4311171
doi
10.5281/zenodo.4311171
oai:zenodo.org:4311171
Lakner, Sebastian
3) Universität Rostock, Justus-von-Liebig-Weg 2, 18059 Rostock, Germany
Seppelt, Ralf
4) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Dept Computational Landscape Ecology, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
Bezák, Peter
5) Institute of Landscape Ecology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, branch Nitra, Akademická 2, 94910, Nitra, Slovakia
Bonn, Aletta
1) German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Puschstraße 4, 04103 Leipzig 2) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Dept Ecosystem Services, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany, 6) Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Institute of Biodiversity, Dornburger Straße 159, 07743 Jena, Germany
Concepción, Elena D.
7) Department of Biogeography and Global Change, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (BGC-MNCN-CSIC), c/Serrano 115bis, E-28006 Madrid, Spain, 8) Department of Biodiversity, Ecology and Evolution, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Creutzig, Felix
9) Sustainability Economics of Human Settlements, Technische Universität Berlin, Straße des 17. Junis 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany, 10) Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, EUREF 19, Torgauer Straße 12-15, 10829 Berlin, Germany
Daub, Claus-Heinrich
11) Institute of Management, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, Bahnhofstr. 6, 5210 Windisch, Switzerland
Díaz, Mario
7) Department of Biogeography and Global Change, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (BGC-MNCN-CSIC), c/Serrano 115bis, E-28006 Madrid, Spain
Dieker, Petra
12) Thünen Institute of Biodiversity, Bundesallee 65, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
Eisenhauer, Nico
1) German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Puschstraße 4, 04103 Leipzig, 13) Leipzig University, Puschstraße 4, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
Hagedorn, Gregor
14) Scientists for Future, Berlin, Germany
Hansjürgens, Bernd
1) German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Puschstraße 4, 04103 Leipzig, 15) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Dept Economics, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
Harrer-Puchner, Gabriele
16) System Logics T.T. GmbH, CH-9000 St.Gallen, Switzerland and Associated Fellow mobil.LAB Doctoral Research Group TUM, Technical University Munich, Germany
Herzon, Irina
17) Department of Agricultural Sciences and HELSUS, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland
Hickler, Thomas
18) Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Jetzkowitz, Jens
19) Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Biodiversity Policy Lab, Invalidenstraße 43, 10115 Berlin, Germany, 20) Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Fakultät für Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften, Holstenhofweg 85, 22043 Hamburg, Germany
Kazakova, Yanka
21) Economics of Natural Resources Department, University of National and World Economy, Studentski Grad "Hristo Botev", Sofia 1700, Bulgaria
Kindlmann, Pavel
22) Department of Biodiversity Research, Global Change Research Institute, Brno, and Institute for Environmental Studies, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
Kirchner, Mathias
23) Center for Global Change and Sustainability, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Dänenstraße 4, 1190 Vienna 24 Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacherstr. 4, 79106 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
Klein, Alexandra-Maria
24) Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacherstr. 4, 79106 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
Linow, Sven
25) Hochschule Darmstadt, Schöfferstraße 3, 64295 Darmstadt, Germany
Lomba, Angela
26) CIBIO (Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources)/InBIO – University of Porto, Campus Agrário de Vairão, 4485-661 Vairão, Portugal
López-Bao, José Vicente
27) Research Unit of Biodiversity (UO/CSIC/PA), Oviedo University, Spain
Metta, Matteo
28) University of Pisa, Via Lungarno Antonio Pacinotti, 43, 56126 Pisa PI, Italia
Morales, Manuel B.
29) Departamento de Ecología and Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM). Autónoma University of Madrid. 28049 Madrid, Spain
Moreira, Francisco
30) CIBIO/InBIO – University of Porto, Campus Agrário de Vairão, 4485-661 Vairão, Portugal; CIBIO/InBIO, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal
Mupepele, Anne-Christine
24) Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacherstr. 4, 79106 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
Navarro, Alberto
27) Research Unit of Biodiversity (UO/CSIC/PA), Oviedo University, Spain
Oppermann, Rainer
31) Institute for Agro-ecology and Biodiversity (IFAB), Böcklinstr. 27, D-68163 Mannheim, Germany
Rac, Ilona
32) University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical faculty, Jamnikarjeva ulica 101, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Röder, Norbert
33) Thünen Institute of Rural studies, Bundesallee 64, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
Martina Schäfer
34) Zentrum Technik und Gesellschaft (Center for Technology and Society, ZTG), Technische Universität Berlin, Germany
Sirami, Clelia
35) Université de Toulouse, INRAE, UMR DYNAFOR, Castanet-Tolosan, France
Streck, Charlotte
36) University of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 10, 14469 Potsdam
Šumrada, Tanja
32) University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical faculty, Jamnikarjeva ulica 101, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Tielbörger, Katja
37) Plant Ecology Group, University of Tübingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 5, 72076 Tübingen
Underberg, Emil
38) Ökozucht Buckow, Kalkarer Str. 4, D-46509 Xanten, Germany.
