| European AgriCultural
Convention
A Rural Future for a larger Europe
The European
AgriCultural Convention (EAC) is a civil society platform
putting forward solutions for European agriculture and rural
perspectives in an enlarged Europe which allows policy makers
and ministers, together with civil society organisations (NGO's,
farmers unions, consumer organisations, experts in agriculture
and rural development and individual citizens) to come together
in a forum and discuss our collective future. We aim to provide
recommendations for the Convention on the Future of Europe
and to the European Commission with regard to the Mid Term
Review of the Common Agricultural Policy.
This creative and innovative approach
involved input through internet contributions from regional
working groups and individuals spread across the wider Europe,
including the new member states. On 6 and 7 June 2002, a public
round table negotiation was held in the European Parliament,
attended by civil society, Mr. Valéry Giscard d'Estaing
and agriculture Ministers from across the wider Europe.
The European
AgriCultural Convention is patroned by the Chair and Vice-Chair
of the European Parliament's Committee on Agriculture and
Rural Development, Mr. Joseph Daul and Wilhelm-Friedrich Graefe
zu Baringdorf, and has the wholehearted backing of the Chair
of the European Convention on the Future of Europe, Mr. Giscard
d'Estaing.
This document
provides recommendations to the Convention on the Future of
Europe. It should not be seen as a closed document. It offers
a provocative first series of recommendations for a wide and
long-term view, rising above the immediate politics of today
and yet candidly addressing some of the major dilemmas of
an expanding and changing Europe. The paper is structured
to reflect that wider view. It starts by stating a vision
for the future Europe and for the role that rural areas and
agriculture may play within that future Europe.
The EAC
being an ongoing process, we would like to invite the Members
of the European Convention on the Future of Europe to give
their feedback on this document and open up a positive dialogue.
Dear Members
of the Convention, please let us hear from you.
The
European AgriCultural Convention
+32 (0)2 28 43412,
+32 (0)2 28 43362
www.agriCulturalconvention.org
The following
document is divided into five main approaches:
A. A CONTRACT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
B. AN INTEGRATED AND TERRITORIAL APPROACH TO RURAL DEVELOPMENT
C. A FUTURE COMMON AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL POLICY (CARP)
D. THE PROCESS OF ENLARGEMENT
E. EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS
Underlined portions
represent recommendations to the Convention on the Future
of Europe. Text in italics represents areas of ongoing discussion.
A) A CONTRACT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
1. Vision: The European Convention on the Future of
Europe (herein after called “the Convention”) can, and should,
take a long-term view of the future of Europe and the European
Union. It should articulate a clear vision for what Europe
should be like in 20 years’ time, when the Union embraces
a large part of the geographic continent. Its recommendations
for the institutions and instruments of the future European
Union should be guided strongly by that vision, and not mainly
by the immediate pre-occupations which face the Union today.
2. Multifunctional role: The European Treaty should
be revised to take account of the changing role of European
agriculture and forestry to include the aim of sustainable
development of rural areas. The existing focus on increased
agricultural production has to be replaced by a system that
enables farmers to generate sufficient income from a sustainable
yield, whilst continuing to improve the quality of food and
other products and services. The European Union of the future
should protect the public goods and services that agriculture
provides in addition to food production.
3. New rights: The European Charter of Fundamental
Human Rights should include a right for all citizens to have
access to healthy food, to transparent information about its
production and safety and the right to produce and consume
GMO-free food. Furthermore, it should include the right
to a healthy environment and clean water, and the right of
those who provide and maintain such public goods and services
to appropriate reward.
4. A force for peace, justice and stability: The EU
should be a force for peace, equality, security and justice
worldwide. This should be a Europe based on solidarity and
cohesion, capable of addressing the disparities between different
peoples and regions which will exist within an expanding Union.
It should also apply these principles in its relations with
the outside world, aiming at the progressive reduction of
inequalities between continents and countries, with particular
attention to the poor in developing countries. To this end,
the European Union should propose a Contract for Sustainable
Development, in which it lays down its global responsibilities
for its citizens in an enlarged Union and for its partners
in a multi-polar world. It should set measurable, transparent,
meaningful and effective indicators which meet the essential
requirements for long term ecological, socio-cultural and
economic development. The EU should ensure that the economic
costs of meeting these ambitions are met.
