207
Secondly, in addition to Brexit, the EU finds itself tested by the rise of nationalism and EU-skeptical politics in a growing number of MSs. Although this movement is not homogenous, it is defined by a readiness to challenge the EU on issues
where over-reaching is perceived, as well as having a limited appetite to prioritize
or support the enhancement of environmental protection (Matthews 2016).
Moreover, following elections in May of 2019, newly elected Euro-skeptical MEPs
have managed to form the third largest political group of the EP, thereby enhancing
their power to collectively challenge EU policies at the institutional level (Ripoll
2019). These outcomes have also served to increase fragmentation within the EP, at
the expense of groupings positioned along the traditional centre-right and centreleft divide, which have previously tended to be the dominant political forces. Given
the legislative role of the EP, the composition and power of these groupings are
expected to have a decisive impact on the type of reform that is agreed for the
2021–2027 programming period.
Against this background, it is suggested that the EU’s ability to pursue ambitious
environmental action in the field of agriculture may be significantly restrained by a
desire not to alienate citizens or create further political divisions. Not least, the level
of funding and ambition needed to transform agriculture is likely to be resisted by
net-contributing MSs, while others could oppose such action on the basis that the
EU is imposing its own will in the field of environmental protection against that of
the MSs (Matthews 2016). In other words, if the EU is perceived to be ‘running red
lights’ with its environmental agenda, further push-back is to be expected from antiEU parties and politicians.
4.1 Key Elements of the Legislative Proposals
In June of 2018 the Commission adopted a package of legislative proposals to
reform the CAP for the 2021–2027 programming period (European Commission
2018). These are currently subject to trilogue discussions between the Commission,
the Council and the European Parliament (EP), which are likely to result in various
changes being negotiated before the final measures are adopted under the ordinary
legislative procedure by the EP and the Council. However, while the details of
future instruments are difficult to gauge at present, there are several overriding
themes that have defined the proposals and are expected to provide the basic framework of the reformed CAP envisioned by the Commission. Moreover, the legal texts
have been accompanied by the publication of guiding policy documents and impact
assessments that further set out the Commission’s priorities and objectives for the
CAP during the next programming period (European Commission 2017). For present purposes, two of the main themes of the proposals are likely to have implications
for environmental protection and deserve further consideration.
First, the Commission has proposed the introduction of a new delivery model
which would shift CAP governance from a compliance-based system to a performance—or outcome—based system. In doing so, the EU will be tasked with setting
Agriculture in the European Union: Seven More Years of Environmental Austerity?
Secondly, in addition to Brexit, the EU finds itself tested by the rise of nationalism and EU-skeptical politics in a growing number of MSs. Although this movement is not homogenous, it is defined by a readiness to challenge the EU on issues
where over-reaching is perceived, as well as having a limited appetite to prioritize
or support the enhancement of environmental protection (Matthews 2016).
Moreover, following elections in May of 2019, newly elected Euro-skeptical MEPs
have managed to form the third largest political group of the EP, thereby enhancing
their power to collectively challenge EU policies at the institutional level (Ripoll
2019). These outcomes have also served to increase fragmentation within the EP, at
the expense of groupings positioned along the traditional centre-right and centreleft divide, which have previously tended to be the dominant political forces. Given
the legislative role of the EP, the composition and power of these groupings are
expected to have a decisive impact on the type of reform that is agreed for the
2021–2027 programming period.
Against this background, it is suggested that the EU’s ability to pursue ambitious
environmental action in the field of agriculture may be significantly restrained by a
desire not to alienate citizens or create further political divisions. Not least, the level
of funding and ambition needed to transform agriculture is likely to be resisted by
net-contributing MSs, while others could oppose such action on the basis that the
EU is imposing its own will in the field of environmental protection against that of
the MSs (Matthews 2016). In other words, if the EU is perceived to be ‘running red
lights’ with its environmental agenda, further push-back is to be expected from antiEU parties and politicians.
4.1 Key Elements of the Legislative Proposals
In June of 2018 the Commission adopted a package of legislative proposals to
reform the CAP for the 2021–2027 programming period (European Commission
2018). These are currently subject to trilogue discussions between the Commission,
the Council and the European Parliament (EP), which are likely to result in various
changes being negotiated before the final measures are adopted under the ordinary
legislative procedure by the EP and the Council. However, while the details of
future instruments are difficult to gauge at present, there are several overriding
themes that have defined the proposals and are expected to provide the basic framework of the reformed CAP envisioned by the Commission. Moreover, the legal texts
have been accompanied by the publication of guiding policy documents and impact
assessments that further set out the Commission’s priorities and objectives for the
CAP during the next programming period (European Commission 2017). For present purposes, two of the main themes of the proposals are likely to have implications
for environmental protection and deserve further consideration.
First, the Commission has proposed the introduction of a new delivery model
which would shift CAP governance from a compliance-based system to a performance—or outcome—based system. In doing so, the EU will be tasked with setting
Agriculture in the European Union: Seven More Years of Environmental Austerity?