Scientists Reject Claims That EU Green Laws Will Harm Food Security and Farmers
Introduction
Over 3,000 scientists have signed an open letter to Members of the European Parliament, rejecting claims that proposed EU green legislation will harm food security and farmers. The letter comes as the parliament’s environment committee prepares to vote on nature restoration plans, and committees are expected to vote on pesticide laws in the coming months.
Nature Under Pressure
Agriculture is responsible for over 10 percent of EU carbon emissions and is the leading cause of biodiversity loss in the world. In 2020, the EU announced ambitious farming reforms to reduce synthetic pesticide and fertiliser use and to restore wildlife across land, rivers, and oceans. However, powerful farming unions and the largest right-wing party in the EU, the European People’s Party (EPP), have been lobbying to delay and scrap the proposed laws.
‘Unjustified Attack’
Opponents of the legislation argue that mandatory pesticide reduction targets would lead to crop losses and that nature restoration plans would harm farmers and food production. The scientists behind the open letter dispute these claims, highlighting the dangers of failing to curb pesticide use and the degradation of nature. They argue that protecting and restoring nature and reducing agrochemical use are essential for maintaining long-term production and enhancing food security.
Intensive Lobbying and Disputed Evidence
The pesticide, seed, and industrial farming industries have been lobbying against the proposed laws for years, promoting claims about the harms posed by green legislation. However, the industry-funded studies have been criticized for failing to incorporate the expected benefits of green reforms and the costs of failing to take action on climate change or biodiversity loss.
Conclusion
The open letter from over 3,000 scientists supports an evidence-based dialogue in the EU and within member states. Protecting and restoring nature and reducing agrochemical use are essential for maintaining long-term production and enhancing food security. The proposed legislation can create new employment opportunities and stimulate innovation, and rejecting it would send a dangerous, negative signal to the world that the EU and its member states are backtracking on commitments.
