CAP in trouble! ARC2020 analysis of the implementation and enforcement of the European agricultural policy in 2024

At the end of 2024, the ARC2020 information platform published a report analysing the threats to the current Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as well as the opportunities for steering the current and future implementation towards a more integrated and coherent agri-food policy, in support of rural areas. This text offers a brief synthesis of the main conclusions of the report.

In recent times every year seems to be something of an emergency for policy makers, and for farming and food. 2024 was no different in that sense  - farmers’ protests occurred all over Europe, and a new, unplanned CAP regulation was rushed through the European Institutions, dampening ambitions for a more sustainable and green policy.

The protests were multifaceted – from large producers, whose fears were fueled by populist rhetoric at the national level, to small and medium-sized producers, fearing for their survival. But it could not be otherwise, given that the sector is defined by the model of “get big or get out”.

5.3 million small farms were lost between 2005 and 2020, while mega-farms grew. In fact, this is not a model of growth for agricultural enterprises, but business consolidation and partial transfer of ownership to corporations and banks.

In February 2024, ARC2020 wrote that steps were being taken backwards on environmental measures. Two standards for sustainable agriculture from the so-called GAEC were to be revised – for permanent pasture and for soil cover. This, led by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was done to appease protesting farmers. Taking advantage of the situation, member states added the additional revision of standards for the protection of wetlands and peatlands, on crop rotation and on fallow land. By March it was clear that the promises and plans for the Green CAP were “dismantled”.

The official proposal for changes was published at the end of March, without giving the opportunity to hear the opinions of organizations working to protect the environment. The coalition for organic farming IFOAM defines these actions as “simplification without vision” and sees the Commission giving in to pressure from member states and industrial producers to get out of the stated ambitions for an ecological transition in agriculture.

By April the Parliament had given its full blessing to the fast track proposal, itself skipping procedures and going straight to a full house vote. As the Belgian presidency galloped ahead, Parliament and Council acted in full synchrony to copper-fasten the changes.

In late September the Ombudsman formally opened an inquiry into the Commission’s conduct in fast-tracking changes to the EU’s farming subsidy programme to dismantle its environmental requirements. Also in September the ECA – the European Court of Auditors - found that CAP plans 2023-2027 “do not match the EU’s ambitions for the climate and the environment”. Using CAP SPs from Poland, France, Spain and Ireland, the ECA found that the Commission “does not use measurable criteria for assessing green ambition.”

Of course, there are also positive examples, as Oliver Moore from ARC2020 writes in his summary: “Only one Member State (Bulgaria) implements the full payment for small farmers; only one region (Wallonia in Belgium) implements a significantly innovative payment for small-scale organic horticulture; only Ireland implements a top-up payment for women in agricultural business.”

The big picture

Hans Wetzels and Hannes Lorenzen conducted a deep dive into the potential impact of Ukrainian entry into the EU’s CAP system.

They conclude that Ukraine’s potential EU accession poses challenges for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), requiring reforms to address disparities between Ukraine’s vast agricultural sector and EU area-based subsidy structures. The dominance of large conglomerates alongside small and medium farms crucial for food security underscores the need for equitable, ecological, and socially focused support. CAP reform must balance preventing oligopolistic dominance, supporting small farmers, and aligning agriculture with environmental and market needs amidst geopolitical pressures.

In 2024, European farming faced upheaval as protests exposed the strain on farmers balancing environmental mandates, economic pressures, the impacts of climate extremes and the Ukraine war. The EU fast-tracked controversial CAP reforms, rolling back environmental measures and prioritising deregulation, drawing sharp criticism from NGOs and small farmer groups who warned of accelerated industrialisation and ecological harm. The reforms, rushed without proper processes or assessments,were a missed chance for equitable, sustainable policies.

Ukraine’s potential EU accession simply heightens the urgency for reform, revealing disparities between small-scale farmers and dominant conglomerates.

The Strategic Dialogue and other approaches all point now to how replacing hectare-based payments is needed. Instead payments should be better tied to environmental resilience and social equity to support small and medium farmers, who are essential for food security and ecological balance.

The potential accession of Ukraine reinforces the need for bold action to prevent further consolidation and environmental damage. This is a chance to redefine the CAP as a driver of fairness and sustainability.