Viewpoint: Food security vs. sustainability aspirations—Reality hijacks European Green Deal advocates

farm-protests_5589884_600x315
The EU aimed to become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050 with the European Green Deal (GDR) announced in December 2019. It was envisaged that a new strategy would be adopted to achieve this and that all policies would be reshaped in line with climate change. The Green Deal, which envisaged fundamental changes in EU policies in a number of areas ranging from agriculture to industry, from energy to transportation, was one of the EU’s biggest initiatives. The goals were to reduce chemical pesticide use by 50% by 2030, reduce fertilizer use by at least 20%, and increase organic farming by 25% and organic aquaculture by a certain amount. The deal also included difficult-to-implement targets such as halving pesticide use by 2030.

There are many reasons for the EU to take the necessary measures against the climate crisis. For example, the worst drought in 500 years will be experienced in some countries in the summer of 2022 ; Up to 30% yield loss in products such as corn and soybeans; yield losses due to extreme heat and dry periods during the flowering period in the Southeastern countries; a significant increase in water and other production inputs, especially electricity, and even increases in prices exceeding 300% in some inputs.

However, due to the climate crisis and the war, Poland, Spain and Hungary have taken action to change the “Farm to Fork” regulations in question. Although food security in the EU is not directly under threat, it is a fact that the European Union is undoubtedly going through a complex period. The ongoing effects of Covid-19, price shocks in world food, energy and fertilizer markets, as well as the current geopolitical situation that has led to shortages of some raw materials cannot be denied. In addition to high inflation, the Covid-19 crisis and the Russia-Ukraine war have negatively affected the EU. Around 7 million refugees have sought refuge in European countries in the last 2 years. The negative economic impacts have been further increased and an economic recession has emerged due to the economic sanctions imposed by the EU against Russia and the decline in industrial production capacity caused by the disruption of natural gas flows.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

The widespread farmer protests in 2023-2024 have led Europe to make many changes to its environmental policies and projections. The new approach to agri-food policy presented by the EU Commission focuses on simplifying regulations and making farming an attractive profession again, rather than imposing unrealistic environmental standards, some of which don’t promote sustainability.

The Commission has moved to “Simplify” the agreement, with one official saying, “We need an approach that rewards farmers rather than putting too much pressure on them.” This will begin to simplify the implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the massive EU farm subsidy program worth almost a third of the total EU budget.

The so-called “Sustainable Use of Pesticide Regulation”, originally proposed in 2022, was withdrawn in February 2024 amid a growing right-wing backlash against the European Green Deal and widespread protests by angry farmers.
Despite the policy change, the new vision aims to make subsidy distribution fairer by reducing payments to large agribusiness and allocating more funds to small farmers.

The Commission is pushing for the production of essential agricultural products to be prioritized in order to increase food sovereignty.

In addition:

  • The plan to reduce pesticide use by 50% by 2030 was cancelled;
  • The Sustainable Use of Pesticide Regulation, proposed in 2022, was withdrawn completely in 2024 after protests;
  • Stringent green criteria that farmers must meet to receive EU agricultural subsidies will be relaxed;
  • Mandatory sustainability labels: The practice of placing labels on the front of packages showing the environmental impact of food production has been withdrawn. Instead, labels containing information on product origin and animal welfare will be included;
  • Some rules requiring farmers to use agricultural land according to certain sustainability rules have been relaxed.
  • Regulations requiring imported agricultural products to comply more strictly with environmental and health standards have been left vague.
  • Economic support and subsidy practices given to farmers will be simplified;
  • Food safety has been made a priority;
  • Environmental criteria will be shifted from strict rules to voluntary incentives;
  • Pesticide standards will be maintained on imported products, but sustainability requirements will be relaxed.

Nazimi Açıkgöz graduated from Ankara University and earned his Ph D. degree at Munich Technical University. He is now a freelance writer. Find Nazimi on Twitter @nazimiacikgoz

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.noReviewsLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot 2026-07-22 at 1.38
Viewpoint: Are the U.S. and Europe headed towards a repudiation of agricultural biotechnology red tape?
Screenshot-2026-07-27-at-3.23.14-PM
Prioritizing AI, robotics, and nuclear energy: Trump administration is guiding research funding away from independent universities to private companies
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-11_51_01-AM
Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s depressingly misguided (and litigator-funded) crusade against antidepressants
png-terrace-Farm-asia
Europe’s tentative embrace of agricultural gene editing could revolutionize food production and health in Asia
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-26-2026-05_35_53-PM
FDA takes up peptide therapies as hype outpaces science
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-26-2026-05_58_17-PM
Louisiana and Texas bring RFK,Jr.- MAHA-backed restrictions on dyes and other ‘controversial’ ingredients to eight states
Screenshot 2026-07-27 at 6.15
No test, no tennis: Women’s Tennis Association becomes first major female sports league to require genetic sex testing
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-10-2026-09_42_12-AM-1
Peptides, patient autonomy, and the limits of medical freedom
organic scaled
Facts & Fallacies podcast: Organic food cuts pesticide exposure? A response to Dr. Rhonda Patrick
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-22-2026-09_13_07-AM
Viewpoint—The Strategic Litigation boom: Understanding the tightening coalition among NGOs, foundations, journalists, and tort lawyers
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-9-2026-11_33_49-AM
Viewpoint: High-dose resveratrol supplements to extend health and life? Don’t waste your money.
Screenshot-2026-07-07-at-12.55.44-PM
Viewpoint: Yes, we can adapt to a changing climate without devastating the environment and the economy
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.