5. Immigration: The EU will continue to be a destination
for migrants, many of which will work in the agricultural
sector. The EU should recognise its responsibility to assist
in sustainably developing the countries of origin to strengthen
democracy, to create fair trading relationships and to prevent
or repair environmental degradation.
6. Role of multi-functional agriculture: Agriculture
should be perceived as a key sector for the well-being of
rural people and communities, for the chains of added value
upstream and downstream of agriculture. The Contract for
Sustainable Development should specifically emphasise the
importance of European rural areas and the new role of a multi-functional
agriculture in ensuring the security, safety and quality of
all food produced in Europe.
7. Empowering citizens: The long-established traditions
of democracy in Europe, coupled with the pride of individual
nations and ethnic groups, point towards a Europe in which
initiative lies strongly with citizens, rather than primarily
with governments or inter-governmental institutions. The
challenge is to release the enterprise and the energy of people
at local level to take control of their own destinies. Therefore,
the European Charter of Fundamental Human Rights should include
the right for self-determination of communities, territories
and nations within the European framework of solidarity and
cohesion. Governments and the European Union should take
active steps to empower the people; to promote participatory
democracy; and to support the emergence and the activity of
non-governmental organisations in rural areas throughout Europe,
notably in the future new Member States. Instruments for
better communication between citizens and governments should
be introduced, in order to avoid the excessive influence of
specific lobbies.
B) AN INTEGRATED AND TERRITORIAL APPROACH TO RURAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Context: More than four-fifths of the land surface
of Europe, and nearly half of its population, fall within
rural areas. They provide living space and livelihood for
hundreds of millions of people, a large part of the food and
other basic resources, and the space for recreation, which
should be seen as a right for all European citizens. Moreover,
European rural areas provide attractions for visitors.
2. Diverse solutions for diverse areas: European rural
areas are highly diversified with multiple functions, demanding
solutions specific to each area. Rural development is an integral
part of regional development, taking into account the specificities
of rural areas compared to those of cities and areas of urban
agglomerations. Thus there is a need for an integrated and
territorial approach to the planning and management of those
areas.
3. A territorial approach: Territorial governance means
the political recognition of defined territories, in which
local identities become powerful forces for local development
in a globalised world economy. Territorial governance should
bring forth a new generation of integrated territorial plans
and programmes of rural Europe, drawing upon the experience
of recent years and using appropriate institutional, legal
and financial instruments. A Common Rural Policy, broader
than but encompassing the CAP, should be an integral part
of a consistent multi-level framework of “territorial governance”,
shaped by the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity.
The Convention should consider whether a separate but comprehensive
rural policy is needed, not only as part of the CAP but as
a new policy area.
4. Horizontal and vertical partnerships: The plans
and programmes should put strong emphasis upon horizontal
and vertical partnerships between national and provincial
governments and local authorities; and upon local partnerships
between the public, private and voluntary sectors, building
upon the experience of the LEADER initiative. Territorial
partnerships should be endowed with the necessary legitimacy,
recognition and means to plan, implement and manage sustainable
development in rural areas. The regional distribution of
funding should be radically reviewed on the basis of a new
typology of rural areas and a proportional system of co-funding
according to population density, the socio-economic situation
and specific features or needs, including low population levels.
5. Innovative networks building human and social capital:
The plans and programmes should facilitate innovative solutions
supported by appropriate research activities and competence
networks within and between rural areas. Bottom-up initiatives
and participatory decision-making should be encouraged and
supported by corresponding top-down structures and activities.
New partnerships should be recognised as a means of achieving
the renewal of institutions as well as citizen support and
involvement. Specific attention should be given to the strengthening
of local public infrastructures; to the development of enterpreneurship
and exchange of best practices; and to giving young people
the opportunity to combine their own future prospects with
those of the area in which they grow up.
6. Strengthened rural-urban linkages: Rural areas should
be regarded as “learning regions”, whose actors are systematically
supported to accumulate the human capital of knowledge and
experience. The future rural Europe should be the Europe of
networks and of co-operation. Rural programmes should help
to strengthen links between rural areas, within and outside
the EU; to enhance the strategic role of rural towns; to establish
creative links with urban centres and metropolitan areas;
and to strengthen links between urban areas and their surrounding
rural areas. Inter-regional co-operation between educational
institutions (and between local or regional bodies) should
also be encouraged. New information and communication technologies
should be used to facilitate such “capacity building networks”.
