Criticism arose as Greenpeace questioned a 300 million lira aid package and a 1000 euro measure aimed at agricultural business owners to compensate losses from rising fertilizer costs. The debate centers on whether these steps actually propel sustainable and environmentally friendly changes in the agri-food system or simply maintain the status quo during a time of price increases and supply pressures.
Observers note that rural areas face hardship while environmental pressures intensify. Climate change, water scarcity, and agricultural practices are amplifying the heavy and often wasteful use of fertilizers in rural communities. Luis Ferreirim, head of agriculture for Greenpeace Spain, outlined these concerns to Europa Press, emphasizing the need to rethink conventional supports that treat fertilizer usage as a guaranteed path to food production. The aim, as framed by the NGO, is for food production to be sustainable and to stay within planetary limits.
Ferreirim argued that Spain should not rely on a narrow productivity model that produces excess food waste. He suggested that seizing a moment of policy action could catalyze meaningful change and better align farming practices with environmental constraints.
From this perspective, there is skepticism that the grants proposed by the Executive would allow Spain to meet the European Biodiversity Strategy Farm to Fork targets, which include reducing the use of fertilizers and pesticides by 2030 in harmony with the environment. Public demonstrations of support for such an approach have been mixed, and debates continue about the most effective route to achieve these shared objectives.
Ferreirim also contends that the 300 million euros approved recently bring new obstacles to achieving these goals, suggesting that other EU member states may need to intensify their efforts to help reach the proposed targets. The discussion mirrors broader worries about how to balance immediate economic needs with longer-term environmental commitments.
Promote organic production
Within this debate, Greenpeace argues for policies that actively support an ecological agro-food production model. The organization cautions that incentives should benefit sustainable agriculture rather than simply sustaining current practices that overlook long-term environmental health.
Additionally, the critique extends to regulatory directions under Planas, accusing the minister of pushing to release barriers around the feeding of industrial livestock in ways that may conflict with European norms while justifying such moves as responses to external pressures. The critique emphasizes that crisis-driven approaches should not derail opportunities to guide farming toward more sustainable options, even though the issue is complex and multifaceted.
The European Commission’s Farm to Fork Strategy, presented as part of the European Green Deal, outlines a climate-neutral pathway by 2050. Its aim is to reform the current European food system into a more sustainable model while prioritizing food safety and security. The core objectives include:
– Ensuring access to sufficient, affordable, and nutritious food without transgressing planetary boundaries.
– Reducing the use of pesticides and fertilizers by half, and curbing the sale of antimicrobials.
– Expanding land allocated to organic farming.
– Encouraging more sustainable food consumption and healthier eating habits.
– Cutting food loss and waste throughout the supply chain.
– Combating food fraud and strengthening integrity within the supply chain.
– Advancing animal welfare across farming systems.
These goals reflect a broader effort to establish an agricultural model that respects environmental boundaries while ensuring reliable food supplies for communities in Europe and beyond. The Farm to Fork Strategy stands as a cornerstone of the broader plan to achieve climate neutrality and sustainable development across the food system, aligning with ongoing discussions about how best to balance economic viability with ecological stewardship.