Wagener-Lohse, Georg
39) Fördergemeinschaft für Erneuerbare Energien, FEE e.V., Berlin, Germany
Baumann, Franz
40) New York University, Graduate School of Arts and Science, Program in International Relations, New York, USA
The EU's Common Agriculture Policy and Sustainable Farming: A statement by scientists
Pe'er, Guy
1) German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Puschstraße 4, 04103 Leipzig; and 2) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Dept Ecosystem Services, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Common Agricultural Policy, Sustainability, farming, biodiversity, climate, ecosystem services, subsidies, policy reform, EU Green Deal
<p>The European Union’s (EU) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) still fails to address the environmental and socioeconomic challenges of EU’s agriculture. Agricultural ecosystems are further degrading, biodiversity is declining and agricultural Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions remain high. At the same time, farms are facing unresolved socio-economic challenges and rural areas struggle to remain viable. Knowledge, data, instruments and resources to address sustainability challenges are readily available. Missing is the CAP’s appropriate design as well as prioritization, and the indispensable political will to improve these.</p>
<p>While the Commission’s 2018 proposal fell short of addressing the key weaknesses of the CAP, the amendment proposals of October 2020 by the Council and the Parliament significantly weaken the CAP’s environmental instruments, while maintaining or even enhancing the inequitable and counterproductive distribution of payments. A weakened CAP puts both the environment and the future of farmers and farming at risk.</p>
<p>Scientific evidence shows that it is possible and efficient to align sustainable farming, multifunctional agroforestry and long-term prosperity with the climate and biodiversity goals of the EU. Farmers’ interests and environmental protection can be mutually reinforced and achieved through a CAP that is aligns with the EU’s Green Deal and Biodiversity Strategy, while also conforming to the Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>The proposed CAP post-2020 as it stands represents a business-as-usual model of agriculture against the viable alternative of a responsible and sustainable farm model that ensures the viability of rural communities. The narrative in support of this foundering approach, by stressing the importance of food production and the need to feed the world, is counteracted by a reality of more farmland taken for the production of fuel and feed for animals than for human consumption. The political positions also fail to represent the interests and needs of most farmers, who want to protect their living environment so in order to secure the long-term sustainability of their own farming - but rightly ask for public policy support. The CAP should provide better means to do so, and aim at a fair transition toward a sustainable future for farming.</p>
<p><strong>The trilogue negotiations are a last opportunity to rethink the CAP post-2020 design and propose legal texts that allow, rather than impede, environmental and social ambition in line with the EU’s statement that the next CAP will be fairer and greener. </strong></p>
<p>Using the time gained by the transition period of two years, we strongly recommend to Member States, the Council and the Parliament to rethink the current proposal. We specifically urge to:</p>
<ol>
<li> </li>
</ol>
<p>a) expanding permanent pasture protection beyond protected areas (Natura 2000) and</p>
<p>b) maintaining or restoring at least 10% non-productive, semi-natural landscape features on all utilized agricultural area rather than only on arable land;</p>
<ol>
<li> </li>
<li>Secure use current knowledge to ensure Eco-schemes are well designed (i.e., include only effective measures for biodiversity), monitored and re-evaluated to achieve measurable environmental impacts</li>
<li> </li>
<li> </li>
<li>Place a clear target for reducing, toward phasing out, of coupled payments (e.g. toward 5%) as subsidies that are harmful for both markets and the environment;</li>
<li>If Direct Payments remain a political priority, and more equity among the recipients is the proposed means to address farmer’s concerns, then the Council and Parliament should make the Capping and Redistribution mechanism mandatory for all Member States, and set strict capping rules;</li>
<li>Ensure the success of the new Delivery Model by means of a) linking Strategic Plans to the EU’s Green Deal, b) retaining the yearly reporting of Result indicators, and c) improving the integration of scientists and other experts in the consultation processes offered by Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS).</li>
</ol>
<p>Science across all disciplines is available to address the agricultural sustainability challenge and improve the CAP. <strong>Over 3600 signatories have supported the call to improve the CAP. They underlined the feasibility of constructive changes and documented the readiness to assist in positively transforming and future-proofing the CAP and the EU’s agriculture</strong> (Pe’er et al. 2020).</p>
Zenodo
2020-12-08
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
4311170
V8.12.2020
1607516834.909855
335543
md5:d074382b792888acce4c2332e9aae96d
https://zenodo.org/records/4311171/files/Peer et al 2020 Scientists Statement on the CAP and the Trilogue 8_12_2020.pdf
public
10.5281/zenodo.4311170
isVersionOf
doi