C) A FUTURE COMMON AGRICULTURAL
AND RURAL POLICY (CARP)
1. A changing landscape: Agriculture and forestry have
been, and will continue to be, fundamental to shaping the
diversity of identities, cultures and traditions of Europe.
But agriculture and forestry have undergone a radical change,
in response to cheap fossil energy, modern technology, global
trade, and, most recently, to public concerns about food quality,
human health, animal welfare, cultural and natural heritage
and the recreational value of rural landscapes. Europe needs
agriculture and forestry in the dual role as archive of the
past and laboratory for the future: they should be seen as
– literally – the “primary” sector which leads the way towards
sustainable development in Europe.
2. Economic, social and environmental sustainability:
A future Common Agricultural and Rural Policy (CARP) should
be oriented towards the overall principles of sustainable
development. It should ensure the viability of agricultural
production and employment in Europe and the future prospects
of young farmers; protect environmental resources such as
soil, water and biodiversity; provide healthy food; ensure
the welfare of animals. It should implement the polluter-pays-principle;
foster local economies and small infrastructures; enhance
related value chains and regional distribution channels; safeguard
the prosperity of village communities and towns; respect people’s
cultural identities and integrity and serve their economic,
social, cultural and environmental needs.
3. Conditionality and public services: Conditionality
of public aid to agriculture should be used to ensure that
farming practices by themselves produce positive external
environmental, social and cultural effects, thus saving public
costs. In the horizontal regulation, equitable modulation
and cross-compliance instruments should be simplified and
reinforced at the EU level, to enhance sustainable farming
in the first pillar. Where farmers produce additional
public goods, they should be rewarded by society. The creation
or maintenance of jobs should be taken into account as a main
criterion for support.
4. Review of development instruments: There is a strong
case for a radical review of all the main instruments now
used in the EU to promote social and economic development
– the CAP and the FEOGA, and the Structural Funds, the ESF
and ERDF. It may be right to distinguish clearly between
agricultural and rural development elements, now linked within
the CAP; to cut through the divide between the Rural Development
Regulation and the Social and Regional Development Funds;
and to create instruments which more directly reflect the
essential need for territoriality and integration at the point
of delivery, while meeting the re-distributive aims of cohesion.
According to the cohesion principle, a new typology of rural
areas should be implanted with different degrees of community
co-financing depending upon population, levels of income and
economic development of the territories, disregarding the
present classification of regions into or outside of objective
1. Agricultural and rural policies should be closely connected
to environmental policies.
5. Quality criteria: CARP instruments should ensure
an appropriate and responsible level of quantitative production
of food, and a continuous improvement of quality and hygiene.
These quality criteria should fit to the varying structures
of European farms and enterprises, instead of transferring
general standards from large enterprises to family farms and
businesses. Regulatory systems should not prevent the continued
pursuit of traditional local craftsmanship, using a diversity
of cultural plants and domestic animals. Patenting systems
must not overrule the rights of local people and associations
to grow, to reproduce and to trade these - mostly endangered
- species and varieties.
6. Fair relations with developing countries: The provisions
in the new CARP should be consistent with Europe’s obligations
to developing countries. The EU should stop subsidising the
export of European food - often below domestic quality requirements
– to developing countries. It should stop exporting pesticides
and other toxic materials which do not meet the Union’s own
standards; and it should oblige European-based corporations
to comply to European standards wherever they operate. It
should recognise the need of farmers in developing countries
to find markets for their products and to benefit from fair
prices, and should work within the World Trade Organisation
to persuade other developed nations to take the same view.
7. “Real” prices which cover all production costs
can only be installed together with supply management to avoid
production surpluses and shortages and import barriers with
the important exception of less developed countries needing
access to our markets, to avoid import below our own production
cost prices.
8. Biological and social research: European research
in biotechnology and genomics has to keep pace with that of
other nations, but should apply new insights and knowledge
according to high ethical standards and the principles of
sustainable development. This is not meant as a purely defensive
strategy: it should become a forerunner in the responsible
management of global intelligence. Effective research into
rural development and the changing role of farmers is also
needed.
9. Co-decision: The European Parliament should have
the right to co-decision and obligatory approval for budgeting.
The national or regional Parliaments should be involved in
customising and making the CARP operational of the CARP within
member states. All actors of an enlarged EU have the right
to participate in the decision-making process for the future
CARP.
10. Economic justice and diversity: For agriculture
to continue to maintain the environment, local culture and
rural communities it must be economically sustainable. Excessive
consolidation in the supply and food purchasing sectors (linked
to industrial “strategic alliances” and to intellectual property
rights) is eroding the economic viability of holdings. EU
trade and competition policy should develop a diverse network
of both suppliers and purchasers for the agricultural sector,
otherwise people will continue to be displaced from the land.
Non-EU countries with a lower regulatory burden in relation
to the environment and animal and social welfare present unfair
competition. Without a level playing field the need for public
subsidy to sustain rural communities is increased.
D) THE PROCESS
OF ENLARGEMENT
1. Urgency of enlargement and readiness to change:
EU enlargement is an important and urgent matter for both
the EU and the new member states. The new states will significantly
enrich EU biodiversity, and bring unique landscapes and cultural
values. They will bring dynamic human capital with enormous
entrepreneurship. This should contribute to strengthening
economic potential and sustaining growth and job creation
in the whole EU. Due to their recent history, within the last
10-12 years they have introduced radical institutional reforms
that took many decades to implement in the west. These nations
will bring a new culture of change that should facilitate
the necessary reforms within the EU. Full EU membership for
these countries will contribute to sustaining recently introduced
reforms and to securing stability and prosperity in the whole
region.
2. A new European Union: The impending accession of
new member states is an important stage in the great political
project of achieving a whole continent unified in peace.
The Europe of the future will be one of more diversity and
multi-culturality. It must take into account the varying
aspirations and needs of peoples, communities and nations,
as well as their equitable rights to access elementary resources,
to pursue their individual level of fulfilment, to freely
express their cultural values and to participate in democratic
institutions and decision making. Increased mobility within
Europe, and between Europe and the outside world, continues
to transform demographic structures and to challenge the institutional
and political capacities of member states to integrate ethnic,
cultural and religious minorities. There is a great responsibility
in helping European people to learn to become familiar with
the unfamiliar.
3. Equality and partnership: The relationship between
the present member states of the Union and the new member
states should be one of equality and partnership in a great
enterprise. They should receive equal treatment with existing
members, related to decision making and the delivery of policies
and financial support systems from the moment of entry or
on a formal phasing-in basis within a very few years of joining.
4. New challenges: The new member states bring not
only human and natural capital that is needed to sustain development
in the EU, but also some traditional problems of countries
in transition from the central planning to market economies.
These problems, such as poverty, insufficient infrastructure,
difficult access to financial capital, unclear land property
rights, deficiency of modern managerial skills, underdeveloped
political culture and non-governmental sector, are particularly
visible in rural areas. In order to resolve those problems,
there is an urgent need to develop innovative and integrative
approaches and adapt them to local circumstances. Bottom-up
decision making processes should be specifically enhanced
by corresponding innovative top-down policies. This is a big
challenge for EU and new member states but also a chance to
develop policy models that could be applicable beyond EU,
particularly in developing countries.
5. A unique opportunity to develop new systems: The
European Union should be aware of the unique opportunity,
presented by enlargement, both to meet the hopes and ambitions
of millions of Europeans and to try out new systems of support.
These systems should integrate the concerns of the agricultural
sector, rural development, environmental protection and landscape
preservation. The new member states need transparent, lean
and flexible support systems, instead of inheriting time consuming
planning, programming and funding structures, which even the
present member states wish to modify because of their inconsistencies
and over complexity.
6. Multi-functionality: The new member states need
a Common Agricultural and Rural Policy based on multi-functionality.
They need well-designed training for farmers and rural people,
improvement of infrastructure and development of efficient
financial services including micro-finance for small farms
and businesses. The acquis communautaire should not
be seen as a hurdle, but rather as an indicative set of standards,
which they may progressively achieve both before and after
joining the Union. They should be given active support not
only to achieve the acquis communautaire, but also
to prepare for entry into substantive EU programmes. Specifically,
they should be offered support for programmes parallel to
the Rural Development Regulation, and to the LEADER-type initiatives.
7. Action, transparency and effectiveness: The Convention
must address how to shift the emphasis onto action, speedy
dispatch of business, transparency and effectiveness. The
preoccupation of the European Commission with financial accountability
and rigorous audit is causing lamentable delay in pursuit
of programmes, and hesitancy to take initiative and to permit
initiative in others.
E) EUROPEAN
INSTITUTIONS
1. The EU should do less, better: Excellent governance
most easily spreads when starting at the top level. The Convention,
when considering the future institutional form of the Union,
should bear in mind that it exists for the benefit of the
citizens of Europe and must be approachable and coherent for
them. A deep re-structuring leading to better horizontal
integration of the general directorates would be a step towards
implementation of the principles formulated in the European
Commission’s White Paper on European Governance. It would
lead to better quality and more effective delivery of policies,
and to a more coherent image for the outside world.
2. Policy co-ordination and coherence: The EU should
be at the forefront of effective integration of sectoral policies
in its own administration. The CAP must be integrated horizontally
with other European policies which affect the agricultural
sector (regional, employment, environment, energy, transport,
competition, consumer health and development). The emphasis
in the EU should shift towards an insistence on transparency
in the declaration by producers of the nature of their products,
so that consumers can judge for themselves what to buy.
3. Improving the management of the CAP: The Common
Market Organisations have developed into a complex system
of market control mechanisms and regulations. There is a
strong case for review of the sectoral market organisation
approach and of the role of the EU in the field of regulations
related to, for example, hygiene and other standards in farming
and food processing. Existing agricultural legislation should
be screened to remove redundant and obsolete rules. The FEDER
model of annual accountancy management for rural development
programmes should be replaced byanother pluri-annual management
system.
4. Transparency and accountability: An enlarged European
Union of 27 or more countries needs clear and transparent
decision-making structures and management processes. Decisions
made on the CAP must take into account all different stakeholders.
The Convention should give a clear vision upon which kind
of tasks should be fulfilled at the European level, and what
(from the perspective of the citizen or an enterprise) can
be better achieved at national, regional or local levels,
although a re-nationalisation of the CAP is undesirable for
reasons of internal market, landscape and trade negotiations.
In the pursuit of decentralised governance, more European
institutions and agencies should be located in different areas
of the Union. New member states should host EU institutions
as soon as possible after formal accession.
5. Need for shared rules: In the long run, the delivery
of policy frameworks for territorial programming at EU level
will only lead to successful results in the regions if the
whole array of territorial (European, national, regional,
local) levels are interlinked and co-ordinated by similar,
simple, transparent rules. The make-up of these frameworks
should embody the spirit of the European integration project,
thus representing much more than administrative procedures.
The nature of the development process is complex and rural
development institutions need to be provided with sufficient
flexibility to assist it.
6. Networks and partnerships: The European Union should
seek to encourage the emergence and viability of a multitude
of networks of solidarity, of cultural exchange and competence
sharing. More competencies should be entrusted to local and
regional public-private partnerships for negotiating and solving
problems within and between territories. These partnerships
should be given resources to participate actively in trans-regional
and transnational networks, inspired by the common purpose
of learning from and with each other. Non-governmental organisations
should play an essential role in these partnerships and networks.
7. The principles of co-operation: Territorial co-operation
within a wider Europe and with other parts of the world should
be based on the principles of solidarity, partnership and
fair competition. This co-operation should take place in
the most direct, decentralised manner, gently encouraged and
supported by European institutions.
8. International obligations: Europe should strive
to reach broadly shared approaches and standpoints with respect
to international negotiations and world-wide agreements concerning
global issues such as environment, wealth distribution, gender
equity and opportunities, new development models and the role
of global, multilateral institutions. The EU should, in the
course of the WTO negotiations, advocate an integrated approach
to rural development as a worldwide necessity, and advocate
equitable social rights for the citizens in developing countries.
9. Continuation of innovative dialogue: The broad participation
and lively discussions before and during the AgriCultural
Convention should inspire European authorities to support,
via Internet and periodic meetings, a continuous forum of
dialogue upon strategic questions of the Common Agricultural
and Rural Policy. A balance has to be found between the
consideration of particular interests and the participation
of representatives of the broader community of farmers, rural
people and European citizens and consumers. European institutions
should facilitate the flow of relevant information in all
directions, from bottom-up, from top-down and laterally, thus
creating a new culture of dialogue.
10. Co-decision: The European Parliament should be
given co-decision power in questions related to both formulating
and budgeting the Common Agricultural and Rural Policy in
an enlarged Europe.
EACrecommendationsAN24.06.2002 |
