EU’s Farm to Fork (F2F) Strategy– External Perspectives: Implications for Global Food Security and International Markets

At the heart of the European Green Deal lies the EU’s sustainable food strategy or ‘Farm to Fork Strategy’ – which aims to broaden the existing Common Agricultural Policy into a comprehensive joint policy leading to a transition to more sustainable food systems within and outside of the EU. The European Commission's 2020 ‘Farm to Fork Strategy’ (F2F) mark a significant shift in EU food and agriculture policy aiming to secure Europe's future food supply. On the 6th of July 2021, foodFIRST organised the first Vijverbergsessies (webinar) of its external perspective series, exploring the implications for global food security and international markets of the EU F2F strategy based on a comprehensive review conducted by the Economic Research Service (ERS) of the US Department of Agriculture. The study analysed the economic consequences of several of the proposed targets in the F2F strategy based on three adoption scenarios of the strategy, finding reduction in global agriculture production, higher prices, less trade, and more global food insecurity by 2030. The aim of this session was to further discuss the impacts of such economic measures on the Global South – specifically Africa – and the role of the EU and the Netherlands, as key a player in the agri-food sector, in absorbing the economic and agricultural consequences of the F2F strategy.

Moderated by Ate Oostra, chair Metropolitan Food Security Platform and former ambassador/Director-General LNV (Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality), co-authors of the report – Jayson Beckman, Senior Economist USDA_ERS and Maros Ivanic, Agricultural Economist USDA-ERS – were present to discuss their findings. Ate Oostra began by summarising the content of the EU F2F strategy listing its targets to achieve an environmentally friendly food system that prioritise the preservation of ecosystems and biodiversity, reduce by half the traditional pollutants to our agricultural economy, utilise 20% less fertilisers and a creation of a common agricultural policy for all EU states.

Jayson Beckman began by giving an overview of the report vis-à-vis the three adaption scenarios by varying geographic scales (EU only, the EU plus some countries, all countries) of the policy’s input reduction (pesticides and fertilisers) standards. Using an equilibrium model, it was estimated that trade is cut off by up to 50% with countries that do not adapt the F2F input reduction standards. Large economies like China and the US are not exempted. For the EU only scenario, the model estimates a total reduction in agricultural production by 12%, resulting in an increase in price of goods due to unequal demand and supply, a decrease in the number of products available for import and an overall reduction in farm income. There is an expected reduction in EU GDP of 71 billion dollars and exports to the EU from other economies such as the US and China will increase with increased prices. For the second scenario, the results are similar with a greater magnitude. This scenario has the largest change in agricultural trade as global trade will reduce by up to 9% because of the divide between trading blocs comprising those who follow the input reduction policy and does who do not. The third and final scenario results indicate an overall decrease in GDP both for the EU and the US, agricultural production and increase in food cost per person. The largest increase in global food insecurity is also expected in this scenario, particularly affecting sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The second speaker Maros Ivanic explores the adaption path of the EU F2F strategy in the EU and perhaps around the round. Two possible paths include improved research and development investment to improve productive to counter the probable decrease in supply, and the involvement of other countries in the F2F strategy via attractive trade policies such as unlimited market access to the EU.