Those farmers I know don't have a problem with the move from quota based production targets to direct subvention and are also quite happy to comply with habitat directives, REPS - Rural Environment Protection Scheme and other measures.  Their problem is they can't cover their costs at current prices.

notes from no w here

linca:

the one problem being that farmers don't want to become glorified gardeners maintaining the countryside with subsidies.

why not? sure beats abusing the land by stripmining its value at the cost of future fertility, polluting water tables and reducing humus, not to mention having to deal, (or more likely pay immigrants to), with incredibly dodgy chemicals.

you argue your corner brilliantly, imo, Frank, definitely seeing the big picture.

also, i don't feel it to be bad netiquette to transport an interesting dialogue, au contraire, that's one of the things it's for...

multi-kudos for focussing on what's real, and will continue to be long after much of what we see around us is gone. CAP money should stop going to big ag and gentry estates and be used as skillful social engineering to guarantee against the mass exodus of country people to already overloaded towns, the toxification of the environment, and insurance against over-reliance on heavy-footprinted imports.

it makes no sense that kenya's main export is roses, when many of its people are hungry, we in the EU need to be very careful about importing such sundries.

as more and more people are laid off from industry, the issues of food and where it comes from will come ever more to the forefront of public affairs.

i'm sure glad you're putting out sound ideas into the forums about these serious issues, there's a lot of education to do.

reclaiming fields on my land, on which farming had been abandoned for 80 years, is enough of a gruelling job, even with heavy machinery. it has given me incredible respect for the work our ancestors put in creating them, and keeping the woods from taking them over, without CAP, these local farms would have been long subsumed, surrounded by ghost villages, as is happening in other parts of italy.

don't abolish it, make it sustainably fairer...

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

That's part of what I wanted to say, but you say it so much better.  Being a farmer is a vocation for many, and most I know continue farming until they die, even if it ends up costing them money.  Its a way of life and they don't know of any other way.  But I think the wider community also benefits greatly from this connectedness with the soil.  

Urban man lives by supermarket ready meals where all connection with the soil is lost.  But that sort of point is treated as mystical mumbo jumbo or special pleading by an interest group by the neo-lib reformers.  I would hate to live in a society without a vibrant rural life and agricultural sector.  But then I'm biased.  I grew up and live there.

notes from no w here

Later in the conversation I note my daughter makes premium ice cream at a local dairy farm - the market for it is going well even in a recession.  But not every farmer can make butter, cheese, ice cream, chocolate etc.  There is a market for craft produce, but it is always going to be a premium product for a more limited market.

notes from no w here

In Ireland the farmers are part of the national partnership process with the Government, employers and trade unions.  Like any trade union, the Irish Farmers association is there primarily to protect the interests of its members.  

As the Government/EU effectively determine a good deal of farmers income through the level of price subsidies or development grants, the Govt./EU is effectively their employer with whom they use their collective bargaining muscle to get what they can.  

Sometimes this can lead to common interests with other workers/trade unions on levels of taxation or social benefits etc. but more often than not their is little common linkage between industrial wage negotiations and the level of CAP subsidies.  

Certainly on the issue of globalisation farmers have been to the forefront in France and elsewhere.  But the often solitary and remote nature of their work doesn't make for easy organisation or linkages with other Unions.

There is also the crucial difference that farmers often own their "means of production" whereas as many industrial and salaried workers do not.  There are huge cultural differences between largely solitary workers and people who work in huge organisations which makes for very different perspectives between people who work for themselves, and people who work for others.

When allied to the traditional social conservatism of rural Ireland, this often means farmers support different political parties to the more militant urban based workers.  All of this is not to say, however, that they don't have certain objective interests in common - as workers, consumers, citizens and producers of essential goods and services.

Globalisation, Climate Change, world food shortages, and political regulation of markets changes the game for all of us, and it is perhaps time that both "sides" recognised this.

notes from no w here

I don't think it is as simple as this.  Even "massive amounts of food" have to be produced in a safe and sustainable way, and chemical fertilisers, pesticides, and GM crops don't always meet those criteria.  Most of Western Europe is too densely populated or of unsuitable terrain for massive factory farms in any case.

Maximising employment, product quality, social cohesion and stability, environmental sustainability, biodiversity, rural and regional development, European self sufficiency and balancing supply/demand have always been part of EU agricultural policy.

No, it doesn't always provide you with the cheapest food, and the globalisation of the food industry continues apace.  Factory farms in less densely populated/more suitable terrains will continue to increase market share providing less employment, employment rights, often less biodiversity/sustainability, and possibly less food for those who need it most.

It is impossible to discuss the food industry outside its environmental and social context and market mechanisms alone will not ensure sustainability or distribution to those who need it.

notes from no w here

Optimize food production along which dimension?

1. Environmental impact?
2. Quality of flavour?
3. Animal welfare?
4. Diversity of products?
5. Nutritional content?
6. Quantity?

I would argue that gigantic corporate-owned factory farms tend to do quite poorly on at least the first four. The European agricultural problem is closer to over production than under production anyway, so I don't think the last point is really of great concern at the moment. And, yes, pastoral settings should be part of the goal.

asdf:

Is it to optimize food production or is it to maintain the ideal of picturesque family farms in an attractive rural setting?

i think it's incredibly important to differentiate between optimisation and maximisation.

or if talking about maximisation, talk about maximisation of nutrients, and health of topsoil, water tables, etc.

otherwise it's just about sacrificing quality for quantity, and we see the dismal results of that all around us, if we look beyond the surface.

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

Only between 6-8% of CAP goes to 'small farmers'. I am not sure what the definition is of 'small'.

You can't be me, I'm taken

Thanks for this substantial and thoughtful response to my diary.  It started out as a comment response to a typical piece of urban socialist farmer bashing which I felt didn't capture the complexities of the issues involved, not necessarily as a defence of the CAP per se, although the CAP has ameliorated the worst effects of deregulation/industrialisation and slowed the destruction of traditional farming with all the community and sustainability impacts this would entail.

Your piece also helps fulfil my second objective, which is to move the debate on from the undoubted defects of a bureaucratic CAP which has been shaped largely by a political compromise between the ruling classes and a (rapidly declining) farmer class, to a much broader argument about sustainability, food security, bio-diversity, the quality of the environment, energy intensity,  rural living and urban/rural planning.

I'm struggling to find a more expert community to discuss this with, because I want to move beyond the cliches into more measurable policy objectives and the political alliances required to make them realistic goals.  But hopefully this will get a debate going on ET as well.

notes from no w here