202
sub-systems (Rockström et al. 2009). Not least, literature employing the planetary
boundaries framework suggests that agriculture has been one of the main drivers of
unsustainable resource use and has, consequently, contributed more heavily than
most other sectors towards the transgression of planetary boundaries that define a
safe operating space for humanity (Steffen et al. 2015). Thus, of the nine systems
identified and analyzed by Rockström et al. (2009), they estimate that critical threshold boundaries have already been transgressed in at least three of these systems, all
partly or mainly due to agricultural land-use and management practices.
However, while the effects of agricultural intensification have clearly had a
global impact, the authors emphasize that much of the observed ecological deterioration has been caused by the current and historical actions of a few developed
nations, with European Union (EU) agriculture certainly standing out as one of the
main sources of this development (Stoate et al. 2009). Indeed, decades of continuous yield growth in Europe has been enabled by the employment of highly intensive
management and production practices, including the expansion of monocultures
and use of inputs such as pesticide and fertilizers, which have not only contributed
to the disruption of the Earth’s phosphorous and nitrogen cycles (Steffen et al.
2015), but have also had devastating impacts on terrestrial and marine biodiversity
(Emmerson et al. 2016). As key sources of this decline, European and other economically advanced nations correspondingly bear a greater responsibility to reduce
the impacts of their food sectors, than that of less developed states. Recent findings
suggest that important international targets relating to e.g. emission reduction, the
halting of biodiversity loss and sustainable water use cannot be realized without
significantly reducing the global environmental footprint of agriculture (O’Neill
et al. 2018). In the European context, it is therefore imperative that efforts to address
ecological decline and climate change are accompanied by ambitious action in the
field of agriculture.
Attaining the types of changes necessary to meaningfully reduce the environmental pressures stemming from EU agriculture will require major transformation
of its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Yet, at a time when ambitious action is
required to steer the CAP on a new course, the ability of the EU to take decisive
steps towards this end has been stifled by a number of converging political developments in recent years. For instance, the decision by the UK to leave the EU following a 2016 referendum has since overshadowed most other political issues and
resulted in a major financial shortfall that makes increased funding for environmental measures unlikely to be prioritized during the 2021–2027 budgetary period
(Matthews 2016). Along with growing EU-skepticism and nationalism in other
MSs, it would appear that the EU’s ability to take bold and transformative action to
address the ecological pressures stemming from agricultural, has consequently been
limited by the risk of further alienating citizens and public opinion. Thus, as the EU
prepares to reform the CAP for the next seven-yearly programming cycle
(2021–2027), significant obstacles exist to meeting the level of ambition needed to
address ecological and climate-related challenges.
Against this background, this chapter analyses the extent to which the CAP is
prepared to deliver the outcomes needed to meaningfully address ecological decline
A. A. Epstein
sub-systems (Rockström et al. 2009). Not least, literature employing the planetary
boundaries framework suggests that agriculture has been one of the main drivers of
unsustainable resource use and has, consequently, contributed more heavily than
most other sectors towards the transgression of planetary boundaries that define a
safe operating space for humanity (Steffen et al. 2015). Thus, of the nine systems
identified and analyzed by Rockström et al. (2009), they estimate that critical threshold boundaries have already been transgressed in at least three of these systems, all
partly or mainly due to agricultural land-use and management practices.
However, while the effects of agricultural intensification have clearly had a
global impact, the authors emphasize that much of the observed ecological deterioration has been caused by the current and historical actions of a few developed
nations, with European Union (EU) agriculture certainly standing out as one of the
main sources of this development (Stoate et al. 2009). Indeed, decades of continuous yield growth in Europe has been enabled by the employment of highly intensive
management and production practices, including the expansion of monocultures
and use of inputs such as pesticide and fertilizers, which have not only contributed
to the disruption of the Earth’s phosphorous and nitrogen cycles (Steffen et al.
2015), but have also had devastating impacts on terrestrial and marine biodiversity
(Emmerson et al. 2016). As key sources of this decline, European and other economically advanced nations correspondingly bear a greater responsibility to reduce
the impacts of their food sectors, than that of less developed states. Recent findings
suggest that important international targets relating to e.g. emission reduction, the
halting of biodiversity loss and sustainable water use cannot be realized without
significantly reducing the global environmental footprint of agriculture (O’Neill
et al. 2018). In the European context, it is therefore imperative that efforts to address
ecological decline and climate change are accompanied by ambitious action in the
field of agriculture.
Attaining the types of changes necessary to meaningfully reduce the environmental pressures stemming from EU agriculture will require major transformation
of its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Yet, at a time when ambitious action is
required to steer the CAP on a new course, the ability of the EU to take decisive
steps towards this end has been stifled by a number of converging political developments in recent years. For instance, the decision by the UK to leave the EU following a 2016 referendum has since overshadowed most other political issues and
resulted in a major financial shortfall that makes increased funding for environmental measures unlikely to be prioritized during the 2021–2027 budgetary period
(Matthews 2016). Along with growing EU-skepticism and nationalism in other
MSs, it would appear that the EU’s ability to take bold and transformative action to
address the ecological pressures stemming from agricultural, has consequently been
limited by the risk of further alienating citizens and public opinion. Thus, as the EU
prepares to reform the CAP for the next seven-yearly programming cycle
(2021–2027), significant obstacles exist to meeting the level of ambition needed to
address ecological and climate-related challenges.
Against this background, this chapter analyses the extent to which the CAP is
prepared to deliver the outcomes needed to meaningfully address ecological decline
A. A. Epstein