Farm certification schemes could make the CAP greener

European certifications could help the EU achieve its environmental ambitions, a recent study showed, though the findings raised questions among MEPs who expressed concern over quality controls and the impacts on farmers.

A recent study presented to the European Parliament on Wednesday (31 August) has concluded that product quality certifications, or certifications of good agricultural practices — such as Haute Valeur Environnementale (HVE) label, Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) label or Label Bas-Carbone — would be an effective tool to reach the EU’s environmental objectives.

The study examined the 198 certifications that currently exist in the EU and in the main third countries.

After the compilation of the various labels and the classification by theme and field of action, the experts assessed their contribution to the EU’s sustainability objectives as set out in the European Green Deal, and in particular in the Farm to Fork Strategy.

They first noted the heterogeneity of the certifications. While overall the certifications comply with the requirements defined by the European regulation, they “do not meet the objectives to the same extent.”

Some of them, such as IP Sigill (Sweden), Leaf (England), Naturland (Germany) and Equalitas (Italy) demonstrate “a wide range of commitments” and are likely to make “a direct or high contribution to almost all of the EU’s sustainability objectives.”

Some others respond more specifically to one, two, or three objectives, such as resource management, environmental protection, and animal health and welfare. Yet others focus specifically on a single objective, for example, animal welfare (Beter Leven in the Netherlands and the Tierwohl Initiative in Germany) or climate (Label bas-carbone in France).

CAP’s environmental objectives

According to the study, “a significant proportion” of these certifications respect the environmental objectives of the new common agricultural policy (CAP), and in particular, those related to good agricultural practices (HVE, IP Sigill, Leaf).

However, the experts note that practices vary greatly depending on the certifications, and generally cover less than a quarter of the 22 potential agricultural practices listed by the European Commission that the eco-schemes — payment schemes rewarding farmers for observing agricultural practices beneficial for the environment — could support.

Some of them cover more than one-third of these good practices, in the case of Naturland (68%), IP Sigill (50%), Beter Leven (41%) and HVE (36%).

Based on this analysis, the authors, therefore, encouraged the use of certification schemes in the member states’ National Strategic plans and advocated for wider use of this tool to lead to “the adoption or maintenance of farming practices requested by the eco-schemes and the Agri-environment-climate Measures (AECM)”.

Commission gives stamp of approval to first batch of CAP plans

The European Commission approved the first package of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) strategic plans on Wednesday (31 August) after months of back and forth between the EU executive and member states.

Controls

MEPs largely welcomed the study at the session, but several raised questions – including how the private sector is handling these certifications.

Among the 198 certifications, only one-third are issued by public, national or supranational bodies. Spanish deputy Clara Aguilera García cited a “risk of ending up with marketing for the company, with no use for the consumer”.

Tanguy Chever, one of three authors of the study, responded: “Private labels are not just marketing and advertising. It is possible that labels are managed by professional organisations. And they can sometimes go further than the rules for organic farming when the public authorities are not willing to do so.”

“The control of these labels must be guaranteed. But how? By whom?” Italian MEP Herbert Dorfmann asked. German MEP Ulrike Müller suggested that the first step should be to identify the certification systems most often used and the most promising ones for achieving the EU’s environmental objectives.

“Controls require funding, and if they have to be done in addition by the Commission, I have a problem with that,” the rapporteur and chief negotiator of the CAP reform for the financing, administration and control aspect said.

While labels and other quality certifications are managed and controlled at the national level — the National Institute for Origin and Quality (INAO) and the National Commission for Environmental Certification (CNCE) in France — private certifications are not.

To prevent the risk of greenwashing by companies, the authors insist on the need for a specific evaluation of the requirements and implementation of these certifications.

Added value

The experts put forward a number of suggestions for linking certifications to CAP tools: requesting a contribution to at least one environmental or climate objective of the CAP, having compulsory “clear added value” requirements, or setting up an EU control system.

Dutch MEP Bert-Jan Ruissen underlined the “added value” of these certifications for the farmers themselves. “These initiatives show their sense of responsibility. The farmer receives a reward for his efforts.”

However, he insists on the need to increase these benefits. “Farmers have to meet many requirements, and the financial reward is sometimes missing,” he said.

It’s a complex issue, Chever responded. “We have seen an added value, especially for specific demands such as geographical indications, or organic [farming]. There are opportunities, income increases. But when the labels are broader, the added value is less, or even zero, it all depends on market access.”

[Edited by Nathalie Weatherald]

Read more with Euractiv

EU fruit, vegetable producers scramble to save harvest as energy prices soar

Soaring energy bills have sent the EU’s horticulture sector scrambling to save their produce just as harvest time hits, leaving some debating whether to simply leave their crops to rot - and even whether to continue growing in the future.