Common agriculture policy 2023-2027 (CAP)

1. Is CAP just another excuse to frame green growth as sustainable?

• Does Brussels understand the reality of farmers?

• How to balance between pleasing big and small farms?

2. The use of pesticides and the massive lobby on environmentally harmful agriculture chemicals inside the EU

• The lobby for chemicals is massive

• Poorly designed incentives can lead to environmental contamination, harming human helath or economic uncertainty for farmers

3. Issue of representation in local bodies

• Farmers are underrepresented in local governance

• Small and organic farms are even less represented. Large-scale industrial farms often receive most funds, while smallholders and riral communities may get left behind, deepening the inequality and limiting opportunities for sustainable livelihoods

4. Environmental issues

• Policies influence wheter land is over-farmed, left fallow, or restored. Intensive farming without proper environmental safeguards depletes soil, reduces its fertility, and therefore harms long-term sustainability

5. Focus on animal welfare not rights

• CAP does not fundamentally question the use of animals in farming, nor does it treat animals as stakeholders with rights. This is an ethical and environmental issue

6. Labour rights and working conditions

• Intensive farming systems, supported indirectly by CAP, can involve precarious labour conditions, seasonal work with low pay, or unsafe working environments

• CAP does not explicitly include labour rights safeguards

7. Right to food and access to resources

• CAP subsidies historically favour large-scale industrial farms, which can distort markets and limit access for smallholders or local farmers

• Right to adequate food and livelihoods for rural communities can be endangered, especially in less-favoured regions