News GLB
'CAP statements Trouw lack nuance'
'Dutch families support the agricultural sector with €500 annually,' Trouw headlined on Saturday 28 December. Reactions from the sector to this statement immediately rained down. WUR researcher and GLB specialist Petra Berkhout, who contributed to the article, also gave a reaction† The numbers are factually correct, but lack nuance.
The Trouw journalist writes that every resident of the Netherlands pays €130 to the agricultural sector on an annual basis, via the EU. Appreciation for the sector, which is so advocated by farmers, is therefore misplaced, the piece suggests. The author uses a note that Wageningen Economic Research made in 2017 at the request of the World Wildlife Fund as the source. According to people in the sector, the article also gives rise to the idea that this €500 will go directly to the Dutch farmer. That is factually incorrect.
Where does that €500 come from?
The EU annually pays out €43 billion in income support for farmers. In addition, €18 billion for European rural development. If you divide this €61 billion by 508 million inhabitants, you arrive at €122 per inhabitant per year. In addition, there is a national contribution. For the Netherlands, this amounts to €9 per inhabitant per year. So for a family of 4 in total about €500 on an annual basis.
Not all the money for the farmer
"Where it goes wrong is that the article suggests that this amount goes entirely to the farm", explains Petra Berkhout. She is a project manager and senior researcher at Wageningen Economic Research. "It is not possible to make a 1-to-1 link between EU agricultural policy and farmers' income. In addition to direct income support (which is paid per hectare), part of the subsidy money goes to rural development. Farmers also receive this subsidy for agricultural nature management, but also other site managers. You can discuss how all this money is spent and what goals are achieved."
One of the comments made by the sector itself is the fact that the Netherlands deposits more money into the EU than it receives back in the form of agricultural subsidies. Berkhout also responds to this: "It is true that the Netherlands is a so-called net payer. This is simply because the Netherlands is a wealthy Member State. You cannot expect residents of Romania to contribute the same per capita. Moreover, the Netherlands also benefits from investments in other countries. countries, such as projects to improve infrastructure."
Non-productive measures
Berkhout agrees that quite a bit of money goes to the farmyard. It is impossible to say exactly what amount that is. This depends on the type of company and its size. In addition, there are non-productive measures such as nature management. This is a large item, which not only benefits the agricultural company but also society.
"EU policy is more than awarding subsidies, there are also all kinds of obligations, for the Member State and for the applicant for the subsidy. In general, the policy is the same for every Member State, but then there is the freedom to choose how the national interpretation takes shape", Berkhout knows. "For example, member states are obliged to offer agricultural nature management, but the details vary per country. In the 70s and 80s, in the Netherlands and other European Member States, we had (among other things) considerable support for primary production, including through investment measures. That phase is behind us, while that is still going on in Eastern Europe."
New CAP policy
The future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which will be presented in 2021, will build on this (on what?). "A document has already been published under European Commissioner Phil Hogan in which the new CAP is outlined in outline. The new committee is working on this further. A level playing field will always remain a point of discussion."
If a country wants to combat the use of cage eggs or other products that are produced with a different production standard, other solutions can be devised. Berkhout: "Through their purchasing policy, companies can make their own choices not to use cage eggs, for example. Such products are often tucked away in the ingredient list. Through marketing and information you can make consumers aware of the products and let them make their own choices."
Capping subsidies
In the new CAP, Member States will have even more discretion. Mutual differences can actually increase further. That is again not so black and white, the researcher knows. "All decisions must be motivated by the EU. As a member state you cannot just make decisions. The committee assesses reasonableness. There is now a lot of criticism of the large land owners in Eastern Europe, who receive huge subsidy amounts. There are also instruments for this. For example, capping the subsidy amount, or exempting them themselves. For example, Schiphol Airport in our country was already excluded from subsidies about ten years ago, despite the fact that it owns a lot of agricultural land. This is a matter for each Member State to decide individually."
STAF demands rectification
Agri Facts Foundation (STAF) also has responded on the Trouw article. On Monday, December 30, it submitted a letter to the editors of the newspaper to rectify the inaccuracy. STAF falls over the fact that the article suggests that the said amount of €500 would go directly to Dutch farmers, which is not the case. The reader is thus misled.
Niels van der Boom
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
