessive levels. More than a quarter of drinking water sources studied, require immediate action because of the excessive nitrate contamination. Only 18% of sources investigated had a nitrate content of less than 10 milligrams per litre.

In 2011, Luxembourg's farms emitted a total of 663,650 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), that is, 5.49% of national greenhouse emissions7; greenhouse gas emissions per inhabitant stood at 1.24 tonnes.

It's not only Luxembourg's agricultural policies that must change

direction. As a member of the EU, Luxembourg is jointly responsible for the badly managed world food situation.

Every day, around 900 million people suffer from hunger. Those particularly affected are small producers, the landless and, above all, women. Although the world cereal crop is sufficient to feed every human being, around a third of this output is used to feed animals.

Economic liberalisation advocated for decades by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the International Trade Organisation (ITO) and the EU in developing countries has led to the neglect of local food production and a constant rise in food imports resulting in dumping, especially by the EU. Millions of small producers have been pushed out of business. The EU continues to push for market liberalisation with new trade negotiations, thus undermining development and job creation, particularly in agriculture.

An additional threat for small producers in developing countries is the growing influence of financial markets and the worldwide agro-industries. Speculation on primary materials, often on staples such as wheat and maize, was one of the major causes of the world food crisis in 2008. This led to dangerous price fluctuations in these products, with disastrous consequences for the poorest populations, having to spend up to 85% of their income on food.

3

The rental of millions of hectares of agricultural land in the poorest developing countries by multinational enterprises, banks and investment funds, including those based in Luxembourg has led to the expulsion of rural indigenous populations and the development of a non-sustainable agricultural model. A large part of this 'agricultural land grab' is used to produce agro-fuels, many of which cause a rise in greenhouse emissions compared to standard fuels.

Meng Landwirtschaft therefore calls on the Luxembourg government to support the type of agricultural production primarily linked to farming practices which are mainly sustainable and independent; this model can ensure a healthy and balanced future for our food supply that respects the natural limits imposed by our planet and maintains solidarity with small producers in developing countries. Luxembourg currently has 25 ares of farmland for each inhabitant, an excellent situation compared to the world average of 19 ares per person8! Consequently, the main objective for Luxembourg's agriculture can and must be to feed the population from the available agricultural land.

To this end, Meng Landwirtschaft has identified the following demands

for the reorientation of Luxembourg's agricultural policy:

1. Agriculture practices must be aligned with a sustainable strategy. The production of food for humans must take priority over other outputs, such as animal feeds or energy production. Agricultural resources should only be transformed into energy at the end of their complete cycle.

2. Food consumption in Luxembourg must be primarily produced locally. This must be linked to the reorientation of current agricultural yields in the form of increased vegetable production with a simultaneous reduction in milk and meat output. Local and regional demands must be encouraged through targets.

3. In order to reduce dependence on imported primary materials, the flow of these goods must be optimised in farming, both for inputs such as nitrates and phosphates and for fossil fuels. Protein imports must be greatly reduced: protein needs must be met by local production.

4. The margin for manoeuver that the CAP allows member states must be fully exploited for the 'greening' of agriculture. A paradigm shift in the distribution of public funds is necessary: subsidies can no longer be proportional to the land surface used. The promotion of rural structures, environmentally efficient agricultural measures, and organic agriculture must be priorities.

5. Organic agriculture's share of the market must reach at least 15% by 2020. Organic agriculture is economical in its use of resources, has less climate change impact than conventional agriculture, and contributes significantly to biodiversity. The strong demand for organic foodstuffs in Luxembourg proves that it has a potentially profitable future.

4

6. Various measures are needed to protect biodiversity and sources of drinking water, such as implementing environment friendly farming policies, and reducing the pollution caused by pesticides and nitrates.

7. Agriculture should contribute to climate protection by cutting greenhouse gas emissions and the use of primary materials and increasing the storage of carbon dioxide in the soil.

8. Consumers in Luxembourg must be made more aware of the importance of locally produced healthy and balanced foods. In line with this, a diet with a higher proportion of vegetables and a reduction in meat consumption should be encouraged.

9. An agriculture without genetically modified organisms (GMOs), free access to traditional gene pools to allow the propagation and improvement of vegetable varieties and animal breeds, and lastly the prohibition of biological patents must constitute the priorities for the Luxembourg government.

At the same time, the Luxembourg government must undertake, both at

national and EU levels, to ensure that its agricultural policy (together with other policies such as those for energy and the economy) is in line with its foreign aid strategy.

In the European and national context, Meng Landwirtschaft calls on

the Luxembourg government to carry out the following actions:

10. Development cooperation policies must give priority to agriculture: at least 10% of government aid must be earmarked for this. Food sovereignty, the right to food for everyone, family farms (or small-scale farming), the important role of women and agro-ecology must be recognised as the main pillars of this policy.

5

11. The EU must do whatever is necessary to stop the export of foodstuffs at a

price lower than the cost of production. In developing countries, a fair regulation of agricultural markets and the protection of small producers should be emphasised.

12. The EU must be encouraged to modify its trade policies, in particular those involving the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA), in order to allow for the development and organisation of small scale farming.

13. The use of agro-fuels derived from foodstuffs and non-sustainable sources must be stopped. Luxembourg must work at EU level to reduce agro-fuel targets, and with strict sustainable criteria. The use of alternative sustainable fuels in the transport sector must be encouraged.

14. Rental of land to multinational companies or investment companies should only be permitted in strict and limited cases.

15. Speculation on staple food products by Luxembourg investment funds must be banned. At EU level, the Luxembourg government must likewise commit to regulate or ban food speculation.

1 Rapport d’activité 2012. Ministère de l’Agriculture, de la Viticulture et du Développement rural, 2012 2 Evaluation de la durabilité régionale agricole au Luxembourg, dans le cadre du programme DAIRYMAN, Work Package 1, Action 1. Lycée technique agricole, 2010 3 Rapport de l’Observatoire de l’environnement naturel. Ministère du Développement durable et des Infrastructures 4 Réponse de M. le Ministre de l’Agriculture, de la Viticulture et du Développement rural à la question parlementaire no°2733 de MM les Députés Camille Gira et Henri Fox, 2013 5 Bye bye Biene? - Das Bienensterben und die Risiken für die Landwirtschaft in Europa. Greenpeace e.V., 2013. 6 Zones de protection autour du captage d’eau souterraine destinée à la consommation humaines. Conseil supérieur pour la protection de la nature et des ressources naturelles, 2013 7 Luxembourg’s National Inventory Report 1990-2011 -Submission under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and under the Kyoto Protocol. Ministère du Développement durable et des Infrastructures 2013 8 Eine nachhaltige Zukunft für die Luxemburger Landwirtschaft. Jean Stoll in, de lëtzebuerger Ziichter’, Nr.2/2008 Link: http://www.forum.lu/pdf/artikel/6400_277_Stoll.pdf

6