Published July 28, 2025
By Silvia Pastorelli, EU Petrochemicals Campaigner at the Center for International Environmental Legislation, Silke Bollmohr, agrochemical and fossil fuels specialist, and Livia Croset, agrochemical and fossil fuels specialist.
Across Europe, farmers are opposing A range of elements , consisting of climbing costs, reduced productivity, and unreasonable profession competitors have made life harder for those who feed the continent. T he European Commission introduced the Vision for Farming and Food in February 2025, a plan meant to attend to farmers’ problems and secure the future of European food systems.
However as opposed to progressing genuine options, the new approach marks a clear retreat from the more enthusiastic Ranch to Fork Method of 2020 Where Ranch to Fork sought to change food production through sustainability and reduced dependence on synthetic inputs , the brand-new Vision focuses on competition , digitalization , and techno-fixes that enhance the extremely fossil-based system it must be moving away from.
Traitement d’azote. Beauce
An Action Backwards
5 years ago , the Farm to Fork Strategy aimed to upgrade Europe’s food cycle, from dirt health and wellness to nutrition, with a concentrate on decreasing waste, lasting animals farming, and agrochemical utilize The strategy had its constraints, but its integrated approach signaled a change towards an extra lasting and durable system
The Farm to Fork Technique collections input-reduction targets that purpose to lower the use and threat of chemicals and making use of more unsafe pesticides by 50 percent, and intends to lower the use of fertilizers by at least 20 percent by 2030 Initial advancements were appealing : in between 2020 and 2022, the use of NPK plant foods in the EU dropped by roughly 13 percent, and while hazardous chemical usage raised somewhat , chemical usage and risk have decreased from 77 to 48 HRI 1 (Harmonised Threat Sign 1, representing about a 38 percent decrease
The EU Payment has because junked the Approach’s chemical input targets , and seems to have postponed its Integrated Nutrient Monitoring Action Strategy because 2023 Rather, it implicitly addresses input use and nutrient monitoring by advertising electronic innovations and data-driven strategies such as accuracy farming and the Ranch Sustainability Tool for Nutrients without associating input decrease targets.
Accuracy farming and other approaches, such as carbon farming , are suggested by the Vision as ways to enhance profitability and earnings, respectively Precision farming aims to make the most of plant yields and profitability However, some recommend that carbon farming does little to address the EU’s contaminating agricultural field, and the efficiency of its practices may be overstated as devices of climate modification mitigation. These methods have been criticized for tethering farmers to an industrial farming version and changing power far from farmers and into agriculture and the modern technology industry.
Defossilization vs. Decarbonization: Why It Matters
The distinction in between decarbonization and defossilization is critical. Decarbonization frequently concentrates on decreasing emissions and recording and saving carbon after the truth. Defossilization means changing or reducing nonrenewable fuel sources at the resource. The EU Vision centres decarbonization by advertising carbon elimination, farming, and storage space, in addition to affiliated carbon credit ratings as a way to optimize added farmer revenue chances.
Focusing on decarbonization over defossilization might ultimately make room for incorrect solutions such as blue ammonia Ammonia is the key active ingredient for nitrogen (N) fertilizers derived from fossil fuels, and blue ammonia is where the fossil-based ammonia manufacturing procedure is incorporated with carbon capture and storage (CCS) modern technology. While branded as a cleaner choice, blue ammonia lodges the agricultural field right into fossil dependence and relies on CCS, a technology that has overpromised and underdelivered
Environment-friendly ammonia-based plant foods, additionally advertised as a low-carbon alternate , fall short to deal with many important concerns of fossil-fuel-dependent agriculture. They transform exactly how ammonia is made– by utilizing renewable energy rather than nonrenewable fuel sources– but they do not transform the harm caused by its use and overuse, consisting of laughing gas emissions , and its contribution to land and marine biodiversity loss Simply under 60 percent of fertilizer-related exhausts come from area application. Nitrous oxide– a greenhouse gas with a heating potential 273 times that of carbon monoxide 2 for a 100 -year timescale– is released as a result of fossil-based applications Green ammonia is also pricey and threats creating neo-colonial techniques In contrast, agroecological methods can minimize dependence on synthetic plant foods and restore dirt wellness via all-natural procedures like organic nitrogen addiction
The Price of Fossil Dependence
Food systems are deeply knotted with fossil fuels In 2020, the agri-food field accounted for 31 percent of complete EU exhausts, yet it remains one of the few fields where exhausts have not meaningfully decreased because 2005
Artificial nitrogen plant food alone adds to over 2 percent of global greenhouse gas exhausts. Some chemicals are greenhouse gases themselves. The International Warming Possible (GWP) of Sulfuryl fluoride, for instance, is up to 5, 000 times better than CO two over a 100 -year time horizon.
Past climate influences, agrochemicals can deteriorate dirts, pollute rivers, and harm air quality and biodiversity They can also subject agricultural workers and communities to significant health threats And since agrochemicals are directly linke d to the availability and rate of fossil fuels, the field is at risk to geopolitical shocks , such as those triggered by Russia’s war on Ukraine.
In action, the EU has imposed sanctions and tariffs on Russian imports, pushing to branch out trade and decrease power reliance However the REPowerEU Roadmap , while aiming for energy independence from Russia, did not address the EU’s dependence on gas-intensive agricultural inputs with tariffs up until this year
Who Conveniences?
The new Vision does not offer farmers: it catches them in a cycle of pricey inputs and volatile markets. Stopping working to challenge fossil fuel dependancy head-on undermines both environmental and wellness objectives.
Farmers today deal with climbing expenses , market instability , and intensifying climate conditions that threaten their harvests and, for that reason, their earnings. Yet the Vision supplies no genuine support for transitioning to sustainable methods or reducing dependency on pricey, environmentally damaging inputs. Instead, it compensates speculative decarbonization methods and promotes innovations and data-driven strategies that benefit large agribusinesses, not small ranches.
Agroecology, regenerative farming , and localized food systems provide a path ahead; one that reduces fossil fuels and emissions, enhances soil health and wellness, and enhances food sovereignty. But these methods need financial investment, training, and plan frameworks that focus on people and earth over profit.
A Crossroads for EU Agriculture
As the EU prepares the efficiency evaluation on the Usual Agricultural Plan in 2027 , there is still time to course-correct. Actual transformation has to center input reduction, ecological practices, and outcome-based signs, not performance metrics that prop up an unsustainable status quo.
The existing Vision for Agriculture and Food represents a missed opportunity. If the EU intends to satisfy its climate commitments and restore count on among farmers , it has to move beyond techno-fixes and accept a truly lasting, fair, and fossil-free future